jim tolmies perm
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2007
- Messages
- 2,269
Or just one ballsy woman such as Ms Dinnage
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
- Thread starter denislawsbackheel
- Start date
City should really boil some piss and announce some new large sponsorship deals with companies not from the UAE. Khaldoon's blackbook of contacts must be off the scale.
Only if those companies then announce huge deals with Etihad.
Fuck them, make them squirm.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 88,475
No, they check every deal to see if it’s “associated” and if it is, then they look to fair market.Somebody will correct me if I am wrong but I think the PL will examine ANY sponsorship deal under the Feb rule change, not just ‘Associated’.
I think City’s main challenge is using “associated” rather than the generally accepted accounting rules used in the U.K. and Europe which are “related”.
I think the problem that city have with the pls rules is that they are too broad and opaque which puts you at risk of being punished for something you didnt even know was a breach of the rules and when you are not convinced that the governing party is not acting in good faith then that becomes a massive problem.No, they check every deal to see if it’s “associated” and if it is, then they look to fair market.
I think City’s main challenge is using “associated” rather than the generally accepted accounting rules used in the U.K. and Europe which are “related”.
You have to laugh at the spin the media are putting on this. Apparently now it’s our fault the PL won’t agree a deal with the EFL.
Maybe this is why VAR is so bad, why Everton and Forrest failed PSR, why Russia invaded Ukraine.
Maybe this is why VAR is so bad, why Everton and Forrest failed PSR, why Russia invaded Ukraine.
No, they check every deal to see if it’s “associated” and if it is, then they look to fair market.
I think City’s main challenge is using “associated” rather than the generally accepted accounting rules used in the U.K. and Europe which are “related”.
I think this is true, but just to add to it a bit. The drafting of 'associated party' is extraordinarily wide. I presume City are arguing that the wording catches US sponsorship deals for US-owned club just as it covers UAE sponsorship deals for us, but that it's being applied in a discriminatory manner so that only the latter are reviewed. We'll see.
The hysterical reaction in the media is risible. City prevail only if the PL has been/is acting unlawfully, you cunts.
give it to gordon
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Nov 2013
- Messages
- 16,395
- Team supported
- Manchester City
This is getting beyond a joke now, it's turning into pitch folks and torches. I can see some of our fans getting seriously hurt by some nutters.
Sadly I agree
The first bit is an interesting take. Has that ever happened before though? Where a sector or a particular business or industry operates outwith the law just because its members want to?I suppose there are two issues. Firstly, if the rules are anti-competitive and secondly, whether certain exemptions from competition law should be made in this case because it's a sporting body.
The first is completely factual with legal precedent and what other clubs think is irrelevant. The second may be influenced by the views of other clubs, I suppose.
I still can't get my head around the fact that such issues can be settled by an arbitration within the PL rules. Can they set legal precedent (say, in regard to the special situation of the PL in competition law? That has never been legally tested as far as I am aware)? With arbitrators from a list chosen by the chairman of a judicial panel chosen by the PL? I struggle with all that.
It can work the other way. I.e there are plenty of performance enhancing supplements that are legal generally, but not legal on sport. But to accept something not in line with general law? Sounds a bit uneasy.
Agree entirely with your last bit. Which is why I kept refusing to believe it ;).
The clubs pathetic media team and PR dept to blame for years of inaction and letting everyone publish such crap without comment. The softly softly approach has not worked, which we have seen for years yet the club still allows all cretins in the media into the ground.You have to laugh at the spin the media are putting on this. Apparently now it’s our fault the PL won’t agree a deal with the EFL.
Maybe this is why VAR is so bad, why Everton and Forrest failed PSR, why Russia invaded Ukraine.
They should instead try get some additional sponsorship. Oh wait.It's a crazy situation when arguably the world's richest club in Newcastle may be forced to sell their best players to meet the PL criteria, that's just so wrong.