Palace potentially denied entry to Europa League?

[Jason Smith]

I have read the email sent

Dear cousin

I think I can upgrade your ticket to Europe league , but you mustn't let this get out . send a letter in asking if that bunch are allowed in Europa league ,
We massaged the rules to take that south London mob is out 👍 ,
I have sorted out my mate to take your blind shares like last time if needed👍👍
Wife asked if your coming to tea later , we have a whole hog roast for you

from your loving cousin Theodore xx

I’ve just forwarded on to our favourite email address: info@cpfc.co.uk

 

[PatrickA]

There's a similar article here, but this one is about UEFA -

Palace 'to launch bombshell claim Forest got special treatment from Uefa'

CRYSTAL PALACE are reportedly demanding full disclosure of alleged bombshell emails and texts between Uefa and Nottingham Forest. The Mail reports that Palace believe the emails will reveal double …

www.thesun.co.uk

This Sun story really cribs from the Mail story, but it does raise a couple of issues.

It suggests that Lyon received proper notification from UEFA about multi ownership rules and failed to act upon it.

Does that mean they escape punishment for rule flouting as they finished in a higher league position whereas we as FA Cup winners in a major competition must be punished?
What nonsense.

The report also indicates that the club has the support of the FA in this matter.
The conclusion I would draw from this is that FA is not supporting Forest in their moves.

 

[Putitout]

This Sun story really cribs from the Mail story, but it does raise a couple of issues.

It suggests that Lyon received proper notification from UEFA about multi ownership rules and failed to act upon it.

Does that mean they escape punishment for rule flouting as they finished in a higher league position whereas we as FA Cup winners in a major competition must be punished?
What nonsense.

The report also indicates that the club has the support of the FA in this matter.
The conclusion I would draw from this is that FA is not supporting Forest in their moves.

Interesting stance of the FA if true.

 

[est1905]

I think you've missed the point !

Think of it this way - all MCO clubs had to have their house in order by 1/3/25. After that deadline UEFA do their checks to ensure all clubs comply with their rules. You then have to take into account the changing scenarios of which clubs may be affected eg Lyon's last gasp qualification through their league position.

In the strictest application of their rules there certainly is a case against Palace for the very reason that there was no Blind Trust on 1/3/25.

Textor's share sale doesn't alter the fact that as at 1/3/25 he owned shares in both clubs.

Hence the sentiment that the only thing Palace have been remiss with was hitting that 1/3 deadline and that the resulting punishment does not fit that crime.

Which is what I keep saying, a slap on the wrist and a modest fine should be more than enough punishment and certainly would be if we were talking about Real Madrid here!

 

[est1905]

Sorry I am of the 'Willo' brand of pessimism but in view of the highlighted incidents of alleged UEFA malfeasance and big club bias and the fact I can't see any Palace compliance with the rules, stupid as they are, it is sensible to be pragmatic and make the best of it.

However, should I be proved wrong I will be delighted and thus follow the proven track record of my associate, Willo, God bless him.

If everyone had that belief corruption wouldn't stay the same. It would grow to ridiculous levels

 

[Eagleman13]

I'd rather the ECL now, coz the EL is full of failed Champions League teams & the ECL is full of easier teams. Makes sense to me.

 

[est1905]

Where did you see this?

I think the Daily Mail have reported it as fact so they are either confident in its validity or they are not worried about Forest/UEFA suing them

 

[Spindle]

Anyone know what bookies are offering on the CAS outcome?

My personal estimate of our chances:
Yes 5% Rejection 95%

That's why I've been saying to take our 'demotion' and move on. We've a better chance in the Conference and we need to concentrate on the PL.

Good point. I think we should resign from the EC and the PL, and request a spot in League One, because I reckon we have a great shot at the Vanarama Trophy.

Do you not think that our players might consider it a thing to play at a club at the highest level possible?

 

[Spindle]

CPFC to launch 'bombshell claim Nottingham Forest got special treatment from EUFA' as they fight Europa ban.

'Full disclosure of emails and texts'.

This is warming up.

😎

This should be made up into an episode of "24 Hours In Police Custody" 😎

 

[Spindle]

It is my opinion that CPFC are not in breach of any UEFA regulations relating to MCO, which means if any advice were offered to both John Textor and David Blitzer by the club secretary, it would be that no blind trust is necessary.

5.01 (a) only applies to clubs that are fully integrated and incorporated as MCO clubs, which clearly Palace is not.

5.01 (b) might only be relevant if Steve Parish held shares in other clubs, which he does not. As CEO, he alone has overall managerial responsibility for Crystal Palace and only for Crystal Palace.

5.01 (c iv) has undoubtedly been the regulation that the CFCB believes John Textor has some form of, “… decisive influence in the decision-making of the club.” But neither his voting share, set at 25%, nor in his managerial responsibilities, of which he had none, indicates this. Indeed, there has to be a reasonable threshold of probability that he had a decisive influence, even in an ad hoc capacity, but of course there is none.

This brought me to the conclusion that this extra time UEFA has given the CFCB needs to be acted upon, through their powers of scrutiny and investigation. In other words, they should not be just waiting for an issue to arise, their remit is to be actively looking into every club that has directors or legal entities in more than one other club that come under UEFA’s area of jurisdiction.

And this is why I do not believe the CFCB have undertaken any investigation from the 1st of March onwards. If they had it would have resulted in extensive correspondence coming to light between the club secretary, John Textor, David Blitzer, and the CFCB in clarifying our MCO status, which would have been cited at the disciplinary hearing. And if there is no evidence of any correspondence, then there is no evidence of any investigation having been carried out by the CFCB; and if this is the case, then there is conclusive proof that UEFA have been wilfully negligent in their delegated responsibilities.

If Crystal Palace can prove this not only does the case collapse in terms of MCO compliance, Palace would then be entitled to sue UEFA for gross negligence in an out-of-court settlement that could change the whole way football has been mismanaged for the benefit of a global elite who have no intrinsic connection with the game where it matters most: in our families and in our community.

Interesting, and I hope we sue in this way if they dig in. The first "Bosman" but for clubs

 

[pssguy]

The report also indicates that the club has the support of the FA in this matter.
The conclusion I would draw from this is that FA is not supporting Forest in their moves.

Well, we did win the FA premier competition so they should support us. Forest's position in the PL means FA to the FA

 

[Jason Smith]

Nothing wrong with Toffs rugby. 1st test won, albeit not convincingly, c'mon the Lions. As for the northern tripe eaters style, meh.

Union is for toffs; League is for whippet breeders!

 

[est1905]

Well, we did win the FA premier competition so they should support us. Forest's position in the PL means FA to the FA

Its true Mariniakis has ruffled too many feathers in recent years. I doubt there will be many allies of the Tree Huggers this side of the Channel

 

[Living In Hope]

Has the actual rule been posted here? If so I apologise, but here it is. I fail to see how we transcend any of the requirements so think we must have a very good case at CAS:-

“Article 5 Integrity of the competition/multi-club ownership
5.01
To ensure the integrity of the UEFA club competitions (i.e. UEFA Champions League, UEFA Europa League and UEFA Conference League), the club must be able to prove that as at 1 March 2025 the below multi-club ownership criteria were met and the club must continue to comply with the below criteria from that date until the end of the competition season:

1. No club participating in a UEFA club competition may, either directly or indirectly:
   1. hold or deal in the securities or shares of any other club participating in a UEFA club competition;
   2. be a member of any other club participating in a UEFA club competition;
   3. be involved in any capacity whatsoever in the management, administration and/or sporting performance of any other club participating in a UEFA club competition; or
   4. have any power whatsoever in the management, administration and/or sporting performance of any other club participating in a UEFA club competition.
2. No one may simultaneously be involved, either directly or indirectly, in any capacity whatsoever in the management, administration and/or sporting performance of more than one club participating in a UEFA club competition.
3. No individual or legal entity may have control or influence over more than one club participating in a UEFA club competition, such control or influence being defined in this context as:
   1. holding a majority of the shareholders’ voting rights;
   2. having the right to appoint or remove a majority of the members of the administrative, management or supervisory body of the club;
   3. being a shareholder and alone controlling a majority of the shareholders’ voting rights pursuant to an agreement entered into with other shareholders of the club; or
   4. being able to exercise by any means a decisive influence in the decision-making of the club.”

Textor was not involved in the management, administration or sporting performance.

He was not able to exercise decisive influence.

Thanks Wisbech. It is difficult to understand UEFA's decision based on this. Point 1 relates to whether the clubs (ie Palace or Lyon) have any ownership / involvement with each other, the answer clearly being "no". Point 2 relates to the management / running of the club (ie not the ownership), the answer being "no". So it is point 3 which matters. As we understand it Textor has 25% voting rights, so 3.1 is "no". If he only has 25% voting rights is would be inconceivable that 3.2 could apply. 3.3 appears to be talking about whether he effectively controls Parish, Harris or Blitzer, so surely "no" once again. It really does look as of it boils down to "decisive influence". I am not sure how you can have decisive influence with only 25% of the voting rights, but unless "decisive influence" is defined elsewhere by UEFA, there is subjectivity over its meaning. Surely on this basis Palace must have a strong case.

 

[Phil’s Barber]

Where did you see this?

Type the ‘Bombshell’ line into Google and you get loads of articles about it.

Google Search

 

[Eaglecoops]

This Sun story really cribs from the Mail story, but it does raise a couple of issues.

It suggests that Lyon received proper notification from UEFA about multi ownership rules and failed to act upon it.

Does that mean they escape punishment for rule flouting as they finished in a higher league position whereas we as FA Cup winners in a major competition must be punished?
What nonsense.

The report also indicates that the club has the support of the FA in this matter.
The conclusion I would draw from this is that FA is not supporting Forest in their moves.

This is kind of what I was alluding to. We get punished for doing exactly the same as Lyon, ie neither party applies for blind trust but they get no punishment because they finished higher in their league.

I guess that the counter argument to this is that ours is not a punishment but just a measure to stop both having a chance to play one another in the same league. Feels like and is a punishment however.

 

[Eagleman13]

Union is for toffs; League is for whippet breeders!

No problem from me.

 

[PatrickA]

Well, we did win the FA premier competition so they should support us. Forest's position in the PL means FA to the FA

Whatever their motives, they are the governing body of football in this country responsible for the rules and disciplinary matters.
It’s doubtful that they would be offering support if Palace genuinely fell short in these areas.
Furthermore , the FA is part of UEFA so it’s preferable to have their support rather than their silence on the matter.

 

[Jason Smith]

Whatever their motives, they are the governing body of football in this country responsible for the rules and disciplinary matters.
It’s doubtful that they would be offering support if Palace genuinely fell short in these areas.
Furthermore , the FA is part of UEFA so it’s preferable to have their support rather than their silence on the matter.

It was sent to UEFA before the hearing, so it cut no ice with them. Hopefully, CAS will see it in a different light.

 

[Northern Panda]

I'm getting the feeling that this is more about getting Textor, out of controlling Lyon and being a thorn in UEFA's side, than multi club ownership. It's been known that owner of PSG and Textor have clashed repeatedly over TV rights and UEFA listen to PSG. Who wouldn't? Unfortunately we're the scapegoats in this. I'd rather we win the Conference League and sue UEFA than fail in the Europa