Palace potentially denied entry to Europa League?

I think I have worked out why UEFA have decided to relegate us. It’s all down to Texor’s position with Lyon, and has nothing to do with us directly. Article 5.01 (c) of their rules says:-

“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.”

Whilst none of those definitions applied to his position at Palace they did at Lyon.

The rules in Article 5.02 being what happens next:-

“If two or more clubs fail to meet the criteria aimed at ensuring the integrity of the competition, only one of them may be admitted to a UEFA club competition, in accordance with the following criteria (applicable in descending order) with the exception of the scenarios set out in Paragraph 5.04 and Paragraph 5.05:
  1. the club which qualifies on sporting merit for the most prestigious UEFA club competition (i.e., in descending order: UEFA Champions League, UEFA Europa League or UEFA Conference League);
  2. the club which was ranked highest in its domestic championship;
  3. the club whose association is ranked highest in the access list (see Annex A).”

Thus although Lyon was the club where Textor held the offending control, they take precedence over Palace because of their league position.

Grossly unfair it might be as no conflict ever existed and certainly doesn’t now. Which UEFA probably accept but are hogtied by their own rules.

The best chance of redemption might be through the UEFA chairman overruling his committee but then he risks being sued by Forest. CAS might determine that the rule is so badly worded that it doesn’t achieve its intended purpose so must be struck out.

Clutching at straws though.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
I think I have worked out why UEFA have decided to relegate us. It’s all down to Texor’s position with Lyon, and has nothing to do with us directly. Article 5.01 (c) of their rules says:-

“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.”

Whilst none of those definitions applied to his position at Palace they did at Lyon.

The rules in Article 5.02 being what happens next:-

“If two or more clubs fail to meet the criteria aimed at ensuring the integrity of the competition, only one of them may be admitted to a UEFA club competition, in accordance with the following criteria (applicable in descending order) with the exception of the scenarios set out in Paragraph 5.04 and Paragraph 5.05:
  1. the club which qualifies on sporting merit for the most prestigious UEFA club competition (i.e., in descending order: UEFA Champions League, UEFA Europa League or UEFA Conference League);
  2. the club which was ranked highest in its domestic championship;
  3. the club whose association is ranked highest in the access list (see Annex A).”

Thus although Lyon was the club where Textor held the offending control, they take precedence over Palace because of their league position.

Grossly unfair it might be as no conflict ever existed and certainly doesn’t now. Which UEFA probably accept but are hogtied by their own rules.

The best chance of redemption might be through the UEFA chairman overruling his committee but then he risks being sued by Forest. CAS might determine that the rule is so badly worded that it doesn’t achieve its intended purpose so must be struck out.

Clutching at straws though.
Click to expand...
As it says, “If two or more clubs fail to meet the criteria …” Only with Lyon did Textor, “… exercise by any means a decisive influence in the decision-making of the club.” If he had ‘decisive influence’ at Palace also, he would have been in violation of these regulations.
 
Last edited:
As I have understood it, Textor should have registered a potential conflict of interest by March 31st - a date brought forward by UEFA at short notice. As no one else had a conflict of interest, this was down to him. It seems to me our best hope will lie in arguing that in the particular circumstances of the case - where failure to abide by UEFA rules rather than any actual conflict of interest seems to be the issue - the culpable party is not being punished; indeed he might feel that he has successfully spited Parrish whom I I don't think he ever forgave for refusing to bail Lyons out a couple of years ago. UEFA's rules are deficient I suspect in failing specifically to address the consequences of a sale of interests such as has occurred here. While I can see that the sale cannot be retrospectively applied to what should have happened at the end of March; it clearly should be taken into account when determining which club should be penalised.
 
Charles said:
As I have understood it, Textor should have registered a potential conflict of interest by March 31st - a date brought forward by UEFA at short notice. As no one else had a conflict of interest, this was down to him. It seems to me our best hope will lie in arguing that in the particular circumstances of the case - where failure to abide by UEFA rules rather than any actual conflict of interest seems to be the issue - the culpable party is not being punished; indeed he might feel that he has successfully spited Parrish whom I I don't think he ever forgave for refusing to bail Lyons out a couple of years ago. UEFA's rules are deficient I suspect in failing specifically to address the consequences of a sale of interests such as has occurred here. While I can see that the sale cannot be retrospectively applied to what should have happened at the end of March; it clearly should be taken into account when determining which club should be penalised.
Click to expand...
March 1st!

The difficulty is though that Textor was trying to sell his shares at this point and had been for about a year. If you then put your shares into blind trust you essentially block yourself from selling your shares.

Who knows what his long term plans were? Perhaps he was still hopeful of buying Parish out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top