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

slbsn said:
He already is. And I did request anyone with negative feedback to DM me yesterday. Strangely nobody has taken me up on the offer.
Click to expand...
I watched your talksport interviews with Custis and Winter, and I think you came across very well.

For what my uninformed opinion is worth, it is pretty clear that you think, act, and speak, like a lawyer. That’s a compliment by the way.
What I mean is that you are naturally cautious, and not given to hyperbole, and also very cognisant of the fact that ANY legal dispute can go one of two ways and slam dunks are for the movies. That is entirely and completely understandable and it is why I have never had a problem with the way you put yourself across on talksport.

Where I think everyday City fans get a little frustrated is precisely because you think and act like a professional, and most of us don’t (because most of us don’t have a background in legal disputes and are looking at this solely as “fans” without the ability (if that is the correct phrase) to be as dispassionate. Again, given your background and experience in life and in work, that is entirely understandable.

Basically, I think you are doing super work in very trying circumstances and always come on here in your own time
To educate and explain to people like me what the hell is going on.
So thank you.
 
Kazzydeyna said:
I watched your talksport interviews with Custis and Winter, and I think you came across very well.

For what my uninformed opinion is worth, it is pretty clear that you think, act, and speak, like a lawyer. That’s a compliment by the way.
What I mean is that you are naturally cautious, and not given to hyperbole, and also very cognisant of the fact that ANY legal dispute can go one of two ways and slam dunks are for the movies. That is entirely and completely understandable and it is why I have never had a problem with the way you put yourself across on talksport.

Where I think everyday City fans get a little frustrated is precisely because you think and act like a professional, and most of us don’t (because most of us don’t have a background in legal disputes and are looking at this solely as “fans” without the ability (if that is the correct phrase) to be as dispassionate. Again, given your background and experience in life and in work, that is entirely understandable.

Basically, I think you are doing super work in very trying circumstances and always come on here in your own time
To educate and explain to people like me what the hell is going on.
So thank you.
Click to expand...
Cheers, appreciate that.

The bit I can't stress enough is that there are no certainties in these legal processes. So even though we now know for sure the historic APT rules are null and void, nobody knows what the practical effect is.

I was reading the Independent article tonight by Delaney - he claims to have to spoken to a range of lawyers and execs and there is about 10 different views on the APT stuff and the consequences. Lots of them are diametrically opposed.
 
slbsn said:
Cheers, appreciate that.

The bit I can't stress enough is that there are no certainties in these legal processes. So even though we now know for sure the historic APT rules are null and void, nobody knows what the practical effect is.

I was reading the Independent article tonight by Delaney - he claims to have to spoken to a range of lawyers and execs and there is about 10 different views on the APT stuff and the consequences. Lots of them are diametrically opposed.
Click to expand...
we rely on you to sort the wheat from the chaff Stefan :-)
 
Tevez City said:
You can have rules to protect clubs from being bankrupt

But Why as an owner I can't invest my own money into my business?

Is that crime in any type of business apart from football ?


I am small cafe and wants to compete with $tarbuck$ around the corner, as soon as I start taking some of the market share , $tarbuck$ are complaining to the authorities that its not allowed for this small cafe to invest much they are causing us trouble by offering higher salaries to our employees, we can't allow that

And then $tarbuck$ come with new set of rules to prevent the new small cafe from growing at uncomfortable rate.

let them rely on their profits only and any other source of financing is considered as cheating by the Cartel because they want to dominate and manipulate the market as they like.


Anyway, the main point that I want to deliver :)

Is that direct investment, from owner pocket to the club account is not a crime

As long you are not risking the club into financial crisis. ( By having maybe bank guarantees or Certified Checks )

IF those hypocrite Cartel clubs want fairness, let them find a model that will allow Getafe to compete with Madrid or Como with Milan when it comes to acquiring new players.
Click to expand...
Annoying as it is, other sports do have restrictions.
F1 for eg, they have financial rules to prevent the front runners being so far as to become un-catchable through investment.

They also have skewed financing as Ferrari are receive a bigger cut due to the brand.
 
Last edited:
slbsn said:
Cheers, appreciate that.

The bit I can't stress enough is that there are no certainties in these legal processes. So even though we now know for sure the historic APT rules are null and void, nobody knows what the practical effect is.

I was reading the Independent article tonight by Delaney - he claims to have to spoken to a range of lawyers and execs and there is about 10 different views on the APT stuff and the consequences. Lots of them are diametrically opposed.
Click to expand...
It’s quite clear this is a complete mess and I cannot understand why the PL have let it get to this. Why didn’t they try and negotiate with City and others to thrash out a compromised agreement that Scudamore was very good at doing. As you said on Sunday surely the risk of losing APT 2 is too great.

They cannot possibly retrospectively add interest to Shareholder loans because Arsenal would argue that they could have converted those loans into equity. And how can you be done for speeding in 2021 just because you have introduced a speed limit in 2025.

City could argue if you are ignoring those loans for the past 3 years you have to ignore the other unlawful rules too. For if City had been provided with all the data on other deals that was requested in 2023 their submissions from FADB and Etihad may have been different.
 
jimharri said:
@slbsn and @ChicagoBlue

Please do the forum a favour. Either put each other on ignore, or take your "discussion" to pms. Thank you.
Click to expand...
I believe that’s old news now. Have no desire to put him on Ignore, as I appreciate his insights, and have stated as such.

Much as with everyone all the time on here, if two posters have a slightly different take on something they should be entitled to post it without being talked down to in monosyllabic responses or being told to fuck off. Sorry if that is a misinterpretation of what this Forum is for. Happy clappers only???

I admire expertise of any kind and welcome it. However, no-one is God on here and if they post something, they should be able to accept MINOR disagreements without abuse.

Never had any desire to offend, which is why I didn’t resort to abuse, but I think I understand how it all works now. Appears some get a wide berth. Others? Not “blue” enough because they didn’t work for the club, even if they played with it for a bit.

Got it.

I look forward to hearing how the PL is going to readdress APT, if that has any real relevance at all going forward, but await the 115 decision with considerably more concern.
 
ChicagoBlue said:
I believe that’s old news now. Have no desire to put him on Ignore, as I appreciate his insights, and have stated as such.

Much as with everyone all the time on here, if two posters have a slightly different take on something they should be entitled to post it without being talked down to in monosyllabic responses or being told to fuck off. Sorry if that is a misinterpretation of what this Forum is for. Happy clappers only???

I admire expertise of any kind and welcome it. However, no-one is God on here and if they post something, they should be able to accept MINOR disagreements without abuse.

Never had any desire to offend, which is why I didn’t resort to abuse, but I think I understand how it all works now. Appears some get a wide berth. Others? Not “blue” enough because they didn’t work for the club, even if they played with it for a bit.

Got it.

I look forward to hearing how the PL is going to readdress APT, if that has any real relevance at all going forward, but await the 115 decision with considerably more concern.
Click to expand...

Best of luck when @gordondaviesmoustache reads your “no one is God on here” comment.
 
Masters credibility is shot to shit, surely. In both the APT and Leicester's legal cases we are led to believe the defence was based on sentiment, that their intentions were honorable.

The EPL is a multi-billion pound industry, any compliance or governance implemented needs to water tight. I can't see how Masters keeps his position here, he's done irreparable damage.
 
slbsn said:
Cheers, appreciate that.

The bit I can't stress enough is that there are no certainties in these legal processes. So even though we now know for sure the historic APT rules are null and void, nobody knows what the practical effect is.

I was reading the Independent article tonight by Delaney - he claims to have to spoken to a range of lawyers and execs and there is about 10 different views on the APT stuff and the consequences. Lots of them are diametrically opposed.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't use any lawyer who says we didn't win the case.

This was the best summary I'd seen of APT1 * so I await their summary of APT2:
www.traverssmith.com

Manchester City v the Premier League | Travers Smith

Amidst the disciplinary proceedings referred to an independent commission by the Premier League (the "League") in respect of alleged breaches by Manchester City Football Club ("City") of the League's financial rules, a decision has been made in the separate arbitration proceedings brought by...
www.traverssmith.com www.traverssmith.com

* Apart from not reporting City's claim that APT1 meant the rules were void.
 
Last edited:
Vic said:
I wouldn't use any lawyer who says we didn't win the case.

This was the best summary I'd seen of APT1 so I await their summary of APT2:
www.traverssmith.com

Manchester City v the Premier League | Travers Smith

Amidst the disciplinary proceedings referred to an independent commission by the Premier League (the "League") in respect of alleged breaches by Manchester City Football Club ("City") of the League's financial rules, a decision has been made in the separate arbitration proceedings brought by...
www.traverssmith.com www.traverssmith.com
Click to expand...
Nobody would say City didn't get some wins.

As for summary, I thought it was incredibly bland and even less committal than me.

I know this was before the Second Partial Award but this says it all "Spectators of this particularly high-profile case will have to wait and see what happens next, including the consequences of the League's proposed changes to the APT Rules"
 
What annoys me most about certain presenters/journalists/rival fans is that they think the average City supports any wrong doing our club owners "may" have done. That is not true. I think we would be the most disappointed if City were found guilty.
However we are sick of this "guilty until proven innocent" shit.

I personally believe in fair sport. I also believe that means we need limits on investment and spending to keep things fair. Not certain rules that suited certain clubs.
I don't want us to win the league year after year because we have the most money. (from our club's owner)
Yet all previous successful "history" clubs had massive investment at certain points in time. Yet now it's "buying the league" when richer owners turn up.
The ironic thing is the "only way" smaller clubs could gain success in the PL is by owners injecting big money.

Those at the top had money and protections to keep them there. Look at what Uefa have done with "historic" seeding tricks to keep certain clubs relevant and successful. Certain clubs get special "Covid allowances".

FFP rules to keep clubs going bust or mismanaged. Yet here we are with United announcing they may be bankrupt this year.
Yet absolutely nothing from the PL.

Why the press perpetuate these idolisms that certain clubs deserve to stay at the top is beyond me. Why do they deserve to stay at the top? How can you create history if you are never allowed to make any?
Isn't the very definition of "sport" is to win by being the best. Not that you was once good, so should be protected to help you stay at the top. That is pure Americanised bullshit.

You can see the press bias in action everyday. Some on Talksport are embarrassing themselves.
City have proven that the PL APT rules were illegal. Yet some outlets ran with "City causing trouble".
THE FUCKING RULES WERE DEEMED ILLEGAL FFS!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top