City launch legal action against the Premier League | Club & PL reach settlement | Proceedings dropped (p1147)

From what I gather (and this is only conjecture) is that this has nothing to do with the 115 charges. It's more to do with the APT (Associated Party Transaction) rules. In effect, the FA have agreed that we were perfectly fine in conducting business the way we did, 'however' they will change the rules from now on. We challenged the rules on the basis that we'd done nothing wrong in our past dealings (which the FA accepts) but we also wanted these conditions to continue into the future (which the FA disagrees with). It's a win for us 'restrospectively' but a back-handed win as the FA doesn't want to lose face entirely so will now 'amend' the rules for the forthcoming seasons.
For FA read PL
 
I'm no expert but I think it's 2-1 to City...its the 95th minute & Haaland has just been fouled by Harry Maguire on the edge of the box...var are taking their time seeing if Haalands foot was on the white line of the area or not...if yes it's a penalty........to be continued this Sunday at 6.20pm.
Haaland hatrick
 


Apparently this talksport piece, it's a win for the Premier League.

Ben Jacobs has a degree in English Literature, I have a degree in Commercial Management & Quantity Surveying!

Neither of us have a clue about football finance or corporate law!

Talksport employ him, Mark Goldbridge, Collymore, Alan Brazil & Ray Parlor etc. for their 'expert views'!

I can't wait for tomorrow to hear Simon Jordon's advice on what Khaldoon should do next!
 
Ben Jacobs has a degree in English Literature, I have a degree in Commercial Management & Quantity Surveying!

Neither of us have a clue about football finance or corporate law!

Talksport employ him, Mark Goldbridge, Collymore, Alan Brazil & Ray Parlor etc. for their 'expert views'!

I can't wait for tomorrow to hear Simon Jordon's advice on what Khaldoon should do next!
To be fair(and believe me I don't want to be) they fucked Goldbridge of his Saturday show cos he's a ****......problem being though, they replaced him with ANOTHER ****......Rory Jennings.
 
Who do you think told them that? 100% it was the PL press office. Is obviously true and obviously from them. You don't need a name to know that.

But by the same token, presumably it will be the City team briefing Lawton and Keegan. It's a little disingenuous to take the PL briefing as fact while dismissing the City briefings. I would also suggest the Roan briefing was a defensive response to the narrative developing that Etihad was cleared.

Anyway, we all know how to brief with the best possible interpretation even if, given the PL's previous history of talking complete bullshit in their briefings, personally I lean more to City's side of the story.

So what we are looking for is a situation where both briefings are true without being complete. What about this? Yes, City have to re-submit Etihad, but the PL have agreed to push it through or, at the very least, have agreed small amendments with City that will allow the PL to push it through.

Clearly, imho, City got out of APT2 what it wanted otherwise what was the incentive to settle rather than to proceed? As you have mentioned yourself many times, it was a no-risk, free hit for City.
 
My only hope through all this is that at no point do the city management want to just be part of the cartel.
i have faith in them though! Hopefully the 115 comes next with an absolute stonking win for us
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top