Seems it’s not a clean sweep for City as per SSN.
The panel found partly in Manchester City’s favour, agreeing that shareholder loans - where shareholders or ‘associated parties’ lend to or borrow money from the clubs they own - should not be excluded from those rules.
They also agreed an updated version of the APT rules, which came into force in February this year, were unlawful because of wording changes, which tightened the interpretation of what constitutes ‘fair market value’ in commercial agreements, was unlawful.
City’s other claims against the Premier League were dismissed.
Miguel Delany, one of few reporters to openly write against sport washing and state ownership has shared a bit from the results too.
https://x.com/MiguelDelaney/status/1843287624229830733
https://x.com/MiguelDelaney/status/1843286286737842480
7 Likes
‘quite a difference between the City statement and the PL statement’
Quelle surprise.
5 Likes
Yeah, I did say it’s worth taking rumours and statements with a pinch of salt.
I’ve long since stopped following the minutiae of this entire saga. For me it boils down to this ; Are the authorities really going to allow one club to destroy the integrity of the Premier League and the entire English game by relying on their state funded army of King’s Counsellors to find some legalistic escape route when it’s obvious to every man and his dog that they have broken the rules and gamed the system over the years to the point where they now win the PL every year. The answer has to be no or we all might as well call it a day.
6 Likes
Just realised that UAE were openly trying to buy the Telegraph a while back. I know the Spectator was sold to that silly racist over at GB News (got the articles if you want to challenge that assertion).
But I’m not sure the Telegraph was purchased. Perhaps best to ignore them then again with the telegraph that’s never not been the case.
I’m not sure any of the media outlets you have mentioned are worth listening to at all?
Actually I take that back, the Torygraph has some decent travel articles.
I only mentioned 2 and they are both conspiracy ridden bollocks.
Spectator, GBeebies, Torygraph?
Doesn’t negate the second half of your post though.
1 Like
Blue Loon is quite a read.
I lasted about five pages of the relevant thread (only about 10 posts on each page).
They are angry souls.
3 Likes
City are going to be found guilt of 128 charges, innocent on 2, here is the statement they will put out …
Premier League was found to have abused its dominant position.
We have succeeded with its claim and the PL rules were found to be unlawful
3 Likes
The fact they won any part of this is worrying though because apparently it leaves the option of them being able to sue the PL where the PL blocked 2 sponsorships. This will either ensure the PL goes for the jugular if City are found guilty of the 130 charges and kicks them out totally or they’ll make a deal and let them off easy with conditions against any further legal action.
Knowing the PL i’m fairly certain they’ll go with option b. I think City got enough out of this case unfortunately.
It’s not just one club:
Significant split between Premier League clubs
One striking part of the verdict is the section which deals with the list of witnesses in the arbitration.
For the claimant (Manchester City): Chelsea, Newcastle United, Nottingham Forest and Everton.
For the respondent (the Premier League): Brighton, West Ham, Manchester United, Liverpool, Tottenham and Arsenal.
Unsuprisingly, sugar daddy and aspiring sugar daddy clubs (Everton) stand beside them.
4 Likes
They are football’s MAGA.
8 Likes
Another reason to want them relegated.
Everton think they did nothing wrong and hence why they jump in on this. Probably why Forest are there as well. City’s punishment has to be worse than both and they can’t argue anything down on that if they are found guilty.
The fact Everton got a reduced penalty on what seems an obvious lie is again something that is missed in all this.
1 Like
And they only exist / behave this way because of City.
1 Like
Very interesting seeing seeing the language and tone used by City.
“The PL was found to have abused its dominant position “, “The rules were found to be discriminatory”, “specifically unfair how it applied those rules to the club in practice”
It tries paints an intent of the PL of not acting in good faith in very confrontational manner.
It reminds me of their lawyers during the CAS/UEFA case were it became very personal (to the point leaked emails showed them celebrating death of FFP investigator). Very much bad blood.
Can’t imagine that serving them well as they tackle the 130 charges. I can see the PL pushing for the strongest sanctions.
9 Likes
Without a Supreme Court to give them a get out of jail free pass.
The main ruling in City’s favour is that shareholder loans should be included in Associated Party Transactions. Considering City and 18 other clubs voted for SHL being excluded from APT when the PL implemented the rule, it’s pretty clear this is a fuck you to the other clubs and attempting to throw them under the bus.
In all fairness, im not sure why it could be excluded so I agree with that ruling.
This is another loss for City which I hope will be just one of over the coming months.
2 Likes
Im still worried they’ll use the threat of legal action against the PL to get away with some of the more serious charges. The fact that one of the parts they “won” in this court case opens up legal action is what worries me. Even though the PL brought these 130 charges i still have doubts they have the backbone to see it through, especially when counter charges can be brought.