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

[Centurions]

All 20 clubs abide by those rules, so if two clubs sort it out between them , the others have agreed to abide by it.
Let it go - nothing is going to come of it.

I would be astounded if the PL weren't notified at the time and possibly the other 18 members. It's definitely water under the bridge.

 

[slbsn]

:) Appreciate everybody's efforts in trying to educate me. I get most of it, but I am still not seeing how this large disclosure is relevant to the 115 case, other than very obliquely. In fact, i would say it is irrelevant. It must just be me. Probably why accountants are always being screwed by lawyers :)

We have no idea how large the disclosure is. And disclosure could be critical, say, in relation to knowledge of the matters at the time especially in respect of something like Fordham. Knowledge/consideration of the issue by the PL in 2012-2014 (say) would mean that the limitation period would likely apply and would therefore close off certain issues. This is just one example off the top of my head - there will be others where 2 way disclosure on issues is important. There will be lots of areas where 2 way or third party disclosure could be relevant.

 

[KS55]

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

That’s part of our case, that the rule unfairly targets clubs owned by ME nationals.

 

[KS55]

Agree with everything you wrote but want to make a point about when you say he is not 'City oriented'.

I know a couple of older blues who completely buy the MSM bullshit and are of the opinion that City are guilty because there's no smoke without fire.

I spent a frustrating couple of hours before the cup final trying to explain to one of them why there's a good chance we are innocent. I patiently explained the UEFA case and CAS judgement and the circumstances around the PL charges, all to no avail.

I fear the media has done such a good job demonising us, that innocent as I believe us to be, much of the muck thrown at us will stick.

Send them here, they’ll learn soon enough.

 

[Jam Tomorrow]

At a time when inward investment into the UK is on its arse, this stupid, vindictive, witch-hunt seems more stupid than ever. All because the cartel shithouses who let their stadiums turn to shit can’t stand their profits being hit by little City….

Investment in UK has trailed other G7 countries since mid-1990s, IPPR says

Institute for Public Policy Research urges Labour and Conservatives to reverse planned cuts

www.theguardian.com

 

[StillBluessinceHydeRoad]

I was away in Devon last week and have only just caught up with recent developments. I believe that the PL has been told it must produce all its emails and texts mentioning City since 2009. This would seem to suggest they are relevant to the "APT" case at least, but it is hard to see how they can be ignored in the "!!%" hearing. Projectriver makes an important point of obvious significance that such texts and emails have a connection with the limitation period on hearing charges with the PL dealing with a period of some 10 years in the case of their 115 charges. Petrusha makes a point of similar significance in that they may show that a number of clubs (and the FFP rules and APT regulations both passed with the required 2/3 majority)lobbied the PL to "stop City" with whatever rules were required. They may have received a sympathetic hearing and reply. If they raise fears that the PL is behaving not as an even handed governing body acting in the interests of the game but as a commercial rival vying with City and some other clubs for sponsorship deals (for example) then the PL case would indeed be weakened severely - holed beneath the water line in fact.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

I was away in Devon last week and have only just caught up with recent developments. I believe that the PL has been told it must produce all its emails and texts mentioning City since 2009. This would seem to suggest they are relevant to the "APT" case at least, but it is hard to see how they can be ignored in the "!!%" hearing. Projectriver makes an important point of obvious significance that such texts and emails have a connection with the limitation period on hearing charges with the PL dealing with a period of some 10 years in the case of their 115 charges. Petrusha makes a point of similar significance in that they may show that a number of clubs (and the FFP rules and APT regulations both passed with the required 2/3 majority)lobbied the PL to "stop City" with whatever rules were required. They may have received a sympathetic hearing and reply. If they raise fears that the PL is behaving not as an even handed governing body acting in the interests of the game but as a commercial rival vying with City and some other clubs for sponsorship deals (for example) then the PL case would indeed be weakened severely - holed beneath the water line in fact.

Gosh.
It’s almost like an independent regulator would be far more fair.

 

[Gingers Dad]

Sniff, sniff, sniff

Easy one

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

At last someone gives a clear reply to a complicated issue rather than insulting. I do get it now thanks

That’s good.
Having got your head around that, what do you think of the fact that 2/3 of the league voted in these rules that in effect nobble us.
Rules that don’t seem to have any business benefits for the league in general and this majority seem to be more interested in stopping our gallop than actually supporting football.
They are almost being tyrannical in their dominant position, you could say. Not being equitable or perhaps more accurately, clubbing together not for the good of all. Too influenced by a cartel really.

Do you think an independent regulator would govern in the same manner?

 

[BlueAnorak]

That’s good.
Having got your head around that, what do you think of the fact that 2/3 of the league voted in these rules that in effect nobble us.
Rules that don’t seem to have any business benefits for the league in general and this majority seem to be more interested in stopping our gallop than actually supporting football.
They are almost being tyrannical in their dominant position, you could say. Not being equitable or perhaps more accurately, clubbing together not for the good of all. Too influenced by a cartel really.

Do you think an independent regulator would govern in the same manner?

Kind of depends who appoints the regulator doesn't it?