Palace potentially denied entry to Europa League?

[Hrolf The Ganger]

Why would CAS side with them? They have nothing to do with each other. In cases gone by they have reprimanded UEFA far more often than any of their opponents. UEFA are indeed a law unto themselves which is why, when challenged on their own rules they usually lose

I don't know how much power CAS has, but I suppose they could rule that the rules around MCO are not fit for purpose or that they were not applied fairly or equally in this case.
They could just decide that Textor didn't have a controlling interest.
It is also possible that they might rule in our favour on a technical issue like an administrative failure.

 

[mtp1958]

Anyone got any good headlines if this doesn't go our way?

I was going to suggest "Palace CAStrated"

your talking bo##ocks now

 

[Part Time James]

your talking bo##ocks now

That's about the nuts of it, yes. But no need to get teste.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

That's about the nuts of it, yes. But no need to get teste.

I honestly read that as taste.

 

[mtp1958]

I honestly read that as taste.

what you do in your private life is up to you 🤣

 

[mars]

Simon Jordan is a very good broadcaster and has deep knowledge on football matters which makes him very listenable but……..
Mention Steve Parish and Jordan turns into a jealous mouthy childish brat!
Parish is better for Palace than Jordan ever was so Simon stick to what you do best and don’t pontificate about Palace cos you’re biased!

 

[Part Time James]

I honestly read that as taste.

At least North Stand Chat will be at home if they snoop.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

At least North Stand Chat will be at home if they snoop.

At least I can blame it on watching the darts while reading posts. Brings to mind the thankfully retired ref Mark Clackerbag.

 

[eaglesdare]

Simon Jordan is a very good broadcaster and has deep knowledge on football matters which makes him very listenable but……..
Mention Steve Parish and Jordan turns into a jealous mouthy childish brat!
Parish is better for Palace than Jordan ever was so Simon stick to what you do best and don’t pontificate about Palace cos you’re biased!

Simon Jordan really needs to get over himself at this point. Parish wasn't the one who got us into administration and I doubt he ever will.

 

[Paaalaaace]

Europa creek with no paddle

 

[doombear]

Time for a siesta everyone?

 

[cryrst]

I haven’t found a pundit, ‘expert,’ commentator or observer of European football who expect CAS to find in our favour.

Does that matter?
Possibly not, but some of them have much greater knowledge and experience than I ( and probably other posters) have of the workings of UEFA and CAS.

The central point seems to be that UEFA has decided that Palace are part of a multi ownership model, and CAS won’t overturn this on the basis that UEFA must have concrete evidence that met their criteria i.e they satisfied that necessary burden of proof.

Of course we could have new evidence to submit, or we could attack the decision on other grounds e.g failure to communicate properly, discrimination as to treatment of other clubs in comparison to Palace, the actions of Lyon and Forest.

However, if UEFA is the ultimate arbiter of what constitutes a multi ownership model I don’t feel as confident as others.
It could be something as trivial as Textor’s shareholding, the dealings on O’Brien, any correspondence involving Textor on Glasner’s appointment.

I’m not suggesting that this is right or fair, but I am suggesting that it may be enough for UEFA to claim that they are satisfied in terms of their rules and definition of the model.

Not many thought we would be FA cup holders either and they got their karma 😀

 

[Painter]

I don't know how much power CAS has, but I suppose they could rule that the rules around MCO are not fit for purpose or that they were not applied fairly or equally in this case.
They could just decide that Textor didn't have a controlling interest.
It is also possible that they might rule in our favour on a technical issue like an administrative failure.

UEFA will have to prove we are part of a MCO with evidence of transactions, rather than just say we are as Textor has shares. CAS deal in facts rather than rumour and hearsay.

 

[Part Time James]

UEFA will have to prove we are part of a MCO with evidence of transactions, rather than just say we are as Textor has shares. CAS deal in facts rather than rumour and hearsay.

This is an interesting point because a lot of this thread has assumed the burden of proof is with Palace. I don't know either way, but it would make sense that UEFA should have to prove we violated the rules.

 

[PatrickA]

This is an interesting point because a lot of this thread has assumed the burden of proof is with Palace. I don't know either way, but it would make sense that UEFA should have to prove we violated the rules.

Commentator Stefan Borsun's view.
Not saying it's gospel, but he has some knowledge of these matters -

 

[mileend]

Commentator Stefan Borsun's view.
Not saying it's gospel, but he has some knowledge of these matters -
View attachment 1609

But it's not true, Palace are not part of an MCO, so what evidence could there be?
Unless Notts Forest have applied pressure to their friends high up in UEFA that could have persuaded them to rule in this way?
But UEFA are of course in no way corrupt so that doesn't make sense either

 

[Jason Smith]

Commentator Stefan Borsun's view.
Not saying it's gospel, but he has some knowledge of these matters -
View attachment 1609

But there was no third party adjudicator regarding the burden of proof. We will never know the CFCB’s findings. They are accountable only to themselves.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Agree with everything you say, but when does a lawyer ever tell their prospective client they have little or no chance, when they can see a long journey through the mire. It may be cynical but it is how they can make so much money.

Those who win get the biggest briefs, so a winning reputation is very important. No lawyer would want to handle a brief they know they will lose, no matter what the fee might be. So there must be at least a reasonable chance of success,

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

They apply if you want to play in their competitions

Not if they fail to achieve their stated purpose, which they don’t. A quasi legal tribunal could order that they be set aside in exactly the same way a Judge can order that unreasonable or unworkable terms and conditions can in contracts. They aren’t sacrosanct because they aren’t the law. Unenforceable rules are an unreasonable demand and could, and should, in my opinion, be ordered to be null and void.

 

[mileend]

Not if they fail to achieve their stated purpose, which they don’t. A quasi legal tribunal could order that they be set aside in exactly the same way a Judge can order that unreasonable or unworkable terms and conditions can in contracts can. They aren’t sacrosanct because they aren’t the law. Unenforceable rules are an unreasonable demand and could, and should, in my opinion, be ordered to be null and void.

correct
if in doubt or want an obvious example see Bosman