Wandy

If there was no evidence that could be used to link the Saudi state with piracy then I still dont understand what the problem would have been with saying that MBS had ultimate control? There's nothing in the test that says a state cant own a club is there? Anyway, yeah this takeover is dead. Will still be interesting to see if Ashley can sue for damages though. We have been shafted, and there is no reason why the spamming and various assaults on the PL's brand should not continue.

Wouldn't surprise me if the buyers have weaponised us just to get their deposit back. Once that is done, off into the sunset they go.

I dont understand the paragraph below? "If an arbitrator had ruled in Newcastle’s favour, the Saudis would have been required to go ahead with owner registration. This would have given the League the right to call Newcastle’s ownership to account over TV piracy by network beoutQ." If the arbitration decision went in the Saudis' favour, why would that then allow the PL to link them to piracy?

Just read it. So basically the PL tried to set a bear trap for the Saudis. No wonder they declined the independent arbitrator.

Penn comes in here with the attitude that we are all idiots for ever believing this deal was ever going to happen and mocks people for offering ideas as to what is going on. What Penn has failed to do on several occasions, is offer an opinion on why, if the deal was so clearly never going to happen, they think the PL has not rejected it outright. Fair enough. I'm not the defending the bastard, by the way. Just think that, unfortunately, he will probably proved to be right once again with regards to the current state of play.

Redbird capital though Good point. He was full of shit with that one.

What has he said that has actually been true that couldn't be achieved through guesswork? Doesnt really matter if he was just guessing though does it? At the end of the day that is all that anyone of has been doing. And are continuing to do. We are all basing our logic on scraps of information and our own personal bias of how we feel this will go.

People can slate Penn all they want but the simple fact is that he has been proved to be correct all the way through this nightmare. I remember scoffing to myself at a comment he made back in early May when he said that the deal wouldn't be done by June 1st. I am on board with the idea that this may yet still happen but I think we have to be realistic. The chances of that are about 5/95 against IMO. I am still in for the 5% because I simply have nothing to lose and this will probably be the last time I am fully invested in NUFC. I have already checked out of football in every other way. Not interested in the game at large whatsoever now and also not interested in any NUFC team news or transfer activity. The only thread I am now checking is this one and a couple of other takeover-related ones on other message boards.

Works for me.

Yeah but if the sinister reason that they have stalled it is because they dont want the Saudis full stop then this would hardly change that.

I'd love someone to explain how this will magically make the PL approve the deal.

Ashley wouldn't hesitate to destroy the Premier League and throw the entire English game into crisis in order to get his money. Go on Mike, show them that they have no idea how nasty you can be.

They've blocked me. The bloody buggers. Aye, they seem to be blocking quite a few people. I wonder if they will be contacting the Premier League to see what’s going on. The PL might be prepared to dig in and ride this out but their sponsors wont.

Just had a look. Superb.

F'kin tease

https://twitter.com/MoneyMikeAshley/status/1292407881090969606?s=20

I mean, if its true that Ashley has legitimate grounds for recourse, then it kind of makes sense why the buyers pulled out as there is no legal avenue that they can go down themselves so they were at a dead end. Also makes sense why Staveley has been cooing over Ashley despite him being a dick and altering the price. They now rely on him getting it through so they stepped aside to let him get on with it.

I just remembered that I actually have an old school friend who is a commercial lawyer. I messaged him and asked him if he thought there was a legal case that could be pursued. His response was that it was unlikely that the buyers could do anything but Ashley possibly could if 1) The PL in some way breached the rules of their test and 2) that the breach caused the seller to "suffer a detrement" because of the breach.

Anyway, what happened to those two young lawyers that were always piping up with positive noises back in the good old days of April & May? I need some straw clutching from someone in the legal field once again.

Sorry to bore you all - I’m bored. Take away your sarcasm and we are actually more on the same page than you make out. I myself am far from convinced that this will be resolved in a positive way for us but I am taking the silence as a positive and you appear to be taking the opposite view. Your unconvinced about the legal grounds - fair enough. But that doesnt mean that they aren't out there. One way or another, we will find out soon enough though.

I don’t even know what you’re arguing anymore. The PL is corrupt and actively stymied a bid by PIF as a favour to BeIn - that’s my opinion. It’s also my opinion that absolutely nothing anyone can and will change enough to enable PIF to take part in a consortium to buy NUFC. I’d love to be presented with strong arguments to change than opinion. Do you have them? And yeah, if you think that somehow Boris and Chi and Amanda and James and the Trust can make Richard Masters rubber stamp a PIF deal, then I comfortable with using the term fantasist. Fucking hell, this is tedious. For a start, you clearly didn't bother to read my post from a few pages ago whereby I clearly stated that all of the noise from us fans and MPs would count for nothing if there was no way this could be forced through by a legal process. You have stated that the PL have not adhered to the rules but you have no proof of this. Masters has consistently played on the idea that "there is no timescale" for the matter to be resolved, which basically makes a mockery of their O&D test rules as they clearly think they can bend the rules around when the various key parts of the test must be conducted. They have clearly planned to hide behind this to make the whole thing go away. PIF have not offciially walked away. Staveley herself has confirmed this. I can't prove you wrong that there is no case to be made. In the same way that you cannot prove wrong anyone who says that there definitely is. I'm not one of those people, by the way. I am on the fence with that and am simply willing to entertain the possibility that there is a way it can be forced through by legal means. A lot of words from a journalist that "say nothing". In other words just like pretty much every other journalist's take on this whole farce over the last 4 months. I can't tell of you of the legal route because I do not know how the law could be applied here. And neither do you.

I’ll keep playing, because I’m bored. I’m glad you noticed I’m being condescending - in fact, I was aiming for patronising as fuck, because I’ve selected you as representative of the fantasists on this board. Once again, no response to the argument. Or the facts. True to form, good on you Let’s do this slowly. You have accepted the rules I’m talking about. They should have made a decision according to those rules. Are we still together? They haven’t made a decision. Is that fact in doubt? No one has sued the PL (as yet). Unless that is not a fact, and you know something no one else does? No one has offered any legal argument of any strength that suggests there are grounds for anyone to sue the PL. I’m actually seeking facts in this case, because if they exist, I’d like to change my opinion. Now, are you going to play properly, or are you going to sook? In that tripe above you unwittingly just confirmed that your little theory about how the PL and buyers have conducted themselves in the last four months cannot be included in any list of facts. You stated it yourself. Known facts : They have not made a decision yet. Nobody knows why. No legal proceedings have taken place yet. Nobody knows why. The PIF issued a statement saying they intended to walk away but in actual fact have not yet done so officially. Nobody knows why. I responded to your argument by stating that you are merely guessing about the details in which the O&D test have been adhered to. Nobody knows how this has played out but many people have suggested that the PL have abused the rules of the test to get where we are. Everything, and I mean everything, is guesswork at the moment when it goes to working out how the negotiations have played out. Nobody has offered a legal argument to suggest that proceedings can be made against the PL in the same way that nobody has offered one to suggest that they cant. That's because, once again, nobody knows either way. People have relied on their information for this entire farce through journalists who claimed to have sources ITK. Well it's worth pointing out that some of those same journalists are now saying that the buyers believe they will have legal grounds to pursue this. It's entirely reasonable to think that this has not gone legal yet because the buyers would prefer to get this done through reasonably amicable negotiation. It's also possible that the buyers became aware at an early stage that the PL were not adhering to the rules and guidance of their own test but said nothing and played along in the hope that the outcome would be positive. Maybe, just maybe, they have been keeping a tally of all the rule bending in readiness for the legal route. That is not fantasy, it's just taking a different stance on what might have transpired and how things will now play out.

You’re perfectly correct to say that the rules say they should do this, and should do that. In fact, if that idiot above was paying attention, he’d notice that my arguments are generally fact-based, and when I’m presented with facts that are inconsistent, I adjust my opinion accordingly. You, yourself, convinced me of f.1.3 about ten pages ago - because I asked for your argument and you provided it. However, the string of facts I presented above are true, even if Wandy[/member] denies it. As you said, JB, the PL does have to provide an answer within five days. If they ask for more information from the consortium, it has to be provided within ten days - and then the five days starts again. The PL have not adhered to those rules. Wandy[/member] suggests that is not a fact. To which I say “How then do you reconcile rule F.1.2 and rule F.1.3 with the facts as we know them?” The consortium has not challenged the failure of the PL to make a decision. This is indeed an opinion - based on the information available. These pages are filled with people suggesting the consortium should sue the PL, Ashley should sue the PL, the Trust, even that goose with his private letter. And I ask you, what legal basis is there to challenge in this case? Who could bring action, and what type of action, and in which jurisdiction? And if someone can give an actual answer to that, I’d love to hear it. I’m actually hoping that all the optimists/fantasists are right, and that MBS is signing the cheque for Mbappe before the new season starts. So please, some real hope would actually be really appreciated. Not some fluffy, hopeful bullshit. The only facts that you have presented are what are the known rules and guidance of the PL's O&D test. That's it. Everything else you have stated is supposition, you condescending clown.

Why do I need to prove anything to you? It’s self evident. The PL doesn’t have to do anything. Why do they? Sure, the rules say they need to have an answer in five days (or ten, I can’t remember). They haven’t. Why not? Because there’s nothing to make them. From the reporting I’ve read, the impasse seems to be that the PL has requested that the consortium make amendments to their directors before they will approve the sale. PIF/KSA have declined to do so. If that scenario is correct, what exactly are they doing “wrong” by giving the consortium more time to make the required adjustments. In fact, you could even argue that the PL has done more than they needed to in giving them the opportunity to change their application. They should have rejected it, but they haven’t - see how fair they are being? (Just getting people ready for next week’s press) The PL has lots of rules it doesn’t enforce. Because no one makes them. Except, occasionally, commercial partners who ask for rules to be sort-of enforced. Maybe it’s just the first time some people have been victims of Qatari corruption. Me, I remember when the English FA... chose to vote for Qatar 2022 instead of Australia (despite private assurances). You need to prove it because you presented your opinion as if it were a known fact. Nothing is self evident here. Nobody has a clue what, if anything, is going on in the background. You suggesting that the PL have to do nothing from here on is nothing more than your own personal opinion. Mate, you’re kidding yourself. I notice you have not addressed my... thesis. Because you don’t have an argument. EDIT: Actually, I’ll play your stupid game, Rafa style. It’s a fact that the PL is obliged to provide a response to the O&D test within five days (PL rule f.1.3) Its a fact that they can request amendments that give the applicants ten days to get their directors list in order (PL rule f. 1.2). It’s a fact that they have not adhered to those rules as written - unless, for four months, there has been a 4-9-4-9 day bouncing between PL and PIF. It’s a fact that the consortium has not taken legal steps against the... improper processing of their application - at least, they have not announced it. I'm not kidding myself at all. If anyone is doing that it is you. Nobody knows how, if or when the PL have adhered to their little aet of rules. The only known "fact' is that the PIF have issued a statement saying they have pulled out, only for Staveley to then quickly say that the PIF will be straight back in if the PL give them the green light. All you are doing is presenting you own theory of what has happened and what will now happen, which you are perfectly entitled to do. But that theory is no more valid than that of those who are sitting on the optimistic side of the fence.

Why do I need to prove anything to you? It’s self evident. The PL doesn’t have to do anything. Why do they? Sure, the rules say they need to have an answer in five days (or ten, I can’t remember). They haven’t. Why not? Because there’s nothing to make them. From the reporting I’ve read, the impasse seems to be that the PL has requested that the consortium make amendments to their directors before they will approve the sale. PIF/KSA have declined to do so. If that scenario is correct, what exactly are they doing “wrong” by giving the consortium more time to make the required adjustments. In fact, you could even argue that the PL has done more than they needed to in giving them the opportunity to change their application. They should have rejected it, but they haven’t - see how fair they are being? (Just getting people ready for next week’s press) The PL has lots of rules it doesn’t enforce. Because no one makes them. Except, occasionally, commercial partners who ask for rules to be sort-of enforced. Maybe it’s just the first time some people have been victims of Qatari corruption. Me, I remember when the English FA... chose to vote for Qatar 2022 instead of Australia (despite private assurances). You need to prove it because you presented your opinion as if it were a known fact. Nothing is self evident here. Nobody has a clue what, if anything, is going on in the background. You suggesting that the PL have to do nothing from here on is nothing more than your own personal opinion.