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

chesterguy said:
I think this is the point though. For American owners don’t think long term and are out for short term profits. They see the money and think it will always be there. They don’t understand that the money came from the ability to attract the best players. By putting a cap on the money will lead to a reduction in the quality of players and therefore a diminution in the quality of the league in the long term. The Americans are used to assured success see NHL NFL NBA they don’t understand relegation they don’t understand qualification for CL they don’t understand a 20 team league. They certainly don’t care about our game the only reason they invest is to make money whereas other owners like us Newcastle have invested in clubs for completely different reasons. One thing is for sure if the TV deal monies dry up I can guarantee that the American will pull out of the UK quicker than a jack rabbit
Click to expand...
The thing they don't understand the most is that there are alternatives to the Prem. La Liga, the Bundesliga, Serie A, etc. If the Prem drop the ball there are other leagues waiting in the wings to prosper. It's not like some of the other leagues haven't been at the top of the financial food chain in the past. The player supply is also much different. Not every top player around the world has to play in the Prem the way they do in the NFL or NBA. Think of how many South Americans, Africans, and Eastern Europeans play in the so called top 5 leagues (plus Portugal and the Netherlands). It's an entirely different environment from American sports and these a holes are trying to apply their tried and true, monopolistic methods to the Prem. The biggest problem is they own all 3 of the cartel clubs, not by accident, and the rest of the clubs, minus City and Chelsea, are willing to be led around by their noses even if it's to their own long term detriment...it's ridiculous...
 
Protein Junkie said:
Bumped into a Bar Codes supporter yesterday at work.
Started talking Football and our cause. I need not have gone into detail - he was fully aware and 100% with us.
Just nice to know not everyone is an enemy of Gods own.
Click to expand...
Have a look at the Newcastle-Online forum, you will see there are many of the posters are fully behind City with this case, it isn’t just the odd supporter.
 
Gingers Dad said:
I don't see any need at all for spending limits. I can't see what they achieve.
Click to expand...
Agree, but if you are going to impose such limits they can't be different for every team. A spending cap is agreed to and everyone is subject to the same limit. This idea of applying limits on a club by club basis stemming from "revenue" is preposterous especially when the so-called revenue is defined by a whole bunch of subjective, convoluted made up rules. Restricting owner investment is even more absurd. I don't see any world where any of the PSR rules would stand up in a court of law. It's always been the richest clubs win the most. And that was always OK and understood. Until someone richer came along. These rules are an obvious response to such one-time clubs being unhappy with someone richer joining the party. It's a fucking disgrace and mind boggling to me that it's been allowed to go on for so long unchallenged in a court of law. And in the Prem it's actually gotten further and further away from legal competitive principles. The ironic thing is if these same American owners tried this shit in the US it wouldn't stand a chance. Thus the salary caps used in the NFL, NBA, and NHL. Imagine telling the Dallas Cowboys they can spend half a billion while telling the Jacksonville Jaguars they can only spend 200 mil because Dallas has more fans, more commercial income, and a bigger "history" regardless of the fact that the Jaguars' owner might be twice as rich as the Cowboys owner? (hypothetical) Insanity, pure insanity...
 
Sk@mcfc said:
No news is good news
Click to expand...
There's unlikely to be any news whatsoever until the judge's decision which could still be months away. Civil cases dealing with competition law are pretty unsexy and uninteresting as far as the media is concerned - proceedings tend to be (unless you're a keen student of cases like this) somewhat tedious and rarely if ever get reported by news platforms irrespective of how high profile the case is until there's a decision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.