Takeover (Covid-19/20)

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Geordieginola said:
So we have a date for ARB. 3rd Jan I think.

And a week for it to fall in favour of the PL because behind closed doors and with an ex PL employee as the lead judge, how can that be impartial.

It’s the whole reason for CAT. To expose the lies and prove the fact that the PL deliberately, under heavy external influence, demanded that KSA be a director to then fail the O & D test.
Click to expand...

What we think we know

Arbitration is 3 jan. It is expected to last 1 week. The owners and directors named have no issues passing it/have already passed it?
If Arbitration falls on club side - deal will complete pretty much there and then allowing new owners most of winter window to operate.
The PL feel everything will be sorted at Arbitration and therefore don't see the need for CAT case to run alongside.

Oh and in shock news Mike Ashley is the owner of NUFC and someone has a small d and someone else has a big d
 
  • Like
Reactions: Munson. and Prince Isak (GG)
magdad said:
Also lets not forget - the PL made it perfectly clear they were only prepared to have arbitration regarding the point of separation. They do not want any of the other accusations coming out today.
Click to expand...
On the point of separation. Which is under ARB obviously. How does ARB even begin to prove that KSA should be a director?

PIF is for the public and country. MBS is chairman but the assumption is that because of control of PIF he and all the others would be tested under the O & D test and of course that will fail.

The PL are just trying to be clever in stating that ARB will resolve it and CAT isn’t needed but we all know why the PL want the ARB.

Legal **** is real **** isn’t it!
 
magdad said:
What we think we know

Arbitration is 3 jan. It is expected to last 1 week. The owners and directors named have no issues passing it/have already passed it?
If Arbitration falls on club side - deal will complete pretty much there and then allowing new owners most of winter window to operate.
The PL feel everything will be sorted at Arbitration and therefore don't see the need for CAT case to run alongside.

Oh and in shock news Mike Ashley is the owner of NUFC and someone has a small d and someone else has a big d
Click to expand...
But we know for a fact that ARB will not be a fair hearing. That it’s behind closed doors.

MA one of the most corrupt owners in our game is willing to throw the cards on the table but the PL don’t want that. You have to ask why.

Why don’t the CAT insist that if they accept the case to close and that ARB is a mirror image then the condition is the ARB is held in the public domain.

The PL will say but we can’t. Our own rules say so. Ha ha ha ha ha
 
Its like saying any company in the UK that gets a Royal Seal of Approval should have the Queen named as a director. After all she has indirectly influenced consumers by giving it her Royal Seal.
 
Another point then. Wonder why PIF didn’t want KSA as a director! Why do the PL want that.

That has to be the key question here.

I would be inclined to ask if KSA is named as a director: what are the consequences?
 
They've already confirmed details will be made public

All we need is them to ssy its going ahead and it's won
 
An interesting point that may have been missed. At the start of that application. Adam Lewis said that the PIF had pulled out on the grounds of separation either until the EPL changed their mind or tribunal was heard. Almost as if, well if Tribunal doesn't fall in favour they may name state as a director.
 
magdad said:
An interesting point that may have been missed. At the start of that application. Adam Lewis said that the PIF had pulled out on the grounds of separation either until the EPL changed their mind or tribunal was heard. Almost as if, well if Tribunal doesn't fall in favour they may name state as a director.
Click to expand...
Not sure. But I’m interested to know why they wouldn’t want that and what the consequences are?

So the PL have an automatic reason to fail the test OFC!
 
In my view the PL QC is doing a pretty ****ing good job of ****ing their separation argument up.

He has clearly taken 2 hours to explain Mike Ashley own MASH, MASH owns SJH, SJH owns NUFCLtd, NUFC ltd owns NUFC. He then argued that just because of legally separate entities that shouldn't stop Mike Ashley following the rules of the FA.

Okay so on the flip side.

KSA owns PIF owns NUFK joins consortium who owns NUFC .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Prince Isak (GG) and Flash
Geordieginola said:
ARB is behind closed doors isn’t it!
Click to expand...


It doesn't matter the entire point of this is about ensuring the gamble of arbitration never comes around.

I've been trying to say this for months and months.

I could be wrong but I ain't changing now.

The premier league will be happy to gamble on arbitration if its all a secret... If cats public they lose that security
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flash
Roy Munson said:
It doesn't matter the entire point of this is about ensuring the gamble of arbitration never comes around.

I've been trying to say this for months and months.

I could be wrong but I ain't changing now.

The premier league will be happy to gamble on arbitration if its all a secret... If cats public they lose that security
Click to expand...
Well your quite right. But if CAT goes ahead it’s public end of.

That chap for the PL is a grade a reknaw.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back