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

[StillBluessinceHydeRoad]

Why has everyone stopped talking about Stan Collymore being a woman beating ****?

Perhaps he no longer beats women ...

 

[foggy1974]

The whole saga is actually very sad and these rules, regulations, whatever you want to call them are creating more problems than they are solving (if anything even needed solving in the first place).

The average football fan has absolutely no chance of understanding the rules or this case involving City. That’s very apparent on here and I’d suggest, us as blues, know a lot more than the average punter about it.

It’s going round in big circle and not really getting anywhere and taking people away from just enjoying the game itself.

How many of those fan were remotely interested when it didn't involve their club & had this kicked in in the late 90s we as a fan base wouldn't have been interested

 

[foggy1974]

What I want to know is, did they come to a settlement over the muffin or barm wording, or has that still to be agreed by the other 19 PL clubs as well?

They are going to call it a barmuffin

 

[halfcenturyup]

The whole saga is actually very sad and these rules, regulations, whatever you want to call them are creating more problems than they are solving (if anything even needed solving in the first place).

The average football fan has absolutely no chance of understanding the rules or this case involving City. That’s very apparent on here and I’d suggest, us as blues, know a lot more than the average punter about it.

It’s going round in big circle and not really getting anywhere and taking people away from just enjoying the game itself.

Sounds a little like the laws of the game the administrators have been introduced over the last decade. I sometimes wonder if football administrators have any idea what they are doing ....

 

[BlueMonkey79]

They are going to call it a barmuffin

I heard it was gonna be Muffarm

 

[Cobwebcat]

If I may, I think people are misreading my comments on how things look, publicly, with me believing that to be the outcome in its entirety.

I leave the below as an example of where I agree with you.

Coatigan said:
Again just to be clear, I am not arguing the club didn't get what they might have wanted out of it all.

But I also think people are too readily using it to celebrate some imagined behind the scenes victory, when the statement literally states the opposite with very little if any room whatsoever, for interpretation.

————————————————————-

They are probably putting the statement together with the press coverage to reach that conclusion which is reasonable. If they aren’t that doesn’t matter really.

My initial instinct, just reading the statement, was that I was unsure. Reading it a second time I read it as a possible win due to the word “settlement” given the fact that we brought the charge rather than being charged.

If you believe that the club may have got what they wanted I think it’s also reasonable to let others come to the same conclusion even if they have taken a different route by interpreting the statement differently. The outcome is the same I think.

 

[Chris in London]

Establish if APT (as opposed to RP) - the PL summarise well: "What constitutes an Associated Party of a Club is set out in detail in the Premier League Rules (Rule A.1.25) and includes third parties that are in the same group of companies as a Club, have common ownership or board members with a Club, or are materially influenced by the same party as a Club. So as to ensure no circumvention, in addition to the standard submission of APTs, all Club deals with non-Associated Parties with an average annual value of over £1 million or, if lower, 5% of the Club’s annual turnover (known as "Threshold Transactions") must also be submitted to the Board for an assessment as to whether they are APTs or otherwise have not been conducted at arm’s length. If so, the deals must be subject to an FMV Assessment."

We know Puma is neither an AP or RP so there is no PL FMV test but it must be FMV to be included in the full UEFA assessment.

Regardless, the idea Puma (an unconnected public company) gave City a non-FMV contract is just yet another conspiracy theory. The truth is far simpler.

yes, i meant apt rather than rpt.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

yes, i meant apt rather than rpt.

Very sloppy.

 

[Cobwebcat]

Very sloppy.

Well you have taken the tap in there. It’s a bit unfair but they all count!

 

[Chris in London]

I’ve asked this before but will try once more. Is it also possible that the club agreed with the PL that the implementation and interpretation of these rules will be different, without needing the rules themselves to be changed?

no

 

[StillBluessinceHydeRoad]

I'm sure we can all agree that none of this was an issue when the Rag's were consistently breaking the transfer record and running away with league titles, and it wouldn't be an issue now if they were still dominating the league.

I think this is a point of central importance. No-one batted an eyelid at the rag's then enormous Chevrolet deal and the scousers record window outlay has been generally applauded. The controversy over sponsorship only arose over City and then Newcastle. It seems that anger is restricted to relatively few clubs who see themselves as rivalling us and the geordies for trophies. Funnily enough these clubs are identical to those of the notorious cartel. The PL seem to see them as guardians of competitive balance, or are scared stiff of them and have got themselves trapped in a mass of dubious practises and unlawful regulations to placate a group of clubs which feels entitled to all the benefits the game has to offer. The PL now has an opportunity to sort itself out, and I'm sure we're all confident they'll seize it with both hands.

 

[Blueknows]

Yet the EPL have gone back to 2009 when throwing the 115 charges at us

And moved the goalposts once we submitted our accounts

 

[Cobwebcat]

I think this is a point of central importance. No-one batted an eyelid at the rag's then enormous Chevrolet deal and the scousers record window outlay has been generally applauded. The controversy over sponsorship only arose over City and then Newcastle. It seems that anger is restricted to relatively few clubs who see themselves as rivalling us and the geordies for trophies. Funnily enough these clubs are identical to those of the notorious cartel. The PL seem to see them as guardians of competitive balance, or are scared stiff of them and have got themselves trapped in a mass of dubious practises and unlawful regulations to placate a group of clubs which feels entitled to all the benefits the game has to offer. The PL now has an opportunity to sort itself out, and I'm sure we're all confident they'll seize it with both hands.

It’s a good point. When the sponsor themselves say they overpaid it’s definitely not FMV!

The PL have created a legal mess trying to correct a problem that was never there.

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

I think this is a point of central importance. No-one batted an eyelid at the rag's then enormous Chevrolet deal and the scousers record window outlay has been generally applauded. The controversy over sponsorship only arose over City and then Newcastle. It seems that anger is restricted to relatively few clubs who see themselves as rivalling us and the geordies for trophies. Funnily enough these clubs are identical to those of the notorious cartel. The PL seem to see them as guardians of competitive balance, or are scared stiff of them and have got themselves trapped in a mass of dubious practises and unlawful regulations to placate a group of clubs which feels entitled to all the benefits the game has to offer. The PL now has an opportunity to sort itself out, and I'm sure we're all confident they'll seize it with both hands.

Pretty sure every City supporter has total belief in the integrity of Richard Masters and the PL hierarchy, knowing that following our settlement of the APT matter, we will be welcomed into the fold as an equal partner.

 

[SilverFox2]

Pretty sure every City supporter has total belief in the integrity of Richard Masters and the PL hierarchy, knowing we will be welcomed into the fold as an equal partner.

I wonder who will give Mr M his orders now that Mr L has departed from TH.
Perhaps the equality mentioned in the "agreement" has been transmitted to the relevant people.

 

[mad4city]

Maybe its like when he wanks on a stranger's car window, seems a good idea in the moment, but swiftly followed by embarrassment, regret and self-loathing.

Coincidentally, Embarrassment, Regret and Self-Loathing is the name of the firm who first drew up the Premier League's list of the 115(ish) charges.

 

[train man]

I wonder who will give Mr M his orders now that Mr L has departed from TH.
Perhaps the equality mentioned in the "agreement" has been transmitted to the relevant people.

Orwell was right! All clubs are equal, but some are more equal than others...

 

[slbsn]

Yet the EPL have gone back to 2009 when throwing the 115 charges at us

Not really the same thing.

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

I wonder who will give Mr M his orders now that Mr L has departed from TH.
Perhaps the equality mentioned in the "agreement" has been transmitted to the relevant people.

TBH I suspect there will always be a new candidate willing to promote themselves in the cabal hierarchy of US owners.

Pretty sure that dippers and gooners will be keen to take up the mantle of lead attack twat.

 

[Centurions]

How do you know? ;)

Taps nose knowingly...