Surely it couldn’t be the case that what is supposed to be confidential information has been leaked to a newspaper and reported by someone who happens to be married to an executive at one of the clubs affected by it?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
City launch legal action against the Premier League | Unconfirmed reports that City have secured "potentially significant victory" (p 808)
- Thread starter denislawsbackheel
- Start date
Surely it couldn’t be the case that what is supposed to be confidential information has been leaked to a newspaper and reported by someone who happens to be married to an executive at one of the clubs affected by it?
Probably waiting until the media finish emptying their bowels on us firstI can’t understand why the “other club” supposedly backing our stance hasn’t been announced yet.
Fans are entitled to criticize the club, or at least ask questions of them or doubt them. In my opinion.
We've been defending them to the hilt for the last 8-10 years now in the face of accusation after accusation.
That's not me saying that I haven't been doing my best in defending my club the past 24 hours!
In lay mans terms, its quite hard to put a good argument favouring City in terms of yesterday's news.
We are allowed to stop and ask, why have we done this, it doesn't look good etc.
I disagree... when you say "it doesn't look good", i'd argue that a biased media is framing it to look that way, when in reality we are challenging the validity... the legality of a rule that was specifically brought in after Newcastle were bought.
I don't want a situation where stupid sponsorships are OK'd, but who are the PL to question the value of some sponsorships? And ultimately we know WHO is actually pulling the strings here - and this challenge could be a backdoor way of laying bare, for all to see, the true corruption in the PL. It's not the democracy the media and fans are painting it - it's three bullies making everyone tow their line... but now more and more clubs are refusing to bow to them and that's what's frightening them!
AshtonBlueMooner
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 1,853
If some of our own fans don’t understand why we have done what we have done, what chance does an uneducated idiot fan from another club have. Many in society now believe everything they read without having the slightest idea of thinking for themselves and challenging the narrative that is being written and why. Give me strength.
Anyway, for what it’s worth. I think it’s a good move, it’s a stand, we’re not being rode over roughshod without a fight. We may win, we may not but we’ve put a marker down and as for the 115, what will be, will be.
I’ll be there whatever the result.
CTID
Anyway, for what it’s worth. I think it’s a good move, it’s a stand, we’re not being rode over roughshod without a fight. We may win, we may not but we’ve put a marker down and as for the 115, what will be, will be.
I’ll be there whatever the result.
CTID
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader
Well-Known Member
Probably as much as the canutes who formulated the rules in the first place. The object was simple - stop City winning anything. They'd find it mildly acceptable at a pinch if we were there or thereabouts, but stumbling at the final hurdle and one of their redshirt dahlings came away with the pot. And then they find the rules they've drafted don't quite fit into anyone's sense of fairness.Competition law cases aren't easy to win, apparently, but it has been done before and we know nothing really about the club's claims.
Still seems to me the February 2024 rules are excessive, burdensome and discriminatory way beyond what is required to regulate the fair values of sponsorships. But what the fuck do I know?
Have to wait and see I suppose :)
no the original is, thats one i photoshoppedAlready in the media thread
Sir Joe Aguero
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Feb 2012
- Messages
- 3,099
One very frustrating thing, no-one ever (in comparison to us/115) mentions the cartel clubs causing the breakaway of the PL, the Super League (which we were last to join & first to leave if I remember correctly), project Big Picture (arguing for abolishing the league cup, community shield & less games), FFP, Arsenal directly asking the PL to investigate us for alleged overspending, and a bunch of stuff I’ve probably missed.
In business & in sport, you can broadly win in 3 ways. Be better, invest more, or create monopolies to stop others spending. Why isn’t restricting what clubs can spend seen as ruining the league?
We have NEVER said ‘oh we’re self-generating now, let’s close up shop and stop anyone else getting close’. All we want is to be allowed to invest as we see fit, same as was when United, Arsenal & Liverpool were all very successful.
In business & in sport, you can broadly win in 3 ways. Be better, invest more, or create monopolies to stop others spending. Why isn’t restricting what clubs can spend seen as ruining the league?
We have NEVER said ‘oh we’re self-generating now, let’s close up shop and stop anyone else getting close’. All we want is to be allowed to invest as we see fit, same as was when United, Arsenal & Liverpool were all very successful.
Last edited:
Possibly because it’s the rags.I can’t understand why the “other club” supposedly backing our stance hasn’t been announced yet.