FA Premier League

The news of Man City’s legal action is chilling

You’d think a fourth consecutive Premier League title which established themselves as statistically the most dominant club in English football history would be enough. That is not enough, though. This latest news tells us that from this position of unprecedented dominance, they actually intend to run away from the rest of the pack.

Don’t like the rules? Just systematically break them for a decade and then throw your toys out of the pram when finally brought to account.

That level of arrogance can only come from a State where democracy doesn’t exist and money distorts everything

From The Times….

In the midst of the legalese, the endgame here is frightening. It is not about being frontrunners in the Premier League competition, it is more about rendering the competition redundant because if you lift financial constraints, which is what they are fighting for in court, then you create a two-horse race for nation state-owned clubs, with Chelsea, whose owners are partly Saudi-funded, trundling along in third.

Managing the financial disparity among its 20 clubs is a complicated game which the Premier League has been attempting to play. On the one hand, it wants to reward the well-off and ambitious yet, simultaneously, it wants to limit the possibility of this disparity killing the competition. It could be argued — and it has been in these pages — that the balance isn’t quite right at present. No, it probably isn’t. However, this is the nuclear option.

This legal challenge by City is a battle about cutting loose from the rules and in so doing, it would cut them loose from the other 19 clubs. Sorry, the other 18 clubs. Newcastle United will have a fingers-crossed front-row seat in the gallery.

There are some elements to this legal challenge that are staggering in their audacity. City are challenging the Associated Party Transaction (APT) rules that the Premier League signed up to in December 2021. Yet, like all the clubs, City had themselves signed off on the new rules. They may not have voted for them but as signatories to the Premier League agreement, they nevertheless put their name to them and agreed to abide by them. That is how the Premier League works; it is a private club governed by the majority vote.

One club seeking to sue the group is thus a kind of anarchy. What happens if one club refuse to play by the rules? Can they even, then, stay in the competition?

City’s legal challenge is about both the past and the future. For the past, this attempt to determine that the rules regarding financial constraints have been unlawful, could have a significant impact on the 115 charges against them. It asks the question: were some of those charges based on rotten law?

For the future, it says: can we now use the freedom of our financial muscle to do whatever we like?

Those 115 charges — still just charges — are a portrayal of a club allegedly breaking the rules (that they had signed up to) in order to accelerate their commercial power and thus to achieve spending parity with the market leaders, the Manchester Uniteds and the Chelseas.

That parity was achieved with impressive speed. This lawsuit, however, is an attempt to accelerate beyond parity and to leave the rest of the game in their wake.

Somewhere in all this there is surely a deal to be made. You drop the charges, we’ll drop the lawsuit. And then it may all go away. But City will have gamed the system. Whichever way you look at it, City are trying to beat the system.

Within its 165-page legal document, City argue that the rules approved by their rivals were implemented to stifle their success; they call this a “tyranny of the majority”. What they mean is that they cannot live with a democracy.

Yet the success of the Premier League is founded on the principles of democratic decision-making. A system of majority-agreement governance ensures that the Premier League remains a competition that the majority want to compete in.

It is this that Manchester City are seeking to detonate in court next Monday. My colleague Matt Lawton reports that this has sparked “civil war in English football’s top flight”. Indeed, the clubs must fight tooth and nail; they have everything to fight for.

I can't deny City deserve a very large punishment. Probably deserve booted from the entire league if I'm honest.

If something like that happened I think it would be a terrible thing for a lot of people's mental health. Ridiculous as that sounds.
Or is it that ridiculous? A lot of people love their club more than their own families 😄

Ten Hag to stay.

Out by Xmas surely.

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c511vlg7jvno

Newly promoted Ipswich will host Liverpool while champions Manchester City are away to Chelsea on the opening weekend of the 2024-25 Premier League season.

Ipswich, who are back in the top flight after a 22-year absence, will play on Saturday 17 August, with City starting their title defence at Stamford Bridge on Sunday, 18 August.

Manchester United's game against Fulham at Old Trafford will kick off the campaign on Friday, 16 August.

All times BST

Friday, 16 August

Manchester United v Fulham (20:00)

Saturday, 17 August

Ipswich Town v Liverpool (12:30)

Arsenal v Wolverhampton (15:00)

Everton v Brighton (15:00)

Newcastle United v Southampton (15:00)

Nottingham Forest v Bournemouth (15:00)

West Ham United v Aston Villa (17:30)

Sunday, 18 August

Brentford v Crystal Palace (14:00)

Chelsea v Manchester City (16:30)

Monday, 19 August

Leicester City v Tottenham (20:00)