Palace potentially denied entry to Europa League?

Common Sense Club said:
Brilliant statement! It lets the world know how one-sided the process is and how people who know where the bodies are have influence. Well done Steve. Now, if the fat bloke has to attend the match make sure Turkish food is on the menu in the Direction suite.
Click to expand...

Drop some "staff" bacteria into his burger, the fat c***
 
The "damning evidence" we claimed to have that wasn't damning enough for CAS...once we have pursued all legal routes is there anything to prevent us exposing that evidence to the public?

I feel that if you're going to heavily imply that the system is corrupt then you have evidence to avoid litigation for such claims. And if they do, let's all see it.
 
Did you know that Elvis recorded 786 songs; one of which was featured on a Palace banner at Wembley. He has also, to date, sold over one billion records. Quite an achievement for someone who had no known affiliation to Crystal Palace!

Page 200 is tantalisingly closer. I can almost taste it! Let’s all stick together with this one.

BTW who remembers a Palace supporter, back in the seventies, daubing, “STICK TOGETHER PALACE” on the hallowed walls of Selhurst Park? It stayed there for months! Where art thou now graffiti prophet?
 
Part Time James said:
The "damning evidence" we claimed to have that wasn't damning enough for CAS...once we have pursued all legal routes is there anything to prevent us exposing that evidence to the public?

I feel that if you're going to heavily imply that the system is corrupt then you have evidence to avoid litigation for such claims. And if they do, let's all see it.
Click to expand...
Interesting that our Sports Minister, Stephanie Peacock, has been missing in action throughout despite the fact that her unique role includes sporting governance - she has been quite capable of speaking out along identical lines as Parish and sending a very chastening message to UEFA re: absence of consistency and preference towards the larger clubs. It is not as if we've all just woken up to the rat bag of unethical behaviours displayed by UEFA who have displayed an appetite for protecting THEIR lucrative business agenda whatever the cost....to the ethics of the game.
 
I feel I should now restate something I posted some time back. It has also been updated.

CPFC is definitely not in breach of any UEFA regulations relating to MCO, which means if any initial advice were offered to John Textor and David Blitzer by the club secretary, Christine Dowdeswell, it would be that no blind trust is necessary.

5.01 (a) only applies to clubs that are fully integrated and incorporated as MCO clubs, which clearly Palace is not.

5.01 (b) might only be relevant if Steve Parish held shares in other clubs, which he does not. As club chairman and CEO, he alone has overall managerial responsibility for Crystal Palace and only for Crystal Palace.

5.01 (c) (iv) has undoubtedly been the regulation that the CFCB believes that John Textor had some form of “… decisive influence in the decision-making of the club.” But neither his voting share, set at 25%, nor his managerial responsibilities, of which he had none, indicated this. Indeed, there has to be a reasonable threshold of probability that he did have a decisive influence, even in an ad hoc capacity, but there is none.

Now, this is where the rubber really hits the road: the extra three months UEFA granted to the CFCB should have been acted upon through their powers of scrutiny and investigation. In other words, they should not have merely waited for an issue to arise; their remit is to be actively looking into every club that has directors or legal entities in more than one club that comes under UEFA’s jurisdiction.

I do not believe the CFCB undertook any investigation from the 1st of March onwards. If they had, it would have resulted in extensive correspondence being generated and coming to light between Christine Dowdeswell, John Textor, David Blitzer, and the CFCB in clarifying the MCO status of Crystal Palace, which would have been cited at the disciplinary hearing and also at CAS. And if there is no evidence of any correspondence, then there is no evidence of any investigation having been undertaken by the CFCB; and if this is the case, then there is conclusive proof that UEFA has been wilfully negligent in their delegated responsibilities to the CFCB.

I twice emailed this to Christine Dowdeswell at info@cpfc.co.uk but got no response. More is the pity it wasn’t taken up, as it would have further damned CAS if they had thrown it out.
 
Jason Smith said:
I feel I should now restate something I posted some time back. It has also been updated.

CPFC is definitely not in breach of any UEFA regulations relating to MCO, which means if any initial advice were offered to John Textor and David Blitzer by the club secretary, Christine Dowdeswell, it would be that no blind trust is necessary.

5.01 (a) only applies to clubs that are fully integrated and incorporated as MCO clubs, which clearly Palace is not.

5.01 (b) might only be relevant if Steve Parish held shares in other clubs, which he does not. As club chairman and CEO, he alone has overall managerial responsibility for Crystal Palace and only for Crystal Palace.

5.01 (c) (iv) has undoubtedly been the regulation that the CFCB believes that John Textor had some form of “… decisive influence in the decision-making of the club.” But neither his voting share, set at 25%, nor his managerial responsibilities, of which he had none, indicated this. Indeed, there has to be a reasonable threshold of probability that he did have a decisive influence, even in an ad hoc capacity, but there is none.

Now, this is where the rubber really hits the road: the extra three months UEFA granted to the CFCB should have been acted upon through their powers of scrutiny and investigation. In other words, they should not have merely waited for an issue to arise; their remit is to be actively looking into every club that has directors or legal entities in more than one club that comes under UEFA’s jurisdiction.

I do not believe the CFCB undertook any investigation from the 1st of March onwards. If they had, it would have resulted in extensive correspondence being generated and coming to light between Christine Dowdeswell, John Textor, David Blitzer, and the CFCB in clarifying the MCO status of Crystal Palace, which would have been cited at the disciplinary hearing and also at CAS. And if there is no evidence of any correspondence, then there is no evidence of any investigation having been undertaken by the CFCB; and if this is the case, then there is conclusive proof that UEFA has been wilfully negligent in their delegated responsibilities to the CFCB.

I twice emailed this to Christine Dowdeswell at info@cpfc.co.uk but got no response. More is the pity it wasn’t taken up, as it would have further damned CAS if they had thrown it out.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately UEFA have defined what they treat as “decisive influence” in an addendum to their rules. It’s precise, doesn’t match what we all think it means, but it’s there in black and white. Common sense ought to have intervened to replace authoritarianism but it didn’t.
 
It seems for all the pages on this topic, Textor just having shares over the threshold amount was enough on its own to ban us. All the other components such as dates and voting etc were deemed irrelevant. Can't we just enjoy the conference,

I theory then, any Premier League club has the potential to win the FA Cup so was every Premier League club asked if they were compliant with the new regulations with a "yes" or "no" answer or having to give details of why they don't believe they are applicable. Had an answer been requested (follow up email) then Palace would have learned that there was a problem before the deadline and been able to fix it. To send an email to a general email address without confirmation of receipt or read is not good enough. I expect this will be changed next year quietly.
 
Jason Smith said:
I feel I should now restate something I posted some time back. It has also been updated.

CPFC is definitely not in breach of any UEFA regulations relating to MCO, which means if any initial advice were offered to John Textor and David Blitzer by the club secretary, Christine Dowdeswell, it would be that no blind trust is necessary.

5.01 (a) only applies to clubs that are fully integrated and incorporated as MCO clubs, which clearly Palace is not.

5.01 (b) might only be relevant if Steve Parish held shares in other clubs, which he does not. As club chairman and CEO, he alone has overall managerial responsibility for Crystal Palace and only for Crystal Palace.

5.01 (c) (iv) has undoubtedly been the regulation that the CFCB believes that John Textor had some form of “… decisive influence in the decision-making of the club.” But neither his voting share, set at 25%, nor his managerial responsibilities, of which he had none, indicated this. Indeed, there has to be a reasonable threshold of probability that he did have a decisive influence, even in an ad hoc capacity, but there is none.

Now, this is where the rubber really hits the road: the extra three months UEFA granted to the CFCB should have been acted upon through their powers of scrutiny and investigation. In other words, they should not have merely waited for an issue to arise; their remit is to be actively looking into every club that has directors or legal entities in more than one club that comes under UEFA’s jurisdiction.

I do not believe the CFCB undertook any investigation from the 1st of March onwards. If they had, it would have resulted in extensive correspondence being generated and coming to light between Christine Dowdeswell, John Textor, David Blitzer, and the CFCB in clarifying the MCO status of Crystal Palace, which would have been cited at the disciplinary hearing and also at CAS. And if there is no evidence of any correspondence, then there is no evidence of any investigation having been undertaken by the CFCB; and if this is the case, then there is conclusive proof that UEFA has been wilfully negligent in their delegated responsibilities to the CFCB.

I twice emailed this to Christine Dowdeswell at info@cpfc.co.uk but got no response. More is the pity it wasn’t taken up, as it would have further damned CAS if they had thrown it out.
Click to expand...

Clearly heartfelt, and I'm not unsympathetic despite some wild accusations being aimed at everyone but the people that actually cocked it all up for you, but I think I may have spotted your problem....

I'd have picked an email address that your club can be bothered to monitor myself. Certainly not the very one that UEFA mailed the rules to, after Palace told them to use it, and then Palace ignored it.


1000022572.webp
 
Last edited:
Wisbech Eagle said:
Unfortunately UEFA have defined what they treat as “decisive influence” in an addendum to their rules. It’s precise, doesn’t match what we all think it means, but it’s there in black and white. Common sense ought to have intervened to replace authoritarianism but it didn’t.
Click to expand...
what does this addendum say? Please post it.
 
I have been thinking about our statement, which I feel is a masterpiece of pointed, unarguable facts, delivered in a tone and manner which avoids any legal consequences. Brilliant work.

Lawyers don’t ask questions they don’t already know the answer to. In the same way they don’t request to see documents that don’t exist. So they must know that they do, and have either been given copies or been told what they say. We know Parish is on good terms with Ceferin the UEFA chairman. We know that it has been claimed there was some sympathy for our position within UEFA and reports of rival factions. It’s not a big stretch to imagine leaked documents finding their way to us in such circumstances.

I know this is only a hypothesis but if we requested disclosure and were refused, but know that a court seeing them would reach different conclusions, then we might seek to go to court, where disclosure is mandatory. Refuse there, we show the Judge our copy, and they have committed perjury.
 
PatrickA said:
From Today's Independent.
Forest's legal team were allowed to cross examine Parish on the control issue.
Very odd. Was Textor feeding them the info? How would they know the workings of our club?
I make no bones about it.
It's the Forest owner who has engineered our demotion with a complicit UEFA.

View attachment 1705
Click to expand...
I dont believe Forest would have been given any permission to cross ex Parish. Palace were not on trial. If anyone was it was UEFA
 
HughReds said:
Clearly heartfelt, and I'm not unsympathetic despite some wild accusations being aimed at everyone but the people that actually cocked it all up for you, but I think I may have spotted your problem....

I'd have picked an email address that your club can be bothered to monitor myself. Certainly not the very one that UEFA mailed the rules to, after Palace told them to use it, and then Palace ignored it.


View attachment 1708
Click to expand...
What “wild accusations” are you referring to?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top