City launch legal action against the Premier League | City win APT case (pg901)

[hammocity]

The Post Office inquiry has exposed the corruption of Post Office & Lawyers from their emails but wouldn’t be getting looked at if the Post Masters had their hand in their til.

I’m hoping City can prove they are innocent with the irrefutable evidence. If this has been ignored & the relationship is corrupt then that should lead to being implicated.

Just as an aside with the Post Office. I still do the books for my mate who I passed my business to when I retired in 2022.

He's changed a van 4 months into the insurance policy we bought from the Post Office. The original premium was nearly £1400. The new van is worth about £4k more than the old one. I rang yesterday to update the policy and its £449 extra, so on 8 months that's an increase of over £670 on an annual policy, nearly 50%. I know they're only the broker but THE FUCKING ROBBING BASTARDS.

When are the government going to act against these charlatans, it's disgraceful.

Apologies for going off topic.

 

[cheekybids]

I’m speculating but, maybe City have disclosed some emails that are damning against the PL and or our rivals and the panel want a more comprehensive picture to join up some of the dots or to put the said emails into some sort of context.

Dear Premier league we’d like an investigation into the £50m for a new stadium to replace Anfield….

Dear Premier league that’s the 2nd time that the Rags have had a game called off down to security failures & no penalties…..

 

[KS55]

Good points, but what does an improper relationship with some clubs have to do with the allegations? If you get charged with breaking a law, you can't just expect to get a policeman's emails, or the judge's emails, to make sure they aren't biased, surely. There has to be a reason that is relevant to the case? Or maybe not, what do I know?

But I am still struggling with that. The justification in the APT case is clear, the 115 not so much. To me, anyway.

Try this for size: email PL to Liverpool fc:
Hi twats,
Thanks for the details of how clubs sold players’ rights to third parties. As you suggested we have charged City with failure to declare players earnings in full.
Who is deciding to charge City but nobody else? And why?

 

[cheekybids]

Dear premier league, thank you for your prompt response to decide that there was no need to investigate Liverpool fc as it happened years ago. It was only illegally hacking our database & therefore profiting from buying Coutinho & selling him at a huge profit passing FFP & being able to buy players that would win them a premier league title.

 

[slbsn]

I suppose. Thanks for your reply. I was just thinking there must be a very good reason for a disclosure request to be enforced by the panel / tribunal. Does there maybe being a witch-hunt against the club (or not) have enough relevance (in the eyes of the panel) to the 115 case to warrant such a stringent disclosure requirement? That is what is going on in my head ....

I bow, however, to the superior knowledge of people who know what they are talking about, and will shut up :)

Other way round. Would have to be very good reason not to demand 2 way disclosure. Only the case where those emails sought by City to be considered irrelevant

 

[Moss Side's Finest]

Dear premier league, thank you for your prompt response to decide that there was no need to investigate Liverpool fc as it happened years ago. It was only illegally hacking our database & therefore profiting from buying Coutinho & selling him at a huge profit passing FFP & being able to buy players that would win them a premier league title.

I think unfortunately City settled the case financially with the scousers, hence that was the end of the matter.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

I think unfortunately City settled the case financially with the scousers, hence that was the end of the matter.

I'm always uneasy with clubs doing 'deals' like this.

Imagine if the dips had done something to a minor club which could have a major effect on other clubs and they took a couple of million pay-off.

Illegalities should be looked at by the Prem no matter if the clubs agree to settle.

 

[jonmcity]

We should launch a class action for the fans against the prem for the undue stress caused by their illegal rules and bias.

 

[Blueeye]

You don't understand why we're challenging a rule brought in by the PL in Feb 24 that will likely substantially affect our current and future income generation through sponsorship so that we cannot spend any money on transfers that doesn't affect any of our direct Competitors?
What exactly don't you understand?

Don't understand that surely the rule applies to all the other clubs

 

[cheekybids]

I think unfortunately City settled the case financially with the scousers, hence that was the end of the matter.

I’m just being facetious but that would still display that Premier league aren’t motivated by the rules but who complains.