City launch legal action against the Premier League | Unconfirmed reports that City have secured "potentially significant victory" (p 808)

[Bluearmy]

Has the Chelsea hotel sale been passed??

 

[creditunionhero]

Why do we have to prove that a RPS is more than we could get from a non related party.
We can't be expected to open negotiations with every business on the planet to find out what they might pay us. It would be totally impractical.
The PL are assuming we are guilty unless we prove our innocence, which is completely unfair.

 

[SWP's back]

Can someone clear something up for me.

The rules are that 2/3rds of the PL must vote to approve something, so that the new rule was approved by 12 of the 18 clubs who voted (2 abstained including us)

So, why didn't we just vote against it - it would have been 12/7/1 and it would have been defeated. Job done surely??

I’m still not convinced City abstained. Plenty of journalists have written that we voted against.

 

[citizen_maine]

But it wouldnt have mattered if the vote rejected the change.
Suggests either City hadn't read the room right on how many would vote against it, or didn't understand the 2/3rds rule (as many of us thought it was 14 no matter what)

or due to the constant drip drip of changes that were clearly discriminatory, City decided enough was enough and wanted the changes tested in court. If they win, the other clubs will think twice about future changes

 

[Paladin]

You’d expect any competent CEO to “read the room” of his twenty shareholders and basically know where the votes would go on contentious matters. He’s a fucking clown and has presided over/caused chaos.

He was chosen by United and Liverpool, and he's there to carry out their bidding.

 

[asgoodasitgets]

I’m still not convinced City abstained. Plenty of journalists have written that we voted against.

Well if journalists have written it , then it must be true with their integrity and fact checking .

 

[halfcenturyup]

Thats a good podcast that Stefan shared on Twitter.
Mark Chapman, Gabby Logan and a sports lawyer.

Basically saying that its not that big a deal and no matter the outcome it won't change a great deal. And that everyone has seen "man city taking the premier league to court" since Tuesday and gone into a frenzy

For anyone interested.



He did a good job pooh-poohing most of the nonsense, but at the end he missed the chance to shut the noise about the EFL deal up. Shame that.

Chapman was OK. Logan had no idea.

 

[Bluearmy]

You’d expect any competent CEO to “read the room” of his twenty shareholders and basically know where the votes would go on contentious matters. He’s a fucking clown and has presided over/caused chaos.

He doesn’t care about 20 shareholders tho :)

 

[Bald fraud]

Bring a rule in within 48 hours to ban it

Is the correct answer

 

[mcfc64]

Ineos would be a related party anyway surely.

It’s difficult without seeing the full submission but personally I do think there needs to be some regulation around associated parties (well, there does now because they allowed the Newcastle sale through, the right answer would have been never allowing that to happen), it sounds like the PL have overreached with it though.