S
S
Shrimp
Guest
That'll go down a storm at Anfield.
It has to be done !
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.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
It has to be done !
Eric Hitchmough
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2015
- Messages
- 3,076
It would definitely boil Dipper piss! Count me in.That'll go down a storm at Anfield.
It has to be done !
many owners clearly happy with the PL revenues, the status of being a PL club owner, and the fact they can vote for saving their own ass in a way not really allowing for any ambitious other club to grow quickly let alone someone coming from Championship all of a sudden become a force.
on top of this with these rules they can always point at the rules when asked for spending more etc.
how mike Ashley would love these stricter rules...
The nicest thing I can say about Ashley is how he fought his corner against Masters and the PL to get the takeover done. No love loss, he ran the club into the ground, but he played his part in taking legal action against the PL.
Nascent Blues
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 20 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 5,355
DO YOU REMEMBER WHENAh a song ,maybe
LETS CHEAT AGAIN
LIKE WE DID LAST SEASON
LETS CHEAT AGAIN
LIKE WE'VE DONE FOR YEARS
you get the drift.
THERE WAS NO CHEATIN'
THE RAGS AND THE SCOUSERS
WON IT EVERY YEAR...
Gaylord du Bois
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 16 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 29,259
- Location
- Great Umbrage.
- Team supported
- Glory Hunting Blue. Was Chelsea.
It's for the birds, that's for sure. Definitely one for the birds.One for the leagal eagles.
give it to gordon
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Nov 2013
- Messages
- 17,602
- Team supported
- Manchester City
here we go again changing the rules to suit the scum
This is terrible. Its clearly designed to keep the status quo.
Gorton_Tubster
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2012
- Messages
- 16,321
- Location
- Riding the blue tidal wave.
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Very true. But I don't think it's City they don't want. It's Pep they don't want... Pep at City (and not the media favoured clubs). The PL don't mind the domination of the league, they just want it to be lfc or utd.Hmm I’d like to think so but. If they get rid of us and the rags are getting government help to do up the swamp again! Everything will be like it was in the 90s. We aren’t wanted. They want the rags back on top. I’ve said before on here once we’reone the scum will copy our business model. The plans they have for the swamp is a carbon copy of the Etihad campus.
Imagine that, the best manager in the world comes to the PL and the PL try to get rid of him. Typical English media.
Last edited:
its the english disease, we are quagmired in traditionalist bullshit.Very true. But I don't think it's City they don't want. It's Pep they don't want... Pep at City (and not the media favoured clubs). The PL don't mind the domination of the league, they just want it to be lfc Ord utd.
Imagine that, the best manager in the world comes to the PL and the PL try to get rid of him. Typical English media.
jaiguruKun
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Mar 2011
- Messages
- 5,736
The claim against City probably has more legs in the even of the breaches being proven. However, there is no quantifiable loss.Please excuse me for perhaps asking silly questions or making dubious points.
1. I have tried to ascertain exactly what the 115 charges are and cannot find this online anywhere.
2.Do the PL not have a duty to clarify these charges to fans of a club ?
3. When precisely did the PL become aware of these misdemeanours ?
4.My reasoning is simple. I do not hold a SC, go when I can.But say you are a SC holder, and were made aware of the charges you may not wish to renew your SC. You will have spent money following City on the premis we have done nil wrong.You will have paid for travel, SCs, and yet a possible sanction would be losing those titles which devalues the investment you have made following City.So you have incurred a loss.
5. If you have incurred a loss due to the intransigence of the PL are you able to make a claim in the small claims court ?? i am aware that you can make a personal claim against the CEO of an organisation if you have incurred a loss.
6. So let us say 5k SC City fans serve Richard Masters a notice to prosecute him personally for potential losses in light of the fact they have failed to clarify matters, when exactly accusing City of the same, is this argument feasible.
One for the leagal eagles.
I understand that one answer will be the claim could be made against City !!
You've still got what you paid for I.e. the entertainment and experience of watching matches.
Can't help but see that Newcastle takeover has put the familiar American ownerships (Joe Lewis/Levy/Spurs too) arses into panic mode. Landscape not helped at all with Roman being replaced with Bohely.
Us finishing 4th last season ahead of Liverpool, Spurs, Man U was probably considered a full-on act of war.
Jamie Reuben did a podcast interview at the end of last season and said that the reception from one particular club was far from welcoming. To the point representatives/higher-ups were being openly hostile and aggressive to Staveley whilst she was in their company watching the game. Hasn't taken too much to read between the lines, and conclude it was during a 2-1 win at Spurs!
This summer's introduction of fair market value was a direct response to our announcement of SELA (Saudi events company) as a shirt sponsor. Signing up with Adidas as one of their lead brands for next season can't have gone down too well either.
The spotlight on multi-club ownership has come about from the familiar names going into a January window without a pot to piss in when it comes to FFP, and shit scared Newcastle were going to be suddenly donated a raft of talent from Saudi. Which was never, ever the case, or ever going to be.
The American ownerships can't be too happy with your guy's carry on, but their current panic will be the current FFP model's ability to hold back the money waiting to be spent into Newcastle. The damn will burst, and it's not as strong as they like. The thought of Newcastle being able to spend another £300M on their squad scares them - as they know we'll not spunk it up the wall and still finish 8th.
Us finishing 4th last season ahead of Liverpool, Spurs, Man U was probably considered a full-on act of war.
Jamie Reuben did a podcast interview at the end of last season and said that the reception from one particular club was far from welcoming. To the point representatives/higher-ups were being openly hostile and aggressive to Staveley whilst she was in their company watching the game. Hasn't taken too much to read between the lines, and conclude it was during a 2-1 win at Spurs!
This summer's introduction of fair market value was a direct response to our announcement of SELA (Saudi events company) as a shirt sponsor. Signing up with Adidas as one of their lead brands for next season can't have gone down too well either.
The spotlight on multi-club ownership has come about from the familiar names going into a January window without a pot to piss in when it comes to FFP, and shit scared Newcastle were going to be suddenly donated a raft of talent from Saudi. Which was never, ever the case, or ever going to be.
The American ownerships can't be too happy with your guy's carry on, but their current panic will be the current FFP model's ability to hold back the money waiting to be spent into Newcastle. The damn will burst, and it's not as strong as they like. The thought of Newcastle being able to spend another £300M on their squad scares them - as they know we'll not spunk it up the wall and still finish 8th.