Palace potentially denied entry to Europa League?

Eaglecoops said:
So all that needs to happen is for us to produce the email that was sent to info@uefa.com saying we intended to put our shares in trust if we won the FA Cup!

Allowing Forest to simply show intention rather than meeting a deadline that is being strictly applied in Palace’s case but not in Forest’s doesn’t appear on the face of it to be particularly just.
Click to expand...
We don’t have any shares to put in trust! Only individual shareholders do. In this case only one of them matters. He had no decisive influence at the club, although by the strict interpretation of UEFA rules he did. We though had no power to instruct him to place them in a blind trust and why would he do so voluntarily when trying to sell? Especially when blind trusts were allowed only for last season, and not the next one, as a device to whitewash MCO conflicts.

This is a mess entirely of UEFA’s own making. The intentions are good. Ones which we have always supported and now unequivocally comply with. The rules though don’t achieve that and aren’t fit for purpose.

I hope, and expect, that CAS are now mediating and trying to reach a negotiated solution rather than have to give a ruling. Which may be harder when Marinakis is involved.
 
Right its Guess time, im going for:

Palace, Europa
Forest, Europa
Lyon, Nought

Or something completely different
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
We don’t have any shares to put in trust! Only individual shareholders do. In this case only one of them matters. He had no decisive influence at the club, although by the strict interpretation of UEFA rules he did. We though had no power to instruct him to place them in a blind trust and why would he do so voluntarily when trying to sell? Especially when blind trusts were allowed only for last season, and not the next one, as a device to whitewash MCO conflicts.

This is a mess entirely of UEFA’s own making. The intentions are good. Ones which we have always supported and now unequivocally comply with. The rules though don’t achieve that and aren’t fit for purpose.

I hope, and expect, that CAS are now mediating and trying to reach a negotiated solution rather than have to give a ruling. Which may be harder when Marinakis is involved.
Click to expand...
My first point was a total jibe around the info@ addresses that have been batted around. I’m aware of the points you have made already.

The second point I made is more pertinent given that it shows a willingness of UEFA to be creative with deadlines which they haven’t so far with Palace regardless of whether or not we believe they are relevant to us.
 
From Martin Samuel in today's Sunday Times - what we are all thinking:

Just fancy that​

Standing besides the Uefa president, Aleksander Ceferin, on the podium in Basel was the general secretary Theodore Theodoridis, a native of Athens and formerly a board member of the Hellenic Football Federation. Uncanny, isn’t it, the way that Olympiacos and Nottingham Forest, the clubs owned by Evangelos Marinakis, manage to nervelessly tiptoe their way through Uefa’s minefield of multiclub ownership when Crystal Palace cannot.
 
Eaglecoops said:
So all that needs to happen is for us to produce the email that was sent to info@uefa.com saying we intended to put our shares in trust if we won the FA Cup!

Allowing Forest to simply show intention rather than meeting a deadline that is being strictly applied in Palace’s case but not in Forest’s doesn’t appear on the face of it to be particularly just.
Click to expand...
Ultimately didn't apply for Forest; UEFA didn't have to apply the rules; so we'll never know.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
We don’t have any shares to put in trust! Only individual shareholders do. In this case only one of them matters. He had no decisive influence at the club, although by the strict interpretation of UEFA rules he did. We though had no power to instruct him to place them in a blind trust and why would he do so voluntarily when trying to sell? Especially when blind trusts were allowed only for last season, and not the next one, as a device to whitewash MCO conflicts.

This is a mess entirely of UEFA’s own making. The intentions are good. Ones which we have always supported and now unequivocally comply with. The rules though don’t achieve that and aren’t fit for purpose.

I hope, and expect, that CAS are now mediating and trying to reach a negotiated solution rather than have to give a ruling. Which may be harder when Marinakis is involved.
Click to expand...
Mediation between who?
 
Uphill said:
From Martin Samuel in today's Sunday Times - what we are all thinking:

Just fancy that​

Standing besides the Uefa president, Aleksander Ceferin, on the podium in Basel was the general secretary Theodore Theodoridis, a native of Athens and formerly a board member of the Hellenic Football Federation. Uncanny, isn’t it, the way that Olympiacos and Nottingham Forest, the clubs owned by Evangelos Marinakis, manage to nervelessly tiptoe their way through Uefa’s minefield of multiclub ownership when Crystal Palace cannot.
Click to expand...
We are.

But UEFA did not need to apply the rules. If they had to and found for the bubble, then the stench would have been more obvious and corruption blatant.

Sadly, we do not have that additional argument.
 
Freedman87 said:
At the moment we're in the Conference League, and the draw is tomorrow. Here are our potential opponents; we play the winner of whichever tie we're drawn against. Fancy any of these?

Larne (N Ireland) v Santa Clara (Azores!)
AIK Stockholm (Sweden) v Gyor (Hungary)
Limassol (Cyprus) v AEK Athens (Greece)
Rosenborg (Norway) v Hammarby (Sweden)
Levski Sofia (Bulgaria) v Sabah (Azerbaijan)
Click to expand...
Why is it just these teams we could play & not any of the other one's?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top