- This topic has 122 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 2 weeks, 4 days ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Wonder if the PL and the rest of us especially the clubs that rallied together to go against City have egg on their faces? Doesn’t look too clever from this angle.
These guys will get away with it as with the likes of PSG, and Real (if there was something il-legit to get away with in the first place).
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
City are claiming a victory, aided it seems by City-favored jornos, but it doesnt seem that way to me. It seems a few minor issues were changed yet the actual APT rules remain the same. These are the rules that could have enabled the likes of City, NUFC and Chelsea to pump in whatever they like under the disguise of an associated sponsor.
“The Premier League welcomes the Tribunalโs findings, which endorsed the overall objectives, framework and decision-making of the APT system. The Tribunal upheld the need for the APT system as a whole and rejected the majority of Manchester Cityโs challenges. Moreover, the Tribunal found that the Rules are necessary in order for the Leagueโs financial controls to be effective.
The Tribunal did, however, identify a small number of discrete elements of the Rules which do not, in their current form, comply with competition and public law requirements (more information below). These elements can quickly and effectively be remedied by the League and clubs. โฏ”
https://www.premierleague.com/news/4144828
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
It is claimed a victory by both City and the PL. But who actually ‘won’?
After reading a fair bit online and trying to filter out some of the tribal stuff (fuelled it seems by a lot of clickbait including mainstream journalists) I can only see a small victory for City but a more successful defence for the PL.
City have won with share holder loans which are now to be subject of fair market value. A number of teams have used share holder loans at favourable terms, think LFC did this for the stadium expansion for example. I’m sure no retrospective punishment will happen but it will mean a different approach is needed by teams that use this approach. But the claims regarding the “tyranny of the majority”, that there are racist implications against City have been dismissed and most importantly that the APT rules remain in place.
A victory for City? Pyrrhic at best. I can’t see this having a major impact on the 115 (130?) but maybe more news develops today.
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
On closer inspection, it would seem the 115 haven’t won every argument but some, with the “prem” arguably winning the more “important” elements of all the complaints..
There’s quite a “dummies guide” in the Guardian today for those who want to read it…
The only thing I agree with, and as the article says at the end, the only real winners here are the bloody lawyers… as it ain’t going away just yet!
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
City didn’t win. They won two quite minor points and lost many, many others. One point only came in Feb. They still have to use fair market value in sponsorships, which is what the PL wanted.
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
The PL did a good job in covering up and fooling the public in what was a real smack and you have certain news media like the telegraph covering up for them. We all know the real truth but ok you guys stand with your clubs it’s normal. Want be long before the real facts emerge.
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
The tribunal ruled that shareholder loans should not be excluded from the scope of APT rules and that some amendments made in February should not be retained. I realise City are saying that as some parts were found to be unlawful that all of it is unlawful, but that doesn’t follow through.
City are trying to claim that as shareholder loans needs to be added, and as adding them in will be problematic for clubs that it is likely that they won’t backdate the rule – that seems fair (as you you can’t break a rule which didn’t exist and be retrospectively punished for it later). City think that as the PL won’t re-evaluate finances they should cancel all evaluations, but surely the common man would think if you have knowingly and wilfully broken the law that in one thing, but breaking a law which didn’t exist is another?
It’s a long shot by City to think the PL will have to drop the case against them unless they punish clubs (who stuck by the rules as they were written) with shareholder loans which retrospectively would make them breach new rules. Their only real hope is that the threat of further litigation puts the PL off of taking the case forward. Then City can claim total innocence, despite clearly not being the case.
What makes you think it was a real smack in the teeth for the PL?
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
The PL is trying to cover up their court loss by saying they lost on small issues only, those so called small issues involve multi millions of pounds, they the PL can’t even afford the legal fees, they want all the club’s to chip in and pay their legal fees.๐คฃ๐คฃ๐คฃ
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Not to worry even if the PL and FA fail the new communist government will step in and destroy the allure of the English game.
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Journalists are not specialists on the matter.
What City claim is not what it seems to be.
Not sure why you’re revelling at this Rover. Do you enjoy a club which is state owned turning the league in to a monopoly, if you believe the outcome from Citys perspective?
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Thanks for that Rover, very insightful and completely impartial coming from the chief City correspondent at the MEN who did not copy and paste from the City press release at all.
BTW, the PL clubs were always footing the bill. They own equal shares in the PL after all. And as I mentioned this is probably Cityโs greatest chance of โwinningโ (scaring the clubs into submission with veiled threats of drawn out and very expensive litigation).
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
City Txiki Begiristain confirmed leaving at the end of the season. Coincidence? Or a rat jumping ship?
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
People in power want to subject the football population to their will, it’s not only the PL but also the FA, Uefa and to a lesser extent Fifa who force draconian rules down everyone’s throats, it’s not about monopoly but a choice you either with capitalism or with fasicm, communism and socialism. Even all the current wars on the go are driven and a reflection of these ideological systems. I don’t even support City but I admire them for standing up and fighting tyranny. However we now have a labour government which has strong ties to those dreadful draconian fascist ideologies so you can guess they will step in soon. So you guys don’t have to worry. Go well.
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Yes, City are anti tyrants. That’s it Rover, you are spot on there mate!
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Alfie I assume you either a United or Liverpool supporter,,๐คฃ, understandable
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
So the slave-owning masters of the Abh Dhabi ruling classes are a beacon for freedom and for the blatent disregard of anything which could be consider remotely fair for football?
Are you genuinely saying for the good of the sport they should be allowed to ignore the rules and/or break them for their own personal gain?
You see nothing wrong with them accepting sponership deals from themselves to inflate their own books?
Do you really think the “First Bank of Abu Dhabi” are suddenly going to get thousands of new accounts in England because they’re sponsering the 115? I would say they’re throwing their money down the drain on that one, but then again, it isn’t their money, is it?
Of course, the FA/UEFA/FIFA are hardly innocent, don’t get me wrong, but painting the 115 as some sort of “freedom fighters” I think is a bit misguided to say the least.
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Rover-
Go to the UAE and speak against the UAE government for their treatment towards migrants, gays and anything else. Then you’ll know the real meaning of tyranny.
Stopping clubs using inflated sponsorship deals to bypass some rules is not tyrant. We have seen less clubs go bust at the top flight since these rules came in to place.
What did City win exactly? Paying off journalists for false information.
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Banjo-
Rover is a Chelsea fan. The only way they can achieve success is by having dictators and corrupt owners in charge.
Not sure I would find that enjoyable. It is like a virgin losing his virginity at a brothel. City and Chelsea fans would see that as a pull and accomplishment. Why the rest would see it as cheap and desperation.
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
City and Chelsea fans would be paying themselves to go cyber chum, and then declaring it as a tax write-off, while collecting bonus points on their sponsered air-miles card before redeeming them for a discount while getting mates rates as it’s their sisters working there… ๐
_____________________________
React below ๐
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.