Jonas Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 This massive shit-show just to limit two clubs from challenging, the very concept of which is itself outrageous really, before you recall its at the behest and probably duress of the orthodoxy de jour and same clubs that would gladly have shafted the PL and formed a super league. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUHRLYASLEEVESUP Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 All we have ever asked for is a team that has every top player in the world on the biggest wages ever paid Not much to ask really is it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEToon Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 (edited) It would have been quite the can of worms had Isak, AG or Bruno been sold. Edited October 8 by JEToon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaztoon Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 2 minutes ago, JEToon said: It would have been quite the can of worms had Isak, AG or Bruno been sold. We was forced to sell mintah and Anderson because of these rules..hope city destroy the lot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 36 minutes ago, The College Dropout said: Arsenal Liverpool Spurs Man U Brighton Palace We think? It's in the article. It's Liverpool, Everton, West Ham, Palace, Brighton, and Spurs. Says they were chosen as being "representative of the league." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucasol Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 2 minutes ago, timeEd32 said: It's in the article. It's Liverpool, Everton, West Ham, Palace, Brighton, and Spurs. Says they were chosen as being "representative of the league." Aye right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HayDen Traces Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 10 minutes ago, timeEd32 said: It's in the article. It's Liverpool, Everton, West Ham, Palace, Brighton, and Spurs. Says they were chosen as being "representative of the league." That's a nice balanced group there Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbandit Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 Being representative of the league? Is this a fucking joke, all 20 clubs are representative of the league. Aren’t they all the clubs that have voted in support of the PL’s side? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonas Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 (edited) 15 minutes ago, timeEd32 said: It's in the article. It's Liverpool, Everton, West Ham, Palace, Brighton, and Spurs. Says they were chosen as being "representative of the league." So only the two clubs that did most to stop our takeover and the two most simpering also-rans that have monstrous hard ons for us Edited October 8 by Jonas Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 (edited) I want to be mad at who's included but I can't be without knowing if we asked to be one of the six and were rejected. But it's not geographically representative, representative of recently promoted/recent EFL clubs (I know they are also meeting), representative of clubs with ambition and money to spend who can't, or representative of anyone who is outwardly frustrated by any of the Premier League's recent rule changes. Edit: I guess this isn't true in the case of Everton. Edited October 8 by timeEd32 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronson333 Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 Just now, timeEd32 said: I want to be mad at who's included but I can't be without knowing if we asked to be one of the six and were rejected. But it's not geographically representative, representative of recently promoted/recent EFL clubs (I know they are also meeting), representative of clubs with ambition and money to spend who can't, or representative of anyone who is outwardly frustrated by any of the Premier League's recent rule changes. Would love to see Palace relegated Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbandit Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 7 minutes ago, Ronson333 said: Would love to see Palace relegated They’ll be a good representative of a championship club next season Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitley mag Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 Pretty damning from Blue Moon - Having ploughed through all 175 pages I think the worst element of this whole saga is the contempt shown to City over the sponsorship deals at First Abu Dhabi Bank, Emirates Palace, and Etihad. If you read the incredible volume of correspondence it is clear that the PL and their financial people dragged their feet and put obstacle after obstacle in City's way. The Etihad deal was dragged out for almost 12 months. The PL told City it was "above market value" but refused to discuss how they arrived at their figures. City were told they couldnt see the comparison with other deals on the database. The Judges slammed this despicable behaviour. These three delayed deals have probably cost City tens of millions of pounds. The PL didn't respond to letters and emails from City repeatedly. This was just pure obstruction driven by bad faith. No wonder City sued them. Just think about it. Three firms who want to invest in a business in North West England are obstructed at every opportunity. A total disgrace. No one has reported on this properly. There are pages and pages of the PL and its financial people just taking the piss out of City. It's in the link below starting at section 441. https://resources.premierleague.com/premierleague/document/2024/10/07/898efab9-9f51-449b-a393-1a0c05b48824/Manchester-City-and-Premier-League-Partial-Final-Award-071024.pdf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mouldy_uk Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 33 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said: Times article says these lot: The six clubs, selected as being representative of the league, are Crystal Palace, Liverpool, West Ham United, Tottenham Hotspur, Everton, and Brighton & Hove Albion Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 Simon Jordon has said the regulator won't have a central budget which means it will have hardly any staff, just another useless govenment quango Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegans Export Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 I'm not overly concerned about who is or isn't meeting with whom. I'm not saying we will (or should) but I don't think our owners would find it particularly difficult to influence the Government if they thought it was necessary. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucasol Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 13 minutes ago, mouldy_uk said: Parrish and Bloom would happily chow down on Henry and Levy’s dirty cuttlefish and asparagus mess, the filthy cucks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbydazzla Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 16 minutes ago, Whitley mag said: Pretty damning from Blue Moon - Having ploughed through all 175 pages I think the worst element of this whole saga is the contempt shown to City over the sponsorship deals at First Abu Dhabi Bank, Emirates Palace, and Etihad. If you read the incredible volume of correspondence it is clear that the PL and their financial people dragged their feet and put obstacle after obstacle in City's way. The Etihad deal was dragged out for almost 12 months. The PL told City it was "above market value" but refused to discuss how they arrived at their figures. City were told they couldnt see the comparison with other deals on the database. The Judges slammed this despicable behaviour. These three delayed deals have probably cost City tens of millions of pounds. The PL didn't respond to letters and emails from City repeatedly. This was just pure obstruction driven by bad faith. No wonder City sued them. Just think about it. Three firms who want to invest in a business in North West England are obstructed at every opportunity. A total disgrace. No one has reported on this properly. There are pages and pages of the PL and its financial people just taking the piss out of City. It's in the link below starting at section 441. https://resources.premierleague.com/premierleague/document/2024/10/07/898efab9-9f51-449b-a393-1a0c05b48824/Manchester-City-and-Premier-League-Partial-Final-Award-071024.pdf Basically the same as what the PL did when PIF were trying to buy us until they got battered by our lawyers in the CAT hearing and then shit themselves about their snide behaviour being revealed so approved the takeover Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paully Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 What an utter shit show from the PL! Well done to Man City for showing the corrupt wankers up! Rules to basically stop us competing from the red cartel tossers and their mates - it’s about time we played dirty in this game - enough is enough! Ferk them! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFEE Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 9 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said: Basically the same as what the PL did when PIF were trying to buy us until they got battered by our lawyers in the CAT hearing and then shit themselves about their snide behaviour being revealed so approved the takeover Memory a bit hazy but don’t think we ever got the chance to run the CAT case. Everything would’ve come out in the wash there and then if we had. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbydazzla Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 It’s telling that this was a court case between MCFC and PL, but NUFC is constantly referenced in the document The snide anti-competitive behaviour towards us by the PL and a cartel of clubs was clearly the catalyst for the PL getting themselves exposed as being snide If the PL and cartel had been more discrete and played a subtle, longer game in how they’d tried to restrict NUFC then they might well have gotten away with it But the knee jerk reaction to stick the financial brakes on a relegation bound NUFC a mere 2 days after our takeover shows them up for the cheats they are Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
janpawel Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 3 hours ago, Jackie Broon said: They did consider that (from page 41 on) but only in the context of the APT rules, they didn't consider the lawfulness of PSR as a whole: 192. We agree that the move to an ex ante regime with a freeze on monies being used until there has been a determination that the APT is evidently not above FMV is a more intrusive market intervention than the previous ex post regime. However, as we have found, the evidence referred to at [180] above, indicates that there were difficulties in the speedy and effective investigation of potential breaches under the ex post regime. RPTs were not being declared, and any restatement would be made long after the money had been done. As a result, the PSR was not effective. There has been no challenge to the PSR or to the principle of detecting and eliminating subsidies by way of RPTs with the clubs. (I know this contradicts what I said earlier and PSR being here to stay) Thanks for this Would make sense that City didn't challange FFP as a whole, as they are one of clubs who benefit the most with their enormous revenues Would love it if we piggy backed on this and kicked up a fuss Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbydazzla Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 (edited) 8 minutes ago, LFEE said: Memory a bit hazy but don’t think we ever got the chance to run the CAT case. Everything would’ve come out in the wash there and then if we had. I’m on about the CAT hearing that was streamed live and tens of thousands of people tuned in to watch it unfold It was a car crash for the PL lawyers, I was blown away at how easily their scam was exposed Few days later the takeover was approved Edited October 8 by bobbydazzla Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Spaceman Posted October 8 Share Posted October 8 I felt sorry for Staveley, the way they attacked her during that hearing was brutal Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now