Manchester City

[Le Chef]

Surely the PL kick them out of the league now, at least until this is resolved.

You cant go around suing the organisation that you're part of and then expect to stay in it. They must know they're in deep **** with these 115 charges now and this is a last ditch attempt to delay things. What other situation would you be able to sue your employer/corporation/organisation and not be stood down. It creates a whole heap of dubious scenarios otherwise.

Didn't the PL threaten to remove all sides that took part on the super league when it was mooted? They can clearly do it if that's the case.

They are one of the shareholders though - So in essence they are suing the collective - Surely it should be a straight forward vote via the shareholders on what the rules should be ?

[chadrtc]

They are one of the shareholders though - So in essence they are suing the collective - Surely it should be a straight forward vote via the shareholders on what the rules should be ?

They’re trying to get that rule of 14 changed as well. It’s part of the case to be heard next week.

I have a bad feeling about this.

[Kenneth]

They’re just throwing everything that they can at it. Trying to cover every angle, as they have from the very start.

[Charly]

Apparently being unable to do what you want is "anticompetitive". All that money, and none for a dictionary.

[Charly]

Six titles in seven seasons and they're complaining about lack of competitive balance?

Anyhow **** the Premier League. Their reluctance to deal with what has been going on at Citeh over the last 15 years has come back to bite them on the arse (again)

Citehs lawyers are.going to drag them into deep water and drown them in litigation.

I still think they have had no choice but to take their time collecting evidence. If they didnt, City would have pulled every trick in the book. The PL have one shot at this. Its not like City have complied (which is one charge that surely they cant slip out of).

[Exiled_red]

Aren't the rules agreed or at least ratified by a supermajority of clubs (14/20). Surely unless they are in breach of UK law there is (or should be) nothing they can do about it. You agree to the rules when you enter the competition, if you don't like them don't enter, or in this case **** off out of it.

[Kenneth]

Yes, presumably they are arguing that they break uk law.

[Charly]

Aren't the rules agreed or at least ratified by a supermajority of clubs (14/20). Surely unless they are in breach of UK law there is (or should be) nothing they can do about it. You agree to the rules when you enter the competition, if you don't like them don't enter, or in this case **** off out of it.

Its like me suing my dungeon master for not giving me the +5 Flaming Sword of Bukkake when I heroically choked all of the heads of Tiamat that time.

[red g]

Everton, Chelsea and Newcastle are all expected to back Manchester City.

Spot the odd one out. Presume they are hoping that some sovereign state takes pity on them

[red g]

From X so probably bollocks

[Charly]

Everton? LOL...

Check the owners bank accounts...

Or maybe they are so bitter they just rather City win it every year

[Mark79]

Everton have their own dodgy ownership situation and have already fallen foul of the PL’s financial rules and been punished for it. No big surprise if they were to side against the PL.

[Mark79]

[ame]https://twitter.com/sportingintel/status/1798623800323653727[/ame]

[shanks69]

Delete
Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

[peterbread]

In the decade from 2009 to 2019, the big clubs all enjoyed a healthy rise in commercial revenues.

Arsenal: £48m to £111m (131%)
Chelsea: £53m to £185m (249%)
Liverpool: £68m to £186m (174%)
United: £70m to £280m (300%)
City: £18m to £230m (1177%)