City launch legal action against the Premier League

[bladdered]

Always worth a repost...

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Prem teams furious as Liverpool and United vet league CEO candidates

Liverpool and Manchester United have left their Premier League rivals furious after reportedly having had special access to weigh up the candidates to be new chief executive of the Premier League.

www.dailymail.co.uk

These kind of antics hardly bode well for the PL. And can only strengthen City's case of bias.

 

[TShed]

We'd definitely get real ale at some of those National League grounds. Makes you think...

Get black peas and home made pies plus a real ale hut on the terracing at Bridge Celtic just have to ensure you stand upwind of most of the crowd

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Not pessimistic about the legal cases.

I just think City are really bad at PR in this country.

They say nothing and the club gets deliberately battered with misinformation and lies.

A simple statement would correct the bullshit that is already going round.

We have probably signed some sort of agreement with the PL not to speak publically. The story has probably leaked from a rival club rather than the PL. Both sides have to be very cautious now about anything they say ahead of court. A chunk of our case revolves around the lack of integrity shown by rival clubs' with their statements. We must not do what we have accused them of doing. We can do our talking in court no matter how frustrating that is for fans and for all our sponsors.

 

[Goodlove]

You suggesting that City agreed to abide by the new related party rules in exchange for the 115 going away forever?

Not sure that buys us much in the court of public opinion, but it could bring finality, I guess.

Both settle out of court and both save face perhaps?

 

[lasereyes]

I wonder what this bit means? What projects and what delayed deals? Do funds go through the PL first?

'In their claim, City are seeking “damages for the losses which it has incurred as a result of the unlawfulness of the FMV [fair market value] rules”, in particular for costs resulting from delays, sums they claim were not paid under agreed deals and additional costs, including the club’s inability to generate revenue from delayed or cancelled projects. This, clubs believe, could potentially amount to tens of millions.'

I think it means the rules place an (unfairly) onerous standard on sponsorship deals which makes it more time consuming, costly and difficult to consummate them. Hence lost revenue that City are claiming.

 

[Coatigan]

The main charges are over nine seasons clearly stopping at 2018.

He’s not talking about non co-operation since that time imho.

He hasn't specified. It is loose, but it isn't 'wrong'.

 

[jimharri]

Always worth a repost...

 

[Blue Maverick]

Harris and Delooney will be chocking on their bile now

 

[ancoats]

FUCK THEM ALL