Palace potentially denied entry to Europa League?

leejaneagles said:
Interesting the direct attack on Parish that his ambition is to avoid relegation and if Textor took over he’d want to progress.

Well, we can say with certainty everyone would say they want to improve if taking something over, so that’s kind of meaningless.

But how many of us have been so frustrated with boom-bust. Bad start to the season, new Manager, new ideas, no transfer budget and sell best players, get Hodgson back in, get rid, change again, get that 40 points etc.

I can’t help but believe Textor on that part and it’s hugely frustrating. Hard to disagree as well if after the FA Cup win, Eze and Guehi don’t start our Prem Season after last year Olisse didn’t start our season after showing top 4/title challenging form.

I don’t think Parish is everything he’s cracked up to be.
Click to expand...
No other small club has managed to stay in the Prem. as long as Palace. Building long-term stability through a realistic set of sustainable policies was the foundation for our cup success, and will be the foundation for any future success. We have Steve Parish to thank for that.
 
Listening to Textor, he says that he and Parish were able to submit legal paperwork clearly stating Textors very limited influence.
Can’t see that Palace have anything else going for them. So any decision will be on that. It could go either way, either they buy it or they don’t.
 
NEILLO said:
It certainly looks that way.

However, I think they've had ample time to perform their due diligence. That amounts to going over the evidence provided to them, which we had confirmed was in the form of constitutional documents, e-mails etc. You would assume that they have trained people with governance experience to perform the checks.

Yes, their rules are not fit for purpose. Certainly open to legal challenge will could be the next step. UEFA are creating their own problems caused by their own incompetence.
Click to expand...
Yeah I completely agree to be honest. If I'm not mistaken though, I believe the committee that decides meets once a week. Perhaps that's just not happened yet and it's on the to-do list? UEFA don't exactly give a monkeys about how long we wait for them to pull their finger out
 
Jason Smith said:
It wasn’t Textor that has kept us out of Europe, it’s essentially down to the voting power and influence that Lyon have through the ECA, plus it’s political influence and connections with the French government, as evidenced by Lyon’s chairman and club president, Michele Kang meeting up with the French sports minister, Marie Barsacq, on Tuesday evening. It couldn’t be more in your face and blatant that we’re up against a very powerful network of elite institutional interests.
Click to expand...
She is worth $1.1b according to Forbes & has quite a nice MCO herself (incl Lyon Women) . . .

www.bbc.co.uk

Michele Kang: The businesswoman leading a football revolution

Why London City Lionesses owner Michele Kang does not believe women's clubs have to be tied to men's teams to succeed.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
 
DANGERCLOSE said:
The big give away is when Jim white ask the question: When Ward and guehi lifted the cup at Wembley did you (textor) think there could be trouble ahead, his answer YES.

I think we will end up in the conference, we will appeal but i think things will stand IMO
Click to expand...
I honestly can’t believe that, whilst revelling in our cup victory at Wembley, he thought “ s***, there is trouble ahead”
 
ASCPFC said:
Ask Lyon and Botafogo how brilliant Textor's ambitions are. Presumably Molenbeek too but I haven't looked it up. Botafogo were literally calling for blood.
Click to expand...
Parish, and his Co owners should get a big Pat on the back, for getting some benefit from Textor, yet never letting him gain any sort of control. Can only hope Woody brings something extra time will tell. But Textor, is at the end of the day a predator , seeing everything as only assets, assets can be stripped in hard times. Not a situation any sports club should ever want to be in.
 
From memory the rules are not unfit for purpose (save as expressed below). They were brought in to curb something very worrying. They come in 4 layers, something like (I am guessing precision but you'll get the point).

1. Direct individual control e.g. majority shareholding in two clubs - No
2. Indirect control e.g. control through majority shareholding in vehicle companies (as in this case, but...) - No
3. Control through some provision in the club's or holding companies' constitutions - No
4. A. N. Other form of control/influence or perception of control e.g. shadow directorships - Hmm

The last wrap-up provision is supposed to allow discretion to cover stuff not thought about when the regs were made e.g. which clever clubs create to get round the regs. Importantly, they allow EUFA to exercise discretion to address the peril of multi club ownership.

My concern is they will bottle in and go for the arbitrary date for compliance, whether or not there is currently any actual conflict or even a perception of it. That would be where the rules are bollox.
 
Teddy Eagle said:
According to Google -

Evangelos Marinakis placed his Nottingham Forest shares into a blind trust on April 30, 2025, to comply with UEFA regulations regarding multi-club ownership. This was done in anticipation of Nottingham Forest potentially qualifying for the Champions League, as Marinakis also owns Olympiacos, who had already secured their place.
Click to expand...

So after the deadline then
 
'A suggestion from time is not the same as a decisive influence '

Textor's direct quote on the matter.

It's for UEFA to prove otherwise and substantiate with concrete evidence.
 
Right lads sat here over the weeks reading all this garbage and made up stuff.

Right the deadline for us was missed, The club and only the club, ours are to blame.

I have read that people on here working in fraud for a living and it's Forest and Lyons fault. We'll he's the fraud becouse how can he think the mess we are in is down to Forest buying a player from Botofogo for £10m going to help Lyon with there £0.5billion debt and save them. Strange and that deal was agreed a long time ago and didn't go through till after Botofogo eliminated from club world cup.

Think Lyon was actually going to buy 2 Forest players, Danilo and Turner so Lyon relegation lost Forest in actual fact them transfers.

Multi club ownership and disgrace goes hand in hand.
West Ham bid £34m for a young French striker in January, it was turned down and the striker went to his teams sister club ( Bournemouth) for £11m the week after. That's what needs looking into.

Our club should have done the paperwork on time.

I think Forest owners moan is more that he did his paperwork on time and at a total cost off around £100k ( £50k twice) once to beat the deadline and once to put it back in his name once Forest had bluffed there lines and bottled the Champions League spot.
So probably fairly he says why spend that money doing the legal stuff on time for a team to not do the paperwork and pay anything and get in.

If was our money spent we wouldn't be happy would we.

I dont know of a easy solution to this as Multi club ownership is getting bigger.
Should the teams involved in the ownership before the season starts agree on which team if any qualify for same comps actually takes the spot.

Everyone on the Palace board needs to held responsible if we get kicked out of Europe.

Wonder if at any board meetings it was discussed and what was said, manager wanted a cup run and believed in the team and rightly so. Why didn't the board believe in the team and look at the what ifs ? And actually take action , on time.
 
Also heard this Talksport interview.

On about voting rights and his having none.

That's not actually the issue, it's ownership thats the issue not voting rights, unreal , dont help us in the slightest does it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top