You were up until 3.30 looking for it? That's not the point though, is it? You said the Prem re-wrote their rules to allow Liverpool through. Do we need to re post the quote? You were very, very certain about it. And as the quoted article from Wiki makes abundantly clear is that the only reason liverpool got special dispensation ( that nobody denied ) was because the FA , not the Prem, went against the only written rule and precedent on the subject and expected UEFA to put Liverpool through anyway. Bearing in mind what happened to Zaragoza, who were subject to the same unwritten rule under the Spanish FA that we had, its fairer to say that you were made the special case, and you then went on to not do a lot with that gift, sadly.
No. So you’re not disputing that Special Dispensation FC got a Special Dispensation in order to get their place then? Fine. So what the **** did you spend hours arguing over yer daft Kopite twat? Me stating that the rules were altered to allow you that Special Dispensation? Well they were by default weren’t they ffs and UEFA made it mandatory afterwards in case it ever happened again.
"A bit like your lot in 2005 then? When the PL rules were literally changed to allow you lot in." So you literally made that up. But as to above, I missed this last night - can you say how we 'Went into administration by proxy'? Is this one of those quasi-legal bogus claims you reach for? Or is this another 'literally' made-up fact? Liverpool were one day from Admin. I do recall you under the old 606 (Lettuce?) bombarding us with your legal expertise then that the sale couldn't ever go through because the injunction taken out by Hicks in Texas had jurisdiction over the London High Court because Hicks lived in Texas. That 'literally' wasn't the case, was it? Better Call Tobes, ffs.
You 'literally' said that the Prem 'literally' changed the rules to allow us special dispensation. They patently didn't. And UEFA changed no rules to give us special dispensation - they gave us special dispensation because our own FA (not Prem) had ignored the only written rule on the subject by UEFA. They then did change the rule - but not for our benefit, as you are now fully aware, but so that in future seasons a bent and corrupt FA wouldn't be allowed to get away with such flagrant favouritism again.
Took you long enough to take that bait You were literally taken over by your major creditors. The Bank ran the football club. You were in administration in all but name. They then squeezed H&G’s balls by forcing them to accept a below market value price for their equity, with the threat of making that administration formal. It was as bent as a nine bob.
But billions of innocent people are dying as we speak. It's insensitive of even talking about these things at these times. Oh, unless you're on the internet 24/7 calling for the league to be null and voided.
Yeah so Special Dispensation FC getting a Special UEFA Dispensation to play in the CL was in fact a sinister FA plot to penalise dem red men. What happened was that you didn’t qualify and the FA refused to change the PL qualification places to take account of your failure and therefore punish us for it. So you got made a ‘Special case’ and brought about a rule change. As the UEFA edict wasn’t a rule, hence the reason they didn’t force the FA to put you through at our expense, as they couldn’t.
Yes, I know exactly what RBS did to H&G (legally), and I remember your desperate disappointment at the time that Liverpool were not forced to take on all their debts in total (even those not relating to the loans taken out on the club), but you still haven't explained that 'Administration by proxy' term. You didn't make it up, did you? I mean literally make it up? And btw, H&G didn't accept the price (not Hicks anyway) and was still trying to sue RBS years after (he got nowhere, of course, and as I said to you at the time, RBS had indemnified NESV (as were), so he couldn't sue them either). You weren't legally advising him at time, were you?
You got to socially distance yourself from that muppet Astro bro. He's like the Lennie Small of Not606 constantly retelling dreams about rabbits that don't exist
Oh but it was (every bit more so than any Prem/FA rule that you couldn't find because they didn't exist): the rule was that participating FA's had the undertaking from UEFA that they were able to put the CL winners into the CL above the fourth placed team without any comeback, as the FA referred to themselves the year before. It was the only written rule on the subject. That the FA would be so bone-headed against all expectations and precedents (including their own from the year before) was why UEFA had the ensure that rule was never ignored again.
Yeah major creditors taking over the running of football clubs is common place, happens all the time. Oh wait.
So is this that 'Administration by proxy' to which you refer? I have got one lawyer in the family sitting on her arse doing nothing at the moment: I'll ask her - if she's not sunbathing or playing online bingo again.
That’s absolute bollocks. As if it was a RULE then the FA couldn’t have merely chosen to not follow it, and UEFA would have simply rejected the FA entering us instead of the RS for the CL places. The clause was there to allow FA’s to chose to alter their nominations should that scenario occur. Only our FA chose not to, and quite right to, as the PL qualification route for that season was for top 4, and not top 4 *subject to an English team winning the CL and being too ****e to actually qualify*. Given it was us as well, as if the FA could have excluded us, who’d qualified for the first time in 16 years, having seen our previous 2 title winning seasons rewarded with exclusion, also as a result of the residents of Castle Greyskull.
Champions League Regulation 1.03 then in force:[2] At the request of the national association concerned, the UEFA Champions League title holders may be entered for this competition, as an additional representative of that association, if they have not qualified for the UEFA Champions League via the top domestic league championship. If, in such a case, the title holders come from an association entitled to enter four teams for the UEFA Champions League, the fourth-placed club in the top domestic league championship has to be entered for the UEFA Cup. Not sure how much a difference there is between a rule and a regulation (especially as we're now throwing pedantry accusations about when you're wickedly being quoted on what you have said) , but it was the only rule/regulation in force at the time of the situation that had a bearing on the subject, and was referred to the year before on the FA's own website in relation to the Chelsea/Arsenal situation. Perhaps pedantically.
