Jackie Broon

The club didn't need to be 'offered' arbitration by the PL, it is their right under the PL's rules if they have any dispute with the PL to take that dispute to arbitration. However, the club probably wanted a decision that they could appeal rather than the longer more complex process of arbitration. The PL refused to actually make a decision, despite saying that they would in their provisional conclusion letter of 12th June 2020 that is published in the High Court judgement. That looks much more damning for the PL.

He's been shown to be wrong on virtually everything verifiable he has said about the clubs CAT case since it was made public. He said it would take 6-8 weeks at the start and would be a public case conference within a few weeks, that was back in May. He might not have factored in the jurisdiction challenge in that, but when that came he said he knew the PL would do that. When there were rumours about the jurisdiction challenge being unsuccessful he first said he wasn't allowed to speak about it, then said the the PL had 'failed to get the case thrown out' and that a decision is only published if they had succeeded. Not long after the CAT agreed an extension and seemingly confirmed that there would be a jurisdiction hearing, proving that he was wrong. He's still claiming that the PL has 'failed to get the case thrown out' and that the case will go ahead in August, which cannot be correct given that the jurisdiction hearing isn't even listed yet and every other jurisdiction challenge I've found on the CAT site has taken at least a month after the hearing to get a decision. He clearly doesn't have a clue what is actually going on in the case, less of a clue than anyone with internet access and the ability to read.

They didn't start the current CAT case, it's a separate case brought by the club. The fact that they say they have received no remuneration, despite passing all of their work to the club's legal team, indicates that they have had vary little influence over the club's case. I think that Keith is massively exaggerating how involved they have been in the club's case and what they know.

And subject to that happening by 30th June 2020, the PL procrastinated so long that the contract expired.

I'm discussing their actions in relation to the PL blocking us from being taken over. That is separate, irrelevant and, whilst laudable, is a pipe dream that if successful will result in nothing more than tokenism IMHO.

If there is no other accountability, all the more reason to ask difficult questions and publicly hold them to account. NUST had the opportunity to do that and instead accepted Master's responses and said the ball is in the consortium's court. That took all momentum out of the pressure on the PL at that time.

Verbally, yes. Their response to him was weak and deferential, they just accepted his responses and said 'over to the consortium'. That took the pressure off the PL when there was significant pressure building against them.

Barely saw a single police officer at Wembley for the final. What a bunch of fucking pusillanimous cunts the PL is run by, calling the police in to protect them from a few dozen peaceful protesters trying to deliver a letter.

I agree, my work involves reading a lot of legislation and policy, and court judgements interpreting that. Judges do get it wrong sometimes though, I see a few a judgements that I really don't agree with, and its not that unusual for interpretations to go one way in the High Court another way in the Court of Appeal and even back again at the Supreme Court. Such interpretations are usually subjective, although judges are very skilled at delivering them with a veneer of objectivity.

“It does occur to me that with EFLs permission I could respond by saying that my advice did not iscuss (sic) the meaning of the defiitionsin hre (sic) rules of person’’dire tor’or control’. (sic) The cklub (sic) would have to-asnd (sic) might not-take my word for it,amnd (sic) would say that without the advice they could not be confident that this was so” The Honourable Michael J Beloff QC

She avoided it because their public position is that they are out.

What a fucking cunt Simon Jordan is. And he's completely wrong, the PL board don't need to change the rules, they can decide within the rules to have a public arbitration process if everyone agrees, they are the only party not agreeing to that. And this idea that it's not within the remit of the government, everything is within the remit of government. Even if they don't have immediate powers to make the PL board agree to a public process, the government could threaten legislation to take the O&D test process away from the PL if it does not act reasonably, just like they did with the ESL clubs to stop them.

Unfortunately the PL's rules give them that right, the definition of 'control' in the PL's rules is very broad and, unlike the legal definition of a shadow director, can include people who have the potential to control the club whether or not they will actually act on that.

That's a big change in position from him.

I'm one of the more positive posters on here when it comes to the takeover, but I'm not delusionally so. Keith is clearly making out he knows more than he does and feeding people false hope about the CAT concluding soon. The jurisdiction hearing isn't even listed yet and, going by other cases, I doubt we'll even have decision on that this year, let alone the whole case. Although I'm very confident that we'll win the CAT case, PIF will probably be gone by the time it concludes. It all hangs on the arbitration.

A fictitious further extension that there's absolutely no indication the PL have applied for is understood not to have been given. Great news!

"I am satisfied that the requested short extension of seven days will not prejudice the listing of the hearing of the Jurisdiction Application" There will be a hearing before any decision on the jurisdiction challenge, that is likely to be months away, might not even be this year.

I don't think there even needs to be that, I think the O&D test is fundamentally anti-competitive in itself. The PL is imposing controls of entry to a closed market of competing business without, as far as I'm aware, a legislative basis to give them the exemption from competition law to do that.

I'd love to be excited about it, it might be the first time in my life that a football team I 'support' wins something. I'm just not.

Nah, just a significant enough minority to colour my view.

I just associate England fans so strongly with brexit, bigotry and Boris.

This is why I just can't bring myself to get excited about England any more. Don't give a shit whether they win or lose tonight.

Coincidentally G-WLKR is operated by the same company as Ashley's plane, Air Charter Scotland.