Summary: > This video talks about Manchester City taking legal action against the Premier League over financial rules. Manchester City argues that some of the Premier League's Financial rules, specifically the associated party transaction rules, are unlawful and incompatible with UK competition law. These rules require that any commercial deals a club signs with a company linked to its owners must be fair value. Manchester City believes that these rules are unlawful and could have serious ramifications for the future competitive balance of the Premier League. > > The hearing on these charges is set for November. However, Manchester City is arguing that if they win the case that starts next week, it would blow a hole in the Premier League's case at the hearing in November. This is because Manchester City would have successfully argued that the rules are unlawful. > > The video also talks about the bigger picture, which is an argument about ownership of Premier League clubs. There are two sides to this argument. One side argues that owners should be allowed to put in as much money as they want into their clubs. The other side argues that financial rules are necessary to maintain competitive balance. The video says that it will be interesting to see how this plays out, as some Premier League clubs are siding with the Premier League and others may want to get rid of the associated party transaction rules.

Original article: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/sport/football/article/man-city-legal-action-premier-league-hearing-7k6r5glhq

Full Article: > Man City launch unprecedented legal action against Premier League Matt Lawton 15 - 18 minutes > > Manchester City have launched an unprecedented legal action against the Premier League in a move that has sparked civil war in English football’s top flight. > > The dispute, which has become a battle between the most powerful clubs in the country, will be settled after a two-week private arbitration hearing starting on Monday. > > The outcome could dramatically alter the landscape of the professional game and have a significant impact on a separate hearing set for November into City’s 115 alleged breaches of the Premier League’s regulations and financial rules. That hearing, expected to last six weeks, could lead to huge fines for the club owners and possibly even relegation for Pep Guardiola’s all-conquering side. > > At next week’s hearing, which has provoked bitter divisions between clubs, City will attempt to end the league’s Associated Party Transaction (APT) rules, which they claim are unlawful, and seek damages from the Premier League. > > Introduced in December 2021 in the wake of the Saudi-led takeover of Newcastle United, the rules are designed to maintain the competitiveness of the Premier League by preventing clubs from inflating commercial deals with companies linked to their owners. The rules dictate that such transactions have to be independently assessed to be of “fair market value” (FMV). > > But within a 165-page legal document City argue that they are the victims of “discrimination”, describing rules they say have been approved by their rivals to stifle their success on the pitch as a “tyranny of the majority”. > > If City are successful in their claim — and some rival clubs fear they will be — it could enable the richest clubs to value their sponsorship deals without independent assessment, vastly boosting the amount of money they can raise and therefore giving them far greater sums to spend on players. > > City have been dominant on the field during the past decade and have recently won their fourth Premier League title in a row > > City have been dominant on the field during the past decade and have recently won their fourth Premier League title in a row > > BRADLEY COLLYER/PA WIRE > > The league’s other 19 clubs have been invited to participate in the legal action and The Times understands between 10 and 12 have stepped forward, providing either witness statements or a letter detailing evidence in support of the Premier League’s defence against the claim. Those who have provided witness statements may be called by the tribunal to give evidence at the hearing. > > As well as the impact it could have on the Premier League as a competition, clubs fear City’s claim could also be key to the outcome of the hearing into their 115 alleged breaches between 2009 and 2023, with sponsorship deals funded by companies linked to Abu Dhabi central to the accusations against them. > > It has been alleged that City concealed payments made by their owner, Sheikh Mansour, through third parties and disguised them as sponsorship revenue. Even before the more recent moves by the Premier League to tighten regulation around APTs, there was a requirement under the league’s rules that related party transactions must be of fair market value. If such rules are now deemed unlawful, it could significantly strengthen City’s defence at the hearing later this year. City have denied any wrongdoing relating to the 115 charges. > > The Times can confirm that City carried out that threat, filing their claim on February 16, with the Premier League informing its member clubs in March that a date of June 10 had been set for the hearing. > > Erling Haaland is one of a series of high-profile moves made under City’s present ownership > > Erling Haaland is one of a series of high-profile moves made under City’s present ownership > > LUKE TAYLOR/SPLASH > > City are suing the Premier League for damages, while arguing that the league’s democratic system of requiring at least 14 clubs, or two thirds of those who vote, to implement rule changes gives the majority unacceptable levels of control. They accuse rival clubs of “discrimination against Gulf ownership”, citing the comments of one particular senior club executive. > > City argue that sponsors linked to club owners — City’s are in Abu Dhabi — should be allowed to determine how much they want to pay, regardless of independent valuation. Four of City’s top ten sponsors have ties to the United Arab Emirates, including their stadium and shirt sponsor, Etihad Airways. > > Newcastle, who are majority-owned by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, have a shirt sponsorship deal with Sela, a Saudi sports rights company. Chelsea have a shirt deal with Infinite Athlete, a leisure company which counts the joint-Chelsea owners Todd Boehly and Behdad Eghbali among its investors. > > While The Times knows of at least one club who have submitted a witness statement in support of City for next week’s arbitration hearing, sources believe more than half have sided with the Premier League. The Premier League invited clubs to submit their statements in a letter from their general counsel, Kevin Plumb, on March 1. > > Despite having just won a record fourth successive Premier League title, City claim rules introduced 2½ years ago are restrictive and anti-competitive. > > City are accusing rival clubs of “discrimination against Gulf ownership” > > City are accusing rival clubs of “discrimination against Gulf ownership” > > VICTORIA HAYDN/MANCHESTER CITY FC VIA GETTY IMAGES > > Their rivals believe that what City are doing will actually destroy the competitiveness of the world’s most popular league, allowing clubs with super-rich owners to spend unlimited amounts of money on their playing squads and infrastructure and nullify Financial Fair Play rules. > > Millions are being spent on legal fees to fight this case. One senior club source says the Premier League’s legal bill has more than quadrupled in the past year, from about £5million to more than £20million. They also point to the fact that since February the Premier League’s own legal department has been forced to shift its focus to this claim when it is also trying to prepare for the hearing into City’s 115 charges. “This is clearly a tactic,” the source said. > > City have certainly spared no expense in their potentially groundbreaking legal fight. They have appointed three KCs, with Lord Pannick supported by Paul Harris and Rob Williams. A fourth senior barrister who specialises in competition and regulatory law, David Gregory, is also on City’s team. > > In their claim, City are seeking “damages for the losses which it has incurred as a result of the unlawfulness of the FMV [fair market value] rules”, in particular for costs resulting from delays, sums they claim were not paid under agreed deals and additional costs, including the club’s inability to generate revenue from delayed or cancelled projects. This, clubs believe, could potentially amount to tens of millions. > > Newcastle are majority-owned by Saudi Arabia’s PIF and have a front-of-shirt sponsor with Sela, a Saudi sports rights company > > Newcastle are majority-owned by Saudi Arabia’s PIF and have a front-of-shirt sponsor with Sela, a Saudi sports rights company > > ANDREW KEARNS – CAMERASPORT VIA GETTY IMAGES > > Indeed, City’s claim says the club are seeking a split trial, with the first part focused on the APT rules followed by a second to then determine damages. > > In his letter to clubs on March 1, Plumb detailed the nature of City’s legal challenge under Section X of the Premier League rules. > > Plumb explained how the Premier League had to secure an order that enabled it to disclose the details of the arbitration to its member clubs and confirm that it was indeed City who had filed a claim. “The purpose of this letter is to provide those further details, within the bounds of the confidentiality of the proceedings, and to confirm the process by which any club may participate in the arbitration,” Plumb states. > > He explained to clubs the detail of City’s claim that the rules are contrary to the Competition Act 1998. > > Plumb then said the Premier League’s independent legal counsel believes the rules are compatible with English law and that they will fight the legal action. > > On February 26 a directions hearing in the arbitration took place, with the tribunal appointed to hear the case giving the Premier League permission to provide a redacted copy of City’s statement of claim to other clubs, because they may be affected by the outcome of the challenge. > > The tribunal set a date for the final hearing to take place from June 10 to June 21, with all witness statements due to be submitted by March 28 in line with the deadline for the Premier League’s statement of defence. > > Clubs were given the option of either intervening formally in the proceedings, upon receiving permission from the tribunal, or submitting factual evidence on relevant matters. > > Lord Pannick is representing the club in the case > > Lord Pannick is representing the club in the case > > AARON CHOWN/PA WIRE > > Within the City claim is a challenge to the voting system upon which the Premier League’s decision-making process has long been built, which requires two thirds of clubs to support a rule change. They say this allows a majority of clubs to exert a “tyranny” that damages the minority. > > City also claim the FMV rules are intended to be discriminatory towards clubs with ties to the Gulf region. > > The claim says the rules were imposed at the instigation of certain rival clubs reacting to the Saudi takeover of Newcastle, with the aim to “safeguard their own commercial advantages”. They say rivals were seeking to limit deals from companies in the Gulf region, citing a quote from a senior executive from another club. > > They claim the rules were “deliberately intended to stifle commercial freedoms of particular clubs in particular circumstances, and thus to restrict economic competition”. > > City also complain that, when it comes to negotiating any form of sponsorship agreement, clubs in the north are at a disadvantage to those in London, who, they say, can charge higher ticket prices. However, rival clubs estimate that, based on median ticket prices at the Etihad Stadium and the seven Premier League clubs in London, City are ranked third. > > City blame the Premier League for not regulating spending when clubs such as Manchester United were more dominant, arguing they have been prevented from monetising their brand in the way United did. City also say the rules penalise clubs who have “lower-profile sporting histories”. > > In their claim, City also dismiss concerns that an inflated sponsorship deal with a company linked to the club’s ownership could be vulnerable to a change of ownership. > > “There is no rational or logical connection between a club’s financial non-sustainability and its receipt of revenues from entities linked to ownerships,” City’s claim states. They say companies would honour sponsorships even if the club were sold to new owners. > > As one Premier League club source observed, this overlooks the fact it is common for sponsorship contracts to have clauses that mean the terms change under new ownership. > > City argue that the Premier League has failed to provide evidence that sponsorship deals with related parties give clubs an unfair advantage or distort the league’s competitive balance. > > They also say that the Premier League, as an organisation, is a direct competitor for sponsorship and therefore claim it has a conflict of interest. > > Further to that, City question the independence of Nielsen Sports, the data analytics company used to determine the fair market value of sponsorship deals, because it has been retained by the Premier League for more than two years. > > City complain that FMV rules discriminate against clubs who form part of a multiclub ownership group, and only apply to commercial deals and not shareholder loans. > > Ultimately, City stand accused of breaking financial rules to spend close to £2billion building a team who now dominate the Premier League and in the 2022-23 season won a European and domestic treble. > > In their claim, City argue that the present rules will limit their ability to buy the best players and force them to charge fans more for tickets. They say they may also have to cut spending on youth development, women’s football, and community programmes. > > Premier League clubs have a scheduled meeting in Harrogate on Thursday. > > Manchester City did not respond when contacted for comment. The Premier League has declined to comment. Why are Manchester City taking action against the Premier League? > > They want Premier League rules for Associated Party Transactions (APT) scrapped, claiming they are unlawful. APT rules, which were introduced in December 2021 and tightened this year, cover sponsorship and commercial deals with companies connected to the clubs, as well as any player transfers between clubs in the same ownership group, to ensure they are of “fair market value”. If City succeed, any constraints over inflated sponsorship deals would be removed. Victory for City could also have a significant impact on their case concerning 115 Premier League charges for alleged breaches of Profit and Sustainability Rules. What is an APT and why are they important? > > In England there are a number of examples of APTs. Newcastle have secured a £25million-a-year front-of-shirt deal with Saudi events company Sela since their Saudi-led takeover, while Chelsea have a shirt deal with Infinite Athlete, a leisure company that counts joint-Chelsea owners Todd Boehly and Behdad Eghbali among its investors. Four of City’s ten main sponsors have links to Abu Dhabi, including the shirt and stadium deals with Etihad Airways. > > Until December 2021, the Premier League only viewed commercial deals as “related party transactions” if they were described as such in clubs’ accounts — Manchester City did not declare sponsorship deals such as Etihad’s as related party transactions. The 2021 rules stated that if the Premier League’s board has reasonable grounds to suspect that it is an associated party deal then an independent firm will determine whether it is of fair market value. > > From this January, the Premier League made clubs liable to be charged with a breach of the rules if they do not “use all reasonable care” to ensure deals are of fair market value, with the burden of proof on the clubs to show they are. > > If constraints over APTs are removed, there are concerns that deals similar to the €200million-a-year deal between the Qatar Tourist Authority and Qatari-owned Paris Saint-Germain announced in 2014 — which Uefa later judged to be not of fair market value — could be replicated in England. What are the 115 charges? > > Fifty-four concern a failure to provide accurate financial information 2009-10 to 2017-18. Fourteen are related to a failure to provide accurate details for player and manager payments from 2009-10 to 2017-18. Five concern a failure to comply with Uefa’s rules, including Financial Fair Play regulations, from 2013-14 to 2017-18. Seven are for breaching the Premier League’s PSR rules 2015-16 to 2017-18. 35 are for a failure to cooperate with Premier League investigations between December 2018 and February 2023. The allegations first surfaced because of leaked correspondence published by the German newspaper, Der Spiegel. City have always argued that the material was obtained illegally. What does this mean for City’s charges? > > Significantly, next week’s private arbitration hearing comes before the independent hearing for City’s charges, which is due to start in November. Rival clubs are concerned that a successful claim against APT rules could strengthen City’s defence later in the year. It has been alleged that City concealed payments made by owner Sheikh Mansour’s Abu Dhabi United Group through third parties and disguised them as sponsorship revenue. If the tribunal concludes that Premier League rules around fair market value are unlawful — and such regulations existed even before more robust rules were introduced in 2021 — it could open the way for City to launch fresh challenges against the legality of the rules concerning the 115 charges.

This is getting out of hand. The FA are looking to investigate Haaland after he reacted to that awful decision yesterday. He only tweeted "wtf" as well. Didn't go on a mad cry baby rant like Arteta did when the decision yesterday was a lot worse.

So players literally aren't allowed react/show emotion when officials make such stupid mistakes? This is such a huge problem and why this keeps happening. Referees are protected. They have zero accountability. The sport we all love literally is dying. This season has been one of the lowest seasons we have had and the officials really are ruining it once and for all.

I've just noticed that a number of the most egregious refereeing mistakes in the last couple of years have favoured Spurs

-Cucurella hair pull (Dean looking after his mate) -Brighton disallowed goals -Díaz goal disallowed (VAR farce) -Man City advantage debacle

Personally I don't mind Spurs, I just think it's weird, and I wonder if there's something sinister going on

To clarify, I’m not saying this rule should be removed, I’m actually in favour of it but what u don’t understand is if you are not allowed to broadcast on Saturday 3pm, why not just schedule your games accordingly. Look at Germany for example, none of their lower league games clash with Bundesliga. In this case I think the prem games should be rescheduled and it will be a win-win for everyone and the people who want to watch the games. Why can’t they do that?

I've been surprised by an apparent reaction to the statement 'there have been no amazing outfield Danish players in the Premier League'.

I'd really like to be reeducation. I have no double there have been some decent, even good Danish players in the league (who didn't play in goal), but none stand out as greats.

So other than goalkeepers, who would make a top 10 (or even a top 20) Premier League defender/midfielder/attacker from Denmark?

I'd like to watch every match of a given season (say 2018), is there a way I could do that? I want to see how my thoughts of a season change if I were to watch every minute of that season.

They're so fun to watch. Their wingers can beat their men, their midfield can hold it down, they play quick 1-2s and move the ball fast and fluidly, they score good goals, they're strong and physical defensively, they're just a great team. every player on the field makes the right decision almost every time. not to mention how much i adore odegaard as a player. they're not like united who struggle to connect 5 passes, beat a man, or pick up a loose runner in the box. it's fucked but i'm finding myself rooting for arsenal more than united at this point, as i'm convinced we will just stay shit until ownership changes

Kluivert got lucky too. I don't understand how the refereeing is so bad in the prem. Do the referees not get paid?

Doesnt seem like it to be honest. What do you think?

No team has ever lost 4 Premier League matches in a row where they were leading in all of them. Spurs are currently on a streak of 3 and are losing to City despite taking the lead early on.

History in the making

I just can't help but think them being 7th and only 4 points off top 4 is nowhere near where they deserve to be. I think they have been so fortunate in games and have had good decisions go their way. Even their win vs Everton I think was lucky. They should have been 4-1 down at half time, after the Garnacho goal Everton were all over them. Then the penalty killed the game.

Didn't deserve 3 points vs Wolves at the start, Rashford dive started their comeback against Forest, scraped by Luton and Sheffield. I honestly don't think United this season have been any better than Chelsea performance wise and think they are extremely fortunate.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-12820137/Everton-supporters-coach-Premier-League-points-deduction.html

I’ll preface this by saying I don’t watch much LaLiga these days, so wanted to get everyone’s opinion on this.

Just watched the Barcelona vs Atletico game and while very entertaining, it looked to me like any top half Premier League team would easily dominate either side. Loads of space and misplaced passes, unorganized defending, many simple through balls or long passes lead to a scoring opportunity.

Considering these are top teams in La Liga, is the gap in quality between the two leagues getting much wider? Looking ahead with the Premier League maintaining enormous spending power over all other leagues, it will be interesting to see if this can translate to European cup domination for English teams in the foreseeable future.

I cant believe im saying this. Man city got absolutely robbed. The epl referees are disastrous. This reminded me of a video of the danish league where the referee blew a whistle by mistake on an advantage play when the guy was through on goal and was extremely apologetic. Our refs will never show such class.

Btw I don’t support man city and this is the result i was seriously hoping for as an arsenal supporter. But how do you mess up so bad? And no apologies at all? Geez who tf do these refs think they are?

It's everywhere. From images, to videos, to Tiktoks, to adverts ... I'm over saturated with opinions, replays, player ratings, hyperbole and the like.

There's only so much you can take.

Example 1. The Newcastle goal vervus Arsenal. Never ending discussions on the decision. The hyperbolic nature of the punditry. The uneven opinions of the same people.

Example 2. Handball against Newcastle. Hundreds of videos all moaning, complaining over and over again. The same pundits complaining and restarting their opinion.

And now the new one - the ref not giving Man City an advantage in the Tottenham game. It starts all over again. The videos, the complaining, the shouting Tiktoks...

I just don't care anymore.

Rational discussions are gone, replaced with hyperbole and drama.

It's too much. I can't watch any football related content anymore.

The only thing to do is to shut it all out but the commentary is just as bad.

Watched two matches: Chelsea Vs Brighton & City Vs Tottenham and both games had huge referee-ing errors at the end..How did Brighton not get a corner kick when the ball clearly hits a Chelsea player and goes out the line...And why did the referee stop Silva's 1v1 chance against Tottenham to award a foul in favour of city...I am neither a brighton nor a city fan but both these decisions angered me so bad...And these smug referees just walk out with their satisfied punchable faces playing with the feelings of the fans and sanctity of our league...This is probably one of the most exciting seasons in recent times and yet we can't enjoy it to the fullest coz of these incompetent referees...PL should just fire all English referees and import referees from other countries...

Surely everyone here agrees that Salah has already cemented his status as a Premier League great right?

Seen some really mad stats from him lately

What strikes me about him is that he’s almost always available for selection too. (Played in 325/355 matches since signing). Unused sub three times, he missed six games in 2022 due to AFCON. Could miss PL games v Bournemouth, Chelsea & Arsenal next month due to AFCON

Comes across as a pretty nice guy too Constantly puts up great G/A numbers as well

Top top footballer

Thierry Henry, Clint Dempsey and Charlie Davies discussing perception of American players in Europe

Read that a few years ago. Now, I've only been following football since '07 which is around the time time Dempsey made his move to Fulham. He was a thrill to watch and I'd reckon he def helped change some opinions around US players at the time with the likes of Pulisic or McKennie continuing to this day.

But just curious for a discussion, how prevalent are the stereotypes of US players today? Is it simply just banter or are there still managers who just don't rate US players all that much.