crvenaeagle
Member
- Country
Australia
Problem is, we can say all this but:
1. UEFA assessed that we were MCO. They are clearly wrong. But, as an appeals tribunal, CAS cannot substitute their own subjective assessment of facts for those arrived at by UEFA.
2. Whether Forest are part of an MCO or not, they did not trigger the rules. The issue of applicable dates did not come into play and UEFA could stand by their arbitrary deadline.
3. Emailgate is also a non point. It is one down the rabbit hole I know but, to comply, we should have put Textor's interest on blind trust and released it from the trust when we were knocked out the Cup... or otherwise. I don't know if this would have negatively impacted the marketability of his shares but UEFA do not appear to have considered this and didn't have to as the rules are the rules.
I am saying this after the event and in retrospect as I was hoping and arguing for a different result. The one point that does upset me is that appeal tribunals can feel they are completely fettered. However, in a case that is so obviously perverse, prejudicial to a relatively small club and blatantly undermining of two major competitions, it is sad they could or would not find any hook onto which to hang a different decision.
It states in UEFAs rules that when you put your shares into blind trust you cannot just take them back out when you fail to qualify.