Joey Linton

1 minute ago, Abacus said:

I thought we'd agreed there was a perfectly valid reason to delay those accounts?

There is. 

From the Premier League's perspective there's a perfectly valid reason to not hold the arbitration in public. 

1 minute ago, Scotty66 said:

Surely the PL would want to prove their squeeky clean image?

They want to win the case. Simple as that. Everything else is secondary. 

1 minute ago, Northerngimp said:

They never will so it highlights how underhanded they have been, if they had football and its fans as their main focus they would be open about it. 

 

I get the feeling their is going to be some serious dirt filtering out in the next few months. 

They never will because it's not in their interests to do it. Which is common sense really. Don't think we can draw conclusions from it at this stage. They were never going to say yes. 

Just now, Northerngimp said:

 

Putting the Premier League under a bit of pressure from the media. 

No, i mean why would the Premier League ever say "yeah ok" to something in which they are effectively a defendant? 

I get why the club might want it done in public, but can anyone explain why the Premier league would ever go for that? 

5 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said:

 

Fuck off with your shit crackpot ideas built on Alex’s personal dreams and get shit done.

Does @Gregstill post on here? 

2 minutes ago, PlymouthGeordie said:

 

I think it means the opposite. Basically puts pressure on the PL to make it public. If they don't, it indicates they may well be hiding something.

There's no pressure. If they say no then that's the end of the discussion. The rules dictate its carried out in private.

3 minutes ago, nbthree3 said:

https://www.nufc.co.uk/news/latest-news/club-statement-010721/

 

The Club continues to receive requests for updates on its current arbitration claim against the Premier League (‘EPL’) considering the lawfulness of the EPL’s decisions regarding the proposed takeover of the Club involving the PIF.

Unfortunately, the Club is unable to make any comment about the arbitration. The EPL Rules provide the entire arbitration process is confidential.

However, both parties can agree for it to be in public. The Club believes it should be.

The issues at stake, including the lawfulness of the EPL’s decision making process and the widely publicised alleged influence of the EPL’s commercial partners on the EPL’s decisions, are of far wider interest to other football clubs, fans and the public in general.

The recent attempted breakaway by some EPL clubs - and the reaction of the government and public to it - has again highlighted the need for transparency and fairness in football governance. Gone are the days when important decisions that affect clubs and their fans should be made secretly, behind closed doors and away from the public eye.

The Club has nothing to hide with respect to the arbitration and invites the EPL to agree that it should no longer be held behind closed doors. If the EPL has acted lawfully and properly, it should have no reason to be afraid of the public spotlight.

To date the EPL has strongly resisted any public scrutiny of its decision-making process. It tried, and failed, to prevent the High Court’s judgment about elements of the arbitration being published last February. It is currently attempting to prevent the competition courts considering a claim by the Club’s sellers from taking place in public, arguing that too should be held in confidential arbitration.

So the Club has invited the EPL to agree - as the claim raises such important issues of sports governance, transparency and openness - that it should be held in public. The Club is prepared for every stage of the process to be in public: the public should be able to see the parties’ evidence and arguments as well as the full decision of the Tribunal when it is made.

The government quite rightly threatened to intervene in reaction to the proposed breakaway from the EPL earlier this year, and the reaction of football fans and the wider public was instrumental in stopping the emergence of the European Super League (ESL).

If the EPL continues to insist that the Club’s claim must be determined behind closed doors, the Club asks that MPs, the government, the media and the general public call on the EPL to finally accept public scrutiny of its decision-making process.

Strange statement to make. 

44 minutes ago, Ankles Bennett said:

and you are missing the point that by challenging the appointment of Beloff they ensured that he will have to be completely impartial.  Any hint of illegally favouring the EPL case will be grounds to have that decision overturned on appeal 

You probably need to read what the judge actually said about the challenge. He said there were absolutely no concerns about the appointment, so in reality they've "ensured" nothing. His position is one of complete impartiality according to the judge. 

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/newcastle-united-loses-bid-to-have-top-lawyer-recused-from-arbitration/5107720.article

7 minutes ago, et tu brute said:

See Rafa in his interview mentioned just about everywhere he’s been apart from us 

It's still too raw for him to talk about. 

19 minutes ago, LFEE said:

He didn’t go that far.

He did like. 

2 minutes ago, nbthree3 said:

5/7 isn't the date, I think it's the type of case it deals with

Don't say that, the Chronicle will already be halfway through writing their article.

7 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

He's not delaying them this year though, he's changing them. 

 

And they were always filed by April/May time until last year when they were early June. 

 

So slight difference in approach

Pretty sure I remember that being a Covid thing, that everyone could do? 

Maybe the Trust could ask why it's been done. 

4 minutes ago, Wullie said:

England going to a back three tomorrow apparently.

Fine as long as he allows the full backs to attack and doesn't play two sitting in front of the three. 

Pogba seriously carrying the can on itv here. Centre backs were absolutely dreadful. 

Just now, Unbelievable said:

What was that fourth official doing FFS?

No celebrating lads. 

3 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

Moving it from June to July has no impact on this. 

1st July to 30 June includes all 38 games of the 2020/21 season already, you'd need to move it to August to have any of 2021/22 included. 

 

Even then you would only show a proportion of the income anyway, if you assume you get £38m for the season that's £1m a game so you would only have £1m x the number of games before your year end. It wouldn't be worth it

Are these not the 19/20 season accounts? The season that finished in the July? 

11 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

He's have 8 months to do it if this was just to change the filing date. 

 

Although it's easy to change the date, you don't do it without a reason. If nothing else the timing is odd

Is it not likely just to get the full 38 game season included? 

3 minutes ago, Abacus said:

 

It shouldn't do, no.

 

In theory, it could be more complex, because sometimes a transaction price is based on unaudited numbers and projections, and can then flex based on actuals or revised forecasts, and that flexing would be built into any agreement.

 

You often also want to know if there are any hidden liabilities that could creep out of the woodwork, so you give yourself some price flex for that too -i.e. you can go back and recoup some of what you've paid.

 

But that's just general stuff. It's likely totally irrelevant to changing the accounting period, because, as I say, that doesn't change your underlying business. 

 

One thing it does do, is change when you have to file your accounts with Companies House. There are plenty of valid reasons to do that as well, as I say.

Thanks again. 

2 minutes ago, Stifler said:

Ashley does it year in year out with all of his businesses, NUFC included, it has nothing to do with any proposed takeover.

The club accounts have been done up to the end of June for the least 15 year so it's hardly year in year out changes for NUFC.