This is very different from what was reported earlier, City had some of their complaints upheld, with only 2 parts of the APT rules found unlawful by the panel. The PL said most of City’s challenges were rejected. Let’s not forget this APT case is completely separate from the 115 financial regulation charges against them. The main win for City in the APT case was the panel’s decision to exclude shareholder loans from the APT rules and to remove some changes the Premier League made in February. Boohoo. That’s the gist of it.
The first article was “City have won in 2 areas, therefore winning this challenge against the prem”
This article is more like “City wanted the entire system thrown out, therefore keeping it with only 2 minor changes is a win for the prem”
Tldr: Man City didn’t win the Premier League won and the premier league is not doomed yet.
NovAaron_ on
So City actually lost on the majority. Media was quick to push this as a victory for City…
Toffeeman_1878 on
So, the conclusion in all of this is that Everton get another 6 points deduction.
Homelesscrab on
Time for everyone to morph into lawyers instantly and start chatting shit
ChicoGuerrera on
How many millions did these twerps pay to get the word “evidently” removed? 😂
criticalascended on
I mean obviously both the PL and City are gonna twist the outcome to seem like a victory for their side. Hopefully we can get some neutral reporting on the case to better understand the actual outcome.
HoneyBadgerLifts on
I still have no idea what this really means in practice.
BigBowser14 on
” – It rejected Manchester City’s argument that the object of the APT Rules was to discriminate against clubs with ownership from the “Gulf region”.
Embarrassing from City
TheLegendOfIOTA on
Premier League statement is just their way of attempting to spin the ruling. Ultimately it opens up doors for enormous lawsuits from teams badly affected by the unfair and improper rules, namely Newcastle and City. Additionally, it undercuts one of the key frameworks of the entire PSR/FFP idea, which will be manipulated by the PL teams and others in all likelihood.
So yes, in spite of what the Premier League claims, this is a rather large deal.
Im_such_a_SLAPPA on
City didn’t win shit but just in a race to release a statement
syfqamr32 on
I think I hate Man City what do you think?
Themnor on
City *needs* to win now. If they lose after all this constant filibustering and pushback it’s more and more likely they get a significant punishment. But honestly good. The league needs to hold these teams accountable.
King_Kai_The_First on
For City fans who are drifting about hoping to see us malding and think this is a huge victory and proof that PL has acted lawfully here is summary of the things City lost and won:
Things city lost:
1. Challenge that APT rules are illegal
2. Challenge that design, framework and implementation is unlawful
3. Challenge that the rules are unclear
4. Challenge that PL is discriminating against them
5. Challenge that the rules are unfair
6. Challenge that City should be privy to the data used to evaluate FMV
7. Challenge that two commercial deals should be allowed
Things that city won:
1. Low/zero interest roles from shareholders should be included in the APT rules
2. Burden of proof should be on PL to show if a deal is/is not fair market value (FMV)
3. PL should have been faster in assessing the two commercial deals that were rejected
4. City can resubmit those two deals for reassessment
There, nice cold shower for you lot
one_and_only_chand on
The tl;dr of this ruling:
– Sponsors will still need to be measured against fair market value
– The Premier League needs to make fair market value sponsorship data readily available.
– The burden of proof has shifted from clubs to prove they are complying with FMV to the premier league to prove that clubs are not complying
– Shareholder loans must be considered as part of PSR (this is likely to affect clubs like Arsenal, Chelsea, Newcastle, Everton, etc who are reliant on these loans).
14 Comments
This is very different from what was reported earlier, City had some of their complaints upheld, with only 2 parts of the APT rules found unlawful by the panel. The PL said most of City’s challenges were rejected. Let’s not forget this APT case is completely separate from the 115 financial regulation charges against them. The main win for City in the APT case was the panel’s decision to exclude shareholder loans from the APT rules and to remove some changes the Premier League made in February. Boohoo. That’s the gist of it.
The first article was “City have won in 2 areas, therefore winning this challenge against the prem”
This article is more like “City wanted the entire system thrown out, therefore keeping it with only 2 minor changes is a win for the prem”
Tldr: Man City didn’t win the Premier League won and the premier league is not doomed yet.
So City actually lost on the majority. Media was quick to push this as a victory for City…
So, the conclusion in all of this is that Everton get another 6 points deduction.
Time for everyone to morph into lawyers instantly and start chatting shit
How many millions did these twerps pay to get the word “evidently” removed? 😂
I mean obviously both the PL and City are gonna twist the outcome to seem like a victory for their side. Hopefully we can get some neutral reporting on the case to better understand the actual outcome.
I still have no idea what this really means in practice.
” – It rejected Manchester City’s argument that the object of the APT Rules was to discriminate against clubs with ownership from the “Gulf region”.
Embarrassing from City
Premier League statement is just their way of attempting to spin the ruling. Ultimately it opens up doors for enormous lawsuits from teams badly affected by the unfair and improper rules, namely Newcastle and City. Additionally, it undercuts one of the key frameworks of the entire PSR/FFP idea, which will be manipulated by the PL teams and others in all likelihood.
So yes, in spite of what the Premier League claims, this is a rather large deal.
City didn’t win shit but just in a race to release a statement
I think I hate Man City what do you think?
City *needs* to win now. If they lose after all this constant filibustering and pushback it’s more and more likely they get a significant punishment. But honestly good. The league needs to hold these teams accountable.
For City fans who are drifting about hoping to see us malding and think this is a huge victory and proof that PL has acted lawfully here is summary of the things City lost and won:
Things city lost:
1. Challenge that APT rules are illegal
2. Challenge that design, framework and implementation is unlawful
3. Challenge that the rules are unclear
4. Challenge that PL is discriminating against them
5. Challenge that the rules are unfair
6. Challenge that City should be privy to the data used to evaluate FMV
7. Challenge that two commercial deals should be allowed
Things that city won:
1. Low/zero interest roles from shareholders should be included in the APT rules
2. Burden of proof should be on PL to show if a deal is/is not fair market value (FMV)
3. PL should have been faster in assessing the two commercial deals that were rejected
4. City can resubmit those two deals for reassessment
There, nice cold shower for you lot
The tl;dr of this ruling:
– Sponsors will still need to be measured against fair market value
– The Premier League needs to make fair market value sponsorship data readily available.
– The burden of proof has shifted from clubs to prove they are complying with FMV to the premier league to prove that clubs are not complying
– Shareholder loans must be considered as part of PSR (this is likely to affect clubs like Arsenal, Chelsea, Newcastle, Everton, etc who are reliant on these loans).