mezzer
Member
- Location
- Main Stand, Block F, Row 20 seat 174
- Country
England
It's very clever if it goes to penalties
Palace potentially denied entry to Europa League?
- Topic starter Guntrisoft
- Start date
Eagle-Trucker
Member
- Location
- Cashel , Co Tipp
- Country
Ireland
Ireland got a 10 million payoff for it after appeals, which is probably more than what we would have got if we qualified, we probably wouldnt have gone any further we had a very poor side and a tough group.
ex hibitionist
Member
- Location
- Hastings
- Country
-
England
you can forget natural justice to start with, that's for the religious amongst us, but you're right the rule isn't fit for purpose, but it's the rule and in my limited experience of the legal world that is way uppermost. You may not agree that the rule did not apply to us, but you are not UEFA. Our lawyers may argue that we couldn't comply with the rule and that we needed extra time to do so which has previously been granted in other cases, so they may get CAS to reduce the penalty or suspend it.
I think this is the most likely decision. A face saving "UEFA you are correct but the penalty is too harsh so fine them instead."
Part Time James
Member
- Country
-
England
The fine should also be proportionate to the price money we make from it.
Common Sense Club
Member
- Country
-
England
We can prove that we are not part of an MCO. UEFA had to act tough as they’ve been caught running on unenforceable rules (not laws). They have to save face so have passed the problem first to the French FA to relegate Lyon (ha!), and now are hoping CAS find a solution. If we succeed, UEFA change the rules and eat humble pie; if we lose, the UEFA protests continue-what fun for the global TV cameras to pick up on!
Wisbech Eagle
Member
- Location
- Truro Cornwall
- Country
-
England
Apparently not as one of the things that CAS consider is whether a ruling conflicts with natural justice. Rules are not laws in the same way that terms and conditions aren’t.
ex hibitionist
Member
- Location
- Hastings
- Country
-
England
I stand corrected - it's in their constitution - I just checked. But I doubt they are some moral saviours - my experience, and most other people's I can safely assume, is that fairness counts for very little if the rules are broken, and it should be clear that I understand the difference between a rule and a law. So how specific is the term 'multi-club organisation'? It seems to imply a joint holding company which we did not belong to, rather a holding company owned nearly half our shares, and according to UEFA's criteria that's close enough to being part of an MCO and we were in that state on March 1 so were in breach - end of. But we all know what the extenuating circumstances were, repeated on here countless times, but I reckon we've got a better chance basing our case on the extenuating circumstances and saying we didn't realise we were in breach rather than just saying UEFA are wrong, even though they plan to alter their criteria for next season. Just an opinion!
Eaglecoops
Member
- Location
- CR3
- Country
-
England
Surely CAS need to look at the intention behind this part of the UEFA rules which is to prevent a situation where collusion/match fixing can occur.
They decided to refer to criteria that defines when someone is in such a position and they have in our case at least, referred to share ownership and a certain level of share ownership.
On that basis we certainly are in breach if they consider over 30% is the threshold, however they have completely ignored the fact that firstly Palace do not consider themselves to be part of an MCO club and secondly, the management set up within Palace prevented Textor from having decisive control within the club and therefore their objective of preventing a position where a result could be influenced has already been met.
This has to be their primary concern otherwise it’s just a rule for rules sake and is not universally appropriate. Mitigation of potential risk in any match between Lyon and Palace has already been met and I would hope CAS considers this point favourably.
Just one of the arguments, however in my opinion an important one nonetheless.
They decided to refer to criteria that defines when someone is in such a position and they have in our case at least, referred to share ownership and a certain level of share ownership.
On that basis we certainly are in breach if they consider over 30% is the threshold, however they have completely ignored the fact that firstly Palace do not consider themselves to be part of an MCO club and secondly, the management set up within Palace prevented Textor from having decisive control within the club and therefore their objective of preventing a position where a result could be influenced has already been met.
This has to be their primary concern otherwise it’s just a rule for rules sake and is not universally appropriate. Mitigation of potential risk in any match between Lyon and Palace has already been met and I would hope CAS considers this point favourably.
Just one of the arguments, however in my opinion an important one nonetheless.
Paaalaaace
Member
- Location
- Croydon
- Country
-
England
Any Bookies offering odds on whether Palace will be back in Europa League after CAS Tribunal?
ex hibitionist
Member
- Location
- Hastings
- Country
-
England
no, but if you want an answer ask yourself this question. Someone offers you £100 if Palace stay in the Conference League on the condition that you have to make them one offer if we end up in the Europa League which they have to accept or the bet is off. How much would you offer them? £100 and its evens or 50-50. £200 and you think it's twice as likely we win the appeal ... 1/2 and 2/1. How much would they accept knowing they might lose £100 if they accept. They'd probably take £30, maybe £40. So we're probably about 3/1 against winning, and 1/3 losing. Bookies shorten the odds to make a profit so we're a 5/2 shot by my reckoning. But I'd only be tempted to back us at odds of 4/1 or more. But it would be in that range. Greed is a good indicator ... 10/1 and I'd bite your hand off. We have a chance, slimmish, but a real chance I'd say.
Final estimate: 25–35% likelihood that CAS will overturn or modify UEFA’s exclusion decision
chatGPT
Eagleman13
Member
- Location
- On The Road To Hell & Alicante
- Country
Bermuda
This, is a good read & spells out everything in easy to understand sections . . .
footballeconomyv2.blogspot.com
Palace get ready for court
Common sense would suggest that confirmation of John Textor’s exit from Crystal Palace should resolve the issues around the Premier League c...
footballeconomyv2.blogspot.com
As Wisbech has said rules and laws are two different things ,
I was rules secretary at my local golf club , that involved the understanding how to apply a rule correctly , and in golf you get a opening line on the rule , but most of the rules have a breakdown , were you go from the opening line to different parts of the rules that are more applicable to the situation ,
That is were we stand with UEFA rules , We have signed documents from when Textor come into the club that the running of the football club , he had no influence over , and CAS will look at that , plus Lyon being allowed more time plus other cases ,
we are in a very strong position as the rules are open to bad interruption , which UEFA have done ,
I speak from being involved 4 tribunal cases and watched 2 , so hopefully we will find out this week as the clock ticking towards conference draw on the 4th
I was rules secretary at my local golf club , that involved the understanding how to apply a rule correctly , and in golf you get a opening line on the rule , but most of the rules have a breakdown , were you go from the opening line to different parts of the rules that are more applicable to the situation ,
That is were we stand with UEFA rules , We have signed documents from when Textor come into the club that the running of the football club , he had no influence over , and CAS will look at that , plus Lyon being allowed more time plus other cases ,
we are in a very strong position as the rules are open to bad interruption , which UEFA have done ,
I speak from being involved 4 tribunal cases and watched 2 , so hopefully we will find out this week as the clock ticking towards conference draw on the 4th
Palace get ready for court
Common sense would suggest that confirmation of John Textor’s exit from Crystal Palace should resolve the issues around the Premier League c...
footballeconomyv2.blogspot.com
This is worth a read.
It summarises how CAS operates, explains it's decision making process and suggests a couple of arguments which could prove fruitful for Palace (and ones that probably wouldn't) .
That is a referee error and nothing to do with UEFA as an organisation. Since it is in their own rulebook that in the spirit of the game they will never overturn a result or order a replay based on a referees error they were powerless to do anything about that. The onus was really on the French who should have offered to replay the game.
Rubbish, There is no way a top lawyer would touch any case with a barge pole that had as little chance of success as that regardless of how much they are being paid. For them reputation is everything.
As mentioned previously they wouldn't only not accept the case but they'd also strongly advise Palace to accept UEFA's decision.
We're going to court because the lawyers believe we can win. Trust me. Thats the only reason we'd take it to CAS.
its a very broad look at how CAS works , has he said its done behind closed doors so he is not privy to how each case is looked at , the recent ones he quoted were MCO and they claimed they didn't have time to change it , we are claiming we are not MCO , totally different case argument .This, is a good read & spells out everything in easy to understand sections . . .
Palace get ready for court
Common sense would suggest that confirmation of John Textor’s exit from Crystal Palace should resolve the issues around the Premier League c...
we have found different reasons for one-way or another how we will get on , I'm 70/30 Palace will win as havent seen all our evidence , plus some of UEFA
What a weird notion. Of course lawyers will take on cases they have a good chance of losing. It pays the bills.
As there is only a win or loss in court, a lawyer who only takes on those where there is a 95% chance of winning would not get much business. There is no loss of reputation in losing a case where the odds are stacked against you. Would Palace's reputation take a massive knock if we lost an away game against PSG?