Teasy

Ironically had Labour been in power the deal would likely be dead and massive potential investment in our area along with it. Would made no difference The government stance would have been very different towards this situation.

Ironically had Labour been in power the deal would likely be dead and massive potential investment in our area along with it.

What happened to that letter sent by 20 MPs btw? Reported a week or so ago I think, never saw anything more about it.

SNP FFS

I was tempted to look but I'm just not giving him clicks now like.

There's fuck all ITK in Penn's posts like and he gets abuse for the way he goes on in general. Other posters are negative, to varying degrees, on the takeover but don't get abuse.

Hammered legally is one thing, I don't know about that. But when you're dealing with big money and large companies there can always be legal challenges. Something like the owners/directors test could be challenged, especially if it's seen that they haven't stuck to the rules or their own test. Other Football related rules that aren't law have stuck for a long time before falling to legal cases. like freedom of movement for out of contract players way back. Also financial rules that leagues or body's have placed on clubs have been taken to court in the past. Not sure people are saying it's a guaranteed win, but the buyers and sellers could certainly give it a good go I'm sure.

More like he hasn't got the stones to see the replies so only comes back once he's sure everyone has stopped calling him a freak

He's one bizarre weirdo like

Haha aye, as everyone knows that's how the law works ?. I know Edwards is only reporting this and it was actually written by some special lad at the Telegraph. But to even report it as fact is bad enough, the guy needs help.

Of course they could challenge. The idea that Qatar's belief or claim of guilt would somehow bar a challenge is the logic of an absolute mong.

No chance if the PL reject it. Back to Ashley. I think there would be a very good chance of a legal challenge. Potentially from both buyers and Ashley. This is a unique situation so I wouldn't be surprised if it ended in court. Another thing the PL will be considering. Because if their is a case and the PL lose, that would set a precedent that could effectively end the owners and directors test outside of the basic tests requires by UK law.

Thought the premier league didn’t announce anything ? I think they will on this one, it's so high profile. I reckon they've already rejected it. You wouldn't be having all this stuff coming out like confetti by BEIN and Qatar if that was the case. They are obviously shitting themselves by the amount of stuff coming out. Ahh sorry, my prediction is that they've rejected it in the last day or two, not previously. Should probably just say "I reckon they're gonna reject it". The last day or two is when Qatar have really lost the plot. Releasing statements about refunds and that they won't bid for another TV deal if it passes and getting a QC to send a opinion to the PL that the takeover should be rejected. It does seem like Qatar have gone from quietly working in the background to get the takeover cancelled to desperate public flailing in the last day or two. I don't want to assume anything, but it doesn't look like the actions of someone confident things are going their way.

Yeah that's how I read it.

From that FootballLaw article: If Qatar are basing the opinion on this report it certainly is desperate The opinion of a slik > a solicitor on twitter, although I'm sure PIF have Queen's Counsel giving exactly the opposite opinion. It's not from Twitter, it's from the FootballLaw website, its written by a Barrister with experience in sports law. I'm sure other opinions can be found, I'm just saying that reading him go through the report in that article it's hard to see what in their is against the tests.

From that FootballLaw article: If Qatar are basing the opinion on this report it certainly is desperate

It really doesn't, it points to multiple possibilities. For instance waiting for the report to be public so that everyone can see it's not a reason to stop the deal before they go ahead and give it the go ahead. Or they received only parts of the report from Qatar and were waiting to judge the full report in its entirety. Or they merely used the release to delay for more time to decide and/or hope for less scrutiny once the season restarted. Or there's your theory that they've used it to delay while they look for other reasons to reject the deal. I'm sure theirs even more possibilities.

How the fuck does a dentist know so much.... Whether he knows anything or not, you can bet they will be behind it. As Wandy said, it's worth throwing in there for them as it does give the PL an out to reject the Saudi bid. "Look there's plenty of interest in NUFC, if we reject this bid, you can easily sell to someone else!" I doubt the Premier League give a shite about NUFC or Ashley so I don't see why they'd need any excuse for them. The only outs they need are for Qatar or the Saudis if they reject or accept and one or the other sues, and this does nothing for that.

Yep, the WTO report was nothing like they claimed and now embarrassing for them. So they've done a quick sweep under the rug with that and moved on to some other bullshit as fast as possible.

Course it is, wouldn't surprise me if the guy didn't even exist. Pull his mask off and it's fat Mike.

PL test hasn't failed yet like, and still might not.

So why do you think someone would outbid a deal that has failed due to PL tests? Its just typical paper nonsense.

Lance Percival from the Carry On films?

The report certainly never claims that the Saudi government were behind the piracy. They sat they didn't do enough to stop it and didn't allow Qatar to challenge it in court. Perhaps you can say that makes them complicit. But that's nowhere near the same thing as saying they are actually behind the piracy, as in they themselves pirated the streams. I mean I haven't seen Look North myself. But if it is saying that the WTO report claims the Saudi government are behind the piracy, well I don't see that quotes anywhere from the WTO report.

"The World Trade Organisation has ruled that Saudi Arabia was behind a pirate satellite TV and streaming service that illegally broadcast sporting events" But they haven't though, have they? They've established that Saudi Arabia didn't do enough to stop it, not that SA was behind the illegal broadcasts. The same people would be complaining if the Saudis had caught those behind beoutQ and chopped their arms off (or whatever they do to pirates over there). Can't win. but the premier league wouldn't give half a s*** and would have rubber stamped the takeover months ago You don’t want this takeover to go through do you, now you’re straw clutching. quite frankly I would rather almost anyone else be trying to buy the club preferably someone without one of the worst human rights records in the world Careful now with that sensible opinion. Sensible? To see the club destroyed for 12 years and then think "whey I'm not sure I like these new owners lets wait it out and see if better come along". It's obviously a very sensible opinion. In a rational world people dying due to a horrendous regime "should" be more important than a football club. However, sport and football especially is tribal and is more important than anything else to a lot of people so it is also understandable that people will care more about that than human rights issues in a faraway country From my perspective the club isn't worth supporting under Mike Ashley. That's why I don't see it as a option to take or leave any change of ownership. If I could choose the owners, I'd choose just Stavely and the Ruebens alone, even if it meant a club that wasn't super rich and just slowly built competitively, but I can't choose. I'm not going to entertain the fantasy that we can just turn down a takeover and along will come another.