Financial Fair Play / Profit & Sustainability

[Jackie Broon]

3 hours ago, SUPERTOON said:

Guessing this means the prem won the last round then.

 

Probably more that it isn't within the remit of the existing arbitration case to determine the lawfulness of the amended rules.

 

If the prem had actually won on that point there would be nothing to arbitrate against.

[Wolfcastle]

If its this messy and complicated its probably this messy and complicated for a reason  - that its not supposed to be

[The Prophet]

43 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

 

What the tweet above appears to be speculating is that the panel have said that any changes the PL have made to the rules after the hearing (ie the ones that got voted through at the end of last year) are beyond their remit, therefore another hearing is needed to determine whether the amended rules are valid or not.

 

Good post. 

 

If the Panel rules that the last hearing deemed the APT laws unlawful though, it'll negate the need for this second hearing.

 

 

Edited Friday at 19:42 by The Prophet

[David Edgar]

Fun reading the Reddit threat. Loads and loads of Arsenal, Manchester United, Liverpool and Spurs fans crying. Wonder why?

[Jackie Broon]

9 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

 

Good post. 

 

If the Panel rules that the last hearing deemed the APT unlawful though, it'll negate the need for this second hearing.

 

I don't think so, this is clearly to deal with the question of whether the amendments to the rules are sufficient to address what the previous tribunal found made them unlawful.

 

One interesting point from the PL's letter is "Manchester City FC seeks a declaration that the amendments approved by clubs in November (and therefore the current APT rules in force) are unlawful and void."

 

That suggests that it has now been established that the previous APT rules were void, which is not something that the PL accepted before.

 

 

Edited Friday at 19:42 by Jackie Broon

[The Prophet]

Haven't they referred back to the panel for clarification on that matter though?

[Jackie Broon]

6 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

Haven't they referred back to the panel for clarification on that matter though?

 

Yes, which suggests that they have a final ruling which has found that the APT rules were void.

[Unbelievable]

I’m not holding my breath on this. From that article the main bone of contention is whether owner loans from before November should be considered in hindsight in the affected clubs’ PSR calculation, which may lead to Everton getting a points deduction and Arsenal getting a slap on the wrist if we’re lucky. None of which will benefit us in any way, shape or form.

 

After previously being hopeful I’m now resigned to these rules being here to stay. Our club will have to continue to outperform some of the “big six” for a while longer until third parties will see us as on par with them as a commercial association. I have faith in Howe and the owners to do just that.

[SAK]

1 hour ago, David Edgar said:

Fun reading the Reddit threat. Loads and loads of Arsenal, Manchester United, Liverpool and Spurs fans crying. Wonder why?

Link?

[Ben]

1 hour ago, TheHoob said:

PL eating itself pt.2365 

 

And it's all to spite, control and knobble Newcastle United who are actually fine to play by the rules.

[Drewboy74]

Surely PIF have something up their sleeve man. They aren't going to put a billion and a half into a new stadium + training ground and get bullied by the cartel. 

[Stifler]

With clubs having to sign sponsorship deals and transfer deals with related parties at below market value, it makes absolute sense that related parties and shareholder loans should only be offered at rates worse than the market value.

[Likelylad]

The most pathetic part of this whole situation is that it’s all designed to try and protect the status quo and number of certain clubs. 

 

[Stifler]

2 hours ago, David Edgar said:

Fun reading the Reddit threat. Loads and loads of Arsenal, Manchester United, Liverpool and Spurs fans crying. Wonder why?

All of them calling for Man City to be thrown out the league for not liking the rules, all of them supporting clubs who lead the breakaway of the Premier League from the Football League, then tried to break from the Premier League to create the ESL because they didn’t like the rules.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

2 hours ago, Unbelievable said:

I’m not holding my breath on this. From that article the main bone of contention is whether owner loans from before November should be considered in hindsight in the affected clubs’ PSR calculation, which may lead to Everton getting a points deduction and Arsenal getting a slap on the wrist if we’re lucky. None of which will benefit us in any way, shape or form.

 

After previously being hopeful I’m now resigned to these rules being here to stay. Our club will have to continue to outperform some of the “big six” for a while longer until third parties will see us as on par with them as a commercial association. I have faith in Howe and the owners to do just that.

 

Everton seeing an uptick in form this season bit getting a points deduction that sends them down would be funny mind

[FloydianMag]

 

[Myleftboot]

3 hours ago, FloydianMag said:

 

 

[FloydianMag]

5 minutes ago, Myleftboot said:

 

An indication that City are quietly confident they’ll be ok in the 115 hearing re breaches of FFP.

[Kid Icarus]

I'm repeating myself mainly because I can't think of another way to put it. Even though we specifically stand to potentially benefit, from a football fan's perspective all of this is the Alien vs Predator tagline for me - whoever wins, we lose.

 

 

Edited 15 hours ago by Kid Icarus

[Jackie Broon]

 

1 hour ago, FloydianMag said:

An indication that City are quietly confident they’ll be ok in the 115 hearing re breaches of FFP.

 

I get that he is speculating from a place of knowledge, but if anyone else had posted speculative inferences like that he'd be the first to say they were reading too much into it and that no one really knows what the outcome will be.

 

 

Edited 15 hours ago by Jackie Broon

[duo]

I think we knew nothing would come of it - it's the best result for the PL

[TheBrownBottle]

Etihad being floated = Man City winning against the charges is a stretch which Reed Richard would be proud of - what complete and utter bollocks 

 

It could just as well be argued that Man City going after the PL on the APT regs shows nervousness about the impending case.  

[FloydianMag]

3 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Etihad being floated = Man City winning against the charges is a stretch which Reed Richard would be proud of - what complete and utter bollocks 

 

It could just as well be argued that Man City going after the PL on the APT regs shows nervousness about the impending case.  

Based on the sum total of fuck all City will be found guilty of minor breaches and indiscretions, heavy fines imposed at the most.

[NG32]

This all painfully avoidable with an obvious way forward but the so called "top 6" would rather strangle the league and competition. 

[TheBrownBottle]

49 minutes ago, FloydianMag said:

Based on the sum total of fuck all City will be found guilty of minor breaches and indiscretions, heavy fines imposed at the most.

I suspect you’re right  - more for the PL to avoid the problem of what to do about it.  They’d have to find some testicles.  The problem with the PL from the off was that the league’s management wasn’t independent of the clubs - it isn’t administered from Lancaster Gate.