Raconteur

Everything is subject to law. If the PIF/PCP/RB consortium don't agree with the Premier Leagues 'reasonable opinion' decision based on the evidence provided then I will be very surprised if they don't take it to court (after the appeal process has played out). Of course everything is subject to law. That doesn’t mean you can sue a corporation because they won’t let you join according to their properly constituted rules and by-laws. If they don't agree with the decision then of course they can take them to court. It happens all the time in business and industry across the world. You believe what you want to though. No need for the condescension - especially when you’ve made no attempt whatsoever to actually answer the question initially posed: on what basis do people think the consortium can sue the PL if the takeover is denied. As you so eloquently and intelligently said, everything is subject to law. So on what basis, in law, would the consortium have to sue the PL if they fail the O&D test? And even though you’re being a dick, I’ll give you a start. One basis might be that the consortium would sue on the grounds that the O&D test wasn’t properly applied - but that is a lunatic case, legally. The rules are malleable and it’s a great big “if”. So I don’t buy it. So, again, on what basis could the consortium sue the PL?

Everything is subject to law. If the PIF/PCP/RB consortium don't agree with the Premier Leagues 'reasonable opinion' decision based on the evidence provided then I will be very surprised if they don't take it to court (after the appeal process has played out). Of course everything is subject to law. That doesn’t mean you can sue a corporation because they won’t let you join according to their properly constituted rules and by-laws.

I’m curious to know why some people think the PIF/PCP/RB consortium will sue the Premier League if the takeover is denied. The PL can do virtually what they like as long as they keep to their flexible and malleable rules.

The number of countries who have murdered journalists is quite short - and the list of those who have dismembered journalists shorter still. Let's not piss on our legs and say it's raining.

I would have thought Amnesty International would be a more likely source of legal funding - and AI receive millions in contributions from people all over the world. They also have queues of lawyers wanting to work for them. I've no doubt there would be a decent number of people here who have or do donate to AI, so essentially those people are (probably) paying for the lady's letters...

The green is nice but I just can’t get behind patterns

That’s how I remember it - looked no better than Manquillo or Yedlin or Krafth as right wing back, but was quite sharp when pushed further forward.

I'm sorry Stifler, but there's some comments I'd lke to make here: Yes, they have the draft report, and it's a decent assumption that it won't be substantially different from the final report unless it's a preliminary report as opposed to a draft one. 1) The investigation was commissioned after the court case, because Qatar were unhappy with the ruling. 2) Different jurisdiction, different rules of evidence, different standards of culpability 3) A precedent in a foreign case doesn't have to have any bearing at all on the O & D test This is the whole issue, and I don't know how you can so glibly dismiss concerns when the King's son is neck deep in PIF and Saudi Arabia's campaign against Qatar. The link is there. The opportunity to reject it is there in the rules. I don't think they will, but that's because I'm deeply cynical as opposed to optimistic...

I absolutely was on the 100% bandwagon. The very first time I started to doubt was reading the Football Laws article (which ironically concluded it would go ahead in their opinion). The article suggested there is a very strong case to block it, but they ended with "we don't think they will". So I wake up expecting one day to be *the day*, but no, I'm not 100% anymore. Maybe 95.

You'd think Ashley would just offer him what he wants if it's not gonna be his problem in a few weeks. One last eight-year contract?

BeIn Sports (Qatar) own the rights to the PL in the Middle East. As part of an economic blockade of Qatar, Saudi Arabia banned broadcasts from Qatar into Saudi Arabia A TV station was set up, called BeOut Sports, that appeared to pirate BeIn’s PL broadcasts via a communications satellite provider ArabSat, broadcasting these into Saudi Arabia and beyond (including France) At issue is whether PIF (buying NUFC) is connected to BeOut and/or ArabSat. And how closely connected. And whether the fact the broadcasts have stopped matter. And lots of attendant issues. There’s a post a few pages back from someone called “Football Laws” that is quite thorough...

The O & D test isn’t a criminal trial, either. Their standards of evidence appear to be below that of civil matters. The whole remit of the WTO is to oversee international trade and ensure it is conducted fairly. They are absolutely the right body to investigate whether someone is breaking the rules of international trade. How independent they are is another question. In theory, they’re exactly as independent as the Security Council or the World Bank or the World Health Organisation...

That Arsenal top might be iconic but it's a bloody eyesore

Does this WTO report carry any clout in terms of whether they can reject the takeover based on what is said in it? Have a look at the twitter link I posted previous page as it gives an insight to this Just this second read it. I take it as the WTO report is nothing to worry about? You can only really go off what he was saying and he worked there 15 years so obviously knows the 'ins and out'. Thought this part was particularly interesting: Still a bit confusing as to what he's saying but I take it the WTO report means f*** all. If so, what the hell are they waiting for it for? Exactly, but more to the point in question can the Premier League use this report 'legally' anyway to knock back the takeover. 'Legally' there doesn't seem to be any requirement in the OD test for there to be an actual conviction or other ruling with legal status. In theory the PL could take into account any evidence that they deem to be appropriate, however, they'd have to be sure it's robust enough to stand up to legal challenge if they were to reject on that basis. Indeed - the Football Laws Twitter thread from a few pages ago seemed to suggest that the PL can refuse the deal based on nothing more evidentiary than feelings. It’s an exclusive club, and they’re not bound to let people in if they don’t want. I’m pretty sure they don’t have to disclose their reasons, or even what they considered. That’s not to say they will or won’t approve it. But I don’t think PIF suing the PL is any prospect if it doesn’t go through.

At least that was a tiny bit interesting, if unseemly...

Massive kudos

Pop that in an email to Amnesty and Richard Keys - they'll recant and we'll have new owners by weekend

Bowyer might have a nice suit and a pretty Pardew haircut, but he still looks like he’d stomp on your face for a giggle

Doesn’t he rent it out when he’s not using it? I’m sure I read that once...

Just because you say it over and over doesn’t make it true. The simplest and most obvious reason why it’s taking so long is because the PL instructed their legal department to prioritise restarting the league.

Right, but the presence of COVID and the halting of football had already started. If it was four weeks in and then football was cancelled etc I could understand. I think the delays are the consequence of a perfect (bad?) storm. You have a majority stake owner with question marks hanging over them, both in terms of human rights, but also their association (whether proven or otherwise) with piracy of the Premier League's product. You have to consider the legal permutations of rejecting them, the response of Man City's owners, the other 18 Premier League owners. Running parallel to all of that is Project Restart, players refusing to train/play, the TV contracts you have to renegotiate on the fly. I believe one of the lawyer's on Twitter said the league's legal department is very small. There are only so many hours in the day. I'm not for one minute saying the league have handled this well - they haven't. Sometimes no decision is worse than the wrong decision, and this is evidence of that. What I am saying is that it does not shock me it's taking a long time. Man Citys owners wont be a problem as the UAE is Saudi Arabia's ally, think you're confusing them with Qatar. Though I agree with the rest of what you are saying. Careful, you’ll have some fucker writing to the PL saying we’ll be in a position to influence Man City and they need to call the takeover off...

In regards to the last bit, how and why? He's #1 or #2. There is absolutely no denying it at this stage. Pretty comfortable putting CR7 after both real Ronaldo and Little Ronaldo. Longevity becomes an issue. I don’t care.

Would have enjoyed seeing Lothar Matthaeus commanding a Premiership midfield

Have to say it turned me around too

That Twitter account is about the thing that will be missed from the whole Ashley era. And those few months of HBA magic, I suppose