[Matthew Lawton] Man City victory as Premier League’s sponsorship rules declared unlawful.
October 7, 2024
[Matthew Lawton] Man City victory as Premier League’s sponsorship rules declared unlawful.
by Legendary_Cheerio
33 comments
This is practically unrelated to the 115 charges we all know about.
This is about some rule that was put in place when the Saudi’s bought New Castle
Was there ever going to be an alternative verdict? They will be found not guilty of the serious charges and take a slap on the wrist for the rest.
£2bn Gregg’s sponsorship for Newcastle incoming.
Good as a Newcastle fan I hate the cartel vibe of the top 4/5 teams. Time to unleash a billion sponsor and smash the cartel to pieces
I called it from the beginning and was met with denial from rival fans – the PL seriously overplayed its hand and, imo, attempted a power move against city over bruised egos.
Fans have deluded themselves into fan fictions of all sorts re City’s punishment and more than likely will be met with disappointment. Its interesting that they are more outraged with City winning in court than they are with the PL breaching UK law specifically to selectively punish individual clubs and meddle with the competition. That in itself should get a lot more outrage than it will because, again, its City.
“*Rules deemed unlawful because they did not take into consideration*
*- interest-free loans from shareholders to clubs*
*- Likely change in the regulations could lead to City striking more lucrative deals and seeking damages from the Premier League*
*- Clubs with high levels of borrowing now in danger of breaching of Profitability and Sustainability Rules*
*- Arsenal, City’s title rivals, have borrowing of more than £200million made up entirely of shareholder loans*
*- Premier League’s stance was backed by Arsenal, Manchester United, Liverpool, West Ham United, Brentford, Bournemouth, Fulham, and Wolverhampton Wanderers*”
“*An independent panel of three retired judges concluded that the rules were unlawful because they did not take into consideration interest-free loans which shareholders lend to clubs. The decision will spark huge concern among a number of City’s Premier League rivals — who rely heavily on such loans — and is likely to lead to the rules being changed.The panel states that, of the £4billion in total borrowing across the Premier League, £1.5billion is in loans from club owners and shareholders. If the rules are altered and commercial loan rates are now applied to these interest-free loans and have to be included in a club’s profitability and sustainability calculation, many clubs could find they are in breach of Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSR).City had argued that such payments were unfair and not at market value because they were interest-free and, in some cases, did not have to be repaid at all. For a club such as Arsenal, with borrowing of more than £200million made up entirely of shareholder loans, that is a potentially seismic development*.”
“Associated Party Transaction (APT) rules were introduced in December 2021 in the wake of the Saudi-led takeover of Newcastle United, and further amended in February this year.The rules were designed to maintain the competitiveness of the Premier League by preventing clubs from inflating commercial deals with companies linked to their owners. Transactions are independently assessed to ensure they are of “fair market value”.The Times revealed in June that City had launched unprecedented legal action against the Premier League and argued that the APT rules were contrary to the Competition Act 1998.While some elements of City’s claim were dismissed, the 175-page partial final award, which has been seen by The Times, found that:• Some of the new rules brought in by the Premier League earlier this year, which include placing the burden of proof onto clubs to show that deals are of fair market value, are unlawful
• *The rules are also unlawful because they do not take into account interest-free loans that shareholders use to inject funds into their clubs*
*• Both the original and amended rules are procedurally unfair because a club is not given access to comparable deals the Premier League can use to determine fair market value.The award document was sent to both City and the Premier League on September 25, and yet was only sent on to the remaining 19 top-flight clubs today. Arbitration rules dictate that both parties have to agree before the findings of the panel can be shared but The Times understands the delay was caused by the Premier League rather than City.As The Times reported in June, City’s legal action divided the top-flight clubs. The ruling document states that Arsenal, Manchester United, Liverpool, West Ham United, Brentford, Bournemouth, Fulham, and Wolverhampton Wanderers submitted evidence that supported the Premier League’s position.City’s case was heard by Sir Nigel Teare, a retired High Court judge, Christopher Vajda KC, a former judge of the European Court of Justice, and Lord Dyson, former Justice of the Supreme Court, in a two-week private arbitration hearing in June.*”
Next, time to get corruption out of the Premier League.
Who would have thought it? Any business can invest what it wants into its business. The rules are as ludicrous as they sound. You’ve got Newcastle sitting on unlimited amounts of money and they can’t spend it
Hahahahahahhahahhahahahaha
People in the comments here don’t seem to realise that is separate from the 115 charges that the independent panel will rule on early next year! Nothing is going to happen to them with that either to be fair because Man City’s lawyers will/are eating then for breakfast, but still.
Man City have more money than any FA lawyers or Premier league so they will just pay them off and carry on as normal.. Fa has a nice big pot for the big knobs to get fat on … The end …
Manchester City are cheaters. Plain and Simple.
if they co-operated with the league over the past 10 years we wouldn’t be here. But we are.
10!billion pound kit sponsorship incoming
Lmaoooooo. My dream of the red cartel being deleted off the face of the earth is a step closer
So the premier league rules get exposed for being unlawful, and that’s the fault of Manchester City?
The official PL statement on this paints a very differing view than the Times headline.
One victory was on the wording of one of the rules, another was about shareholder loans being excluded from the scope of the rules (something City had voted for), and the final one on the clubs being given data around the benchmarking of sponsorship deals.
The tribunal sided with the PL on the test of the matters.
How many rival fans can hand on the heart say if they were in City or Newcasltes shoes they would still be against this. Most of us don’t like it because its not us. Its okay to admit that.
Honest Question: What authority does the Premier League Actually have? Don’t they set the rules? If not who? Who holds leverage over the clubs to enforce those rules?
Can Villa now rake in Adidas money?
So, does this mean that there is nothing stopping any of the petro-state club owners from deciding that they want the word “OIL” on the front of the shirt, and will personally pay £1bn for the privilege? (Honestly, I just want to know what level of trolling is available).
Line 439 basically shows it’s a win for both sides lol, “the tribunal is therefore not persuaded that the rules were unfair in the manner suggested in Issue 7(d)
Bed wetters unite.
Lol, weird headline. This is the BBC’s reporting on the same news
>City had **some** complaints upheld, with two aspects of the APT rules deemed unlawful by a tribunal.
>But the Premier League says the tribunal **rejected the majority of Manchester City’s challenges** and “endorsed the overall objectives, framework and decision-making of the APT system.”
Important bit
>**The tribunal ruled that shareholder loans should be excluded from the scope of APT rules and that some amendments made in February by the Premier League should not be retained.**
This means the City PR machine are spinning this and even we are unraveling it on Reddit. It’s a total failure.
RIP football
Edit: I wrote this before actually reading the full story. Seems I may have jumped the gun a bit. It doesnt relate to the 115 and only 2 of a number of Citeh’s challenges to rules around sponsorship.
The premier league breached its own rulebook, you can’t make this shit up 🤣🤣🤣
I know this ruling is vastly different from 115. However, the general gist I’m getting from everyone is that they’re quite happy to say city cheated and in the same breath, defend the PL from acting unlawfully. You can’t have it both ways. An organising body acting unlawfully, as the tribunal decided, should concern people. In this case, city have challenged the unlawful practices and won the case. Fans of rival clubs should be applauding this as it helps their clubs
Cheats be cheatin’.
Stay humble premier League, stay humble
Premier League acts unlawfully? Don’t worry, this sub will find a way to make City the bad guys.
ITT: many people who did not read the actual ruling
33 comments
This is practically unrelated to the 115 charges we all know about.
This is about some rule that was put in place when the Saudi’s bought New Castle
Was there ever going to be an alternative verdict? They will be found not guilty of the serious charges and take a slap on the wrist for the rest.
£2bn Gregg’s sponsorship for Newcastle incoming.
Good as a Newcastle fan I hate the cartel vibe of the top 4/5 teams. Time to unleash a billion sponsor and smash the cartel to pieces
I called it from the beginning and was met with denial from rival fans – the PL seriously overplayed its hand and, imo, attempted a power move against city over bruised egos.
Fans have deluded themselves into fan fictions of all sorts re City’s punishment and more than likely will be met with disappointment. Its interesting that they are more outraged with City winning in court than they are with the PL breaching UK law specifically to selectively punish individual clubs and meddle with the competition. That in itself should get a lot more outrage than it will because, again, its City.
“*Rules deemed unlawful because they did not take into consideration*
*- interest-free loans from shareholders to clubs*
*- Likely change in the regulations could lead to City striking more lucrative deals and seeking damages from the Premier League*
*- Clubs with high levels of borrowing now in danger of breaching of Profitability and Sustainability Rules*
*- Arsenal, City’s title rivals, have borrowing of more than £200million made up entirely of shareholder loans*
*- Premier League’s stance was backed by Arsenal, Manchester United, Liverpool, West Ham United, Brentford, Bournemouth, Fulham, and Wolverhampton Wanderers*”
“*An independent panel of three retired judges concluded that the rules were unlawful because they did not take into consideration interest-free loans which shareholders lend to clubs. The decision will spark huge concern among a number of City’s Premier League rivals — who rely heavily on such loans — and is likely to lead to the rules being changed.The panel states that, of the £4billion in total borrowing across the Premier League, £1.5billion is in loans from club owners and shareholders. If the rules are altered and commercial loan rates are now applied to these interest-free loans and have to be included in a club’s profitability and sustainability calculation, many clubs could find they are in breach of Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSR).City had argued that such payments were unfair and not at market value because they were interest-free and, in some cases, did not have to be repaid at all. For a club such as Arsenal, with borrowing of more than £200million made up entirely of shareholder loans, that is a potentially seismic development*.”
“Associated Party Transaction (APT) rules were introduced in December 2021 in the wake of the Saudi-led takeover of Newcastle United, and further amended in February this year.The rules were designed to maintain the competitiveness of the Premier League by preventing clubs from inflating commercial deals with companies linked to their owners. Transactions are independently assessed to ensure they are of “fair market value”.The Times revealed in June that City had launched unprecedented legal action against the Premier League and argued that the APT rules were contrary to the Competition Act 1998.While some elements of City’s claim were dismissed, the 175-page partial final award, which has been seen by The Times, found that:• Some of the new rules brought in by the Premier League earlier this year, which include placing the burden of proof onto clubs to show that deals are of fair market value, are unlawful
• *The rules are also unlawful because they do not take into account interest-free loans that shareholders use to inject funds into their clubs*
*• Both the original and amended rules are procedurally unfair because a club is not given access to comparable deals the Premier League can use to determine fair market value.The award document was sent to both City and the Premier League on September 25, and yet was only sent on to the remaining 19 top-flight clubs today. Arbitration rules dictate that both parties have to agree before the findings of the panel can be shared but The Times understands the delay was caused by the Premier League rather than City.As The Times reported in June, City’s legal action divided the top-flight clubs. The ruling document states that Arsenal, Manchester United, Liverpool, West Ham United, Brentford, Bournemouth, Fulham, and Wolverhampton Wanderers submitted evidence that supported the Premier League’s position.City’s case was heard by Sir Nigel Teare, a retired High Court judge, Christopher Vajda KC, a former judge of the European Court of Justice, and Lord Dyson, former Justice of the Supreme Court, in a two-week private arbitration hearing in June.*”
[https://www.removepaywall.com/search?url=https://www.thetimes.com/sport/football/article/man-city-victory-as-premier-leagues-sponsorship-rules-declared-unlawful-0mp6kb7m0](https://www.removepaywall.com/search?url=https://www.thetimes.com/sport/football/article/man-city-victory-as-premier-leagues-sponsorship-rules-declared-unlawful-0mp6kb7m0)
Doesn’t tell me much
Premier League will be dead in 15 years
Next, time to get corruption out of the Premier League.
Who would have thought it? Any business can invest what it wants into its business. The rules are as ludicrous as they sound. You’ve got Newcastle sitting on unlimited amounts of money and they can’t spend it
Hahahahahahhahahhahahahaha
People in the comments here don’t seem to realise that is separate from the 115 charges that the independent panel will rule on early next year! Nothing is going to happen to them with that either to be fair because Man City’s lawyers will/are eating then for breakfast, but still.
Man City have more money than any FA lawyers or Premier league so they will just pay them off and carry on as normal.. Fa has a nice big pot for the big knobs to get fat on …
The end …
Manchester City are cheaters. Plain and Simple.
if they co-operated with the league over the past 10 years we wouldn’t be here. But we are.
10!billion pound kit sponsorship incoming
Lmaoooooo. My dream of the red cartel being deleted off the face of the earth is a step closer
So the premier league rules get exposed for being unlawful, and that’s the fault of Manchester City?
The official PL statement on this paints a very differing view than the Times headline.
One victory was on the wording of one of the rules, another was about shareholder loans being excluded from the scope of the rules (something City had voted for), and the final one on the clubs being given data around the benchmarking of sponsorship deals.
The tribunal sided with the PL on the test of the matters.
How many rival fans can hand on the heart say if they were in City or Newcasltes shoes they would still be against this. Most of us don’t like it because its not us. Its okay to admit that.
Honest Question: What authority does the Premier League Actually have? Don’t they set the rules? If not who? Who holds leverage over the clubs to enforce those rules?
Can Villa now rake in Adidas money?
So, does this mean that there is nothing stopping any of the petro-state club owners from deciding that they want the word “OIL” on the front of the shirt, and will personally pay £1bn for the privilege? (Honestly, I just want to know what level of trolling is available).
Line 439 basically shows it’s a win for both sides lol, “the tribunal is therefore not persuaded that the rules were unfair in the manner suggested in Issue 7(d)
Bed wetters unite.
Lol, weird headline. This is the BBC’s reporting on the same news
>City had **some** complaints upheld, with two aspects of the APT rules deemed unlawful by a tribunal.
>But the Premier League says the tribunal **rejected the majority of Manchester City’s challenges** and “endorsed the overall objectives, framework and decision-making of the APT system.”
Important bit
>**The tribunal ruled that shareholder loans should be excluded from the scope of APT rules and that some amendments made in February by the Premier League should not be retained.**
This means the City PR machine are spinning this and even we are unraveling it on Reddit. It’s a total failure.
RIP football
Edit: I wrote this before actually reading the full story. Seems I may have jumped the gun a bit. It doesnt relate to the 115 and only 2 of a number of Citeh’s challenges to rules around sponsorship.
[https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cq5eyvl7nggo](https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cq5eyvl7nggo)
Hold that red cartel
The premier league breached its own rulebook, you can’t make this shit up 🤣🤣🤣
I know this ruling is vastly different from 115. However, the general gist I’m getting from everyone is that they’re quite happy to say city cheated and in the same breath, defend the PL from acting unlawfully. You can’t have it both ways. An organising body acting unlawfully, as the tribunal decided, should concern people. In this case, city have challenged the unlawful practices and won the case. Fans of rival clubs should be applauding this as it helps their clubs
Cheats be cheatin’.
Stay humble premier League, stay humble
Premier League acts unlawfully?
Don’t worry, this sub will find a way to make City the bad guys.
ITT: many people who did not read the actual ruling