Ameritoon Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 I think the beIN intervention is likely the death knell for the deal. It gives the Premier League the economic rationale to reject it, in addition to the political cover provided by Amnesty and the general media outcry. Every post I see of Penn's is absurdly negative and he's offline minutes after posting it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LV Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 Decent thread that.that. Yep, good thread that. I was about to wade in and say that Saudi and Qatar can’t stand each other and are pretty much in a diplomatic war with each other. This is more about politics, national pride and finance than it is about broadcasting rights. Qatar don’t want Saudi outperforming them on the football pitch for a start. I think the PL should be aware of this and not want to be part of a diplomatic imbroglio. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 Does anyone know what is actually in the test? Might be an idea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LV Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 I think the beIN intervention is likely the death knell for the deal. It gives the Premier League the economic rationale to reject it, in addition to the political cover provided by Amnesty and the general media outcry. Bore off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 Does anyone know what is actually in the test? Might be an idea. Have you been declared bankrupt. Have you been convicted of a crime. That is all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulie Walnuts Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 Main story on BBC sport https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52375947 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 Does anyone know what is actually in the test? Might be an idea. Have you been declared bankrupt. Have you been convicted of a crime. That is all. Thought it would be something like that As if the PL are sitting in moral judgement over anyone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paullow Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 The same issue was brought up in late January when the news first broke: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tv-piracy-row-could-hit-newcastle-united-takeover-bid-7lh9mqh9r Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marki Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 They might aswell just rubber stamp the deal now put an end to all this shit stirring,if it was any other club it would be done by now Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 Does anyone know what is actually in the test? Might be an idea. Have you been declared bankrupt. Have you been convicted of a crime. That is all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LV Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 I think the beIN intervention is likely the death knell for the deal. It gives the Premier League the economic rationale to reject it, in addition to the political cover provided by Amnesty and the general media outcry. Every post I see of Penn's is absurdly negative and he's offline minutes after posting it. Textbook WUM Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
toontownman Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 Not surprised. Username is a thinly veiled disguise for penfold. Given the bashing we have him today I am not surprised he is bitter. All the best in your future endeavors though lee. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFEE Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 Didn’t Penn used to be the forum ITK? Or was that just regarding Pardew? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raconteur Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 Didn’t Penn used to be the forum ITK? Or was that just regarding Pardew? Surely the only real Pardew ITK was GolfMag? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HaydnNUFC Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 Why does it always have to be so difficult, man. Just announce the fucking takeover, please. Can't bear this shite anymore. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlito Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 Why does it always have to be so difficult, man. Just announce the fucking takeover, please. Can't bear this shite anymore. Trying to get this deal over the line with the entire world trying to stop it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 Does anyone know what is actually in the test? Might be an idea. Have you been declared bankrupt. Have you been convicted of a crime. That is all. It's not. There is mention in there of illegal broadcasting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 Why does it always have to be so difficult, man. Just announce the fucking takeover, please. Can't bear this shite anymore. It doesn't, just your much more invested in this one. Chill out, go to bed, everything's gonna be cool. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 This is the test (EFL website but I'm fairly certain that it is the same test the PL use): https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules--regulations/appendix-3---owners-and-directors-test/ A lot of legalese that I can't really follow but I'm guessing this is the sticking point: (v) dishonestly receiving a programme broadcast from within the UK with intent to avoid payment under Section 297 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988; It specifically states that it only applies to unspent convictions from within England and Wales though (which seems fairly ridiculous and anachronistic but there we go) so it's hard to see how this would apply. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-more Mag Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 This is the test (EFL website but I'm fairly certain that it is the same test the PL use): https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules--regulations/appendix-3---owners-and-directors-test/ A lot of legalese that I can't really follow but I'm guessing this is the sticking point: (v) dishonestly receiving a programme broadcast from within the UK with intent to avoid payment under Section 297 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988; It specifically states that it only applies to unspent convictions from within England and Wales though (which seems fairly ridiculous and anachronistic but there we go) so it's hard to see how this would apply. Here's the Premier League version (see Section F beginning on page 121): https://resources.premierleague.com/premierleague/document/2020/04/17/049a315f-f4a8-4706-bcec-75ec9ddf7f73/2019-20-PL-Handbook-170420.pdf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 Ah thanks so the PL version specifies that convictions abroad also count, but otherwise that particular rule is the same (as set out in Appendix 1). Don't see how it changes anything really. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest godzilla Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 Good bait for sure Same person who was saying the oil slump is scuppering the deal yesterday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GideonShandy Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 This is the test (EFL website but I'm fairly certain that it is the same test the PL use): https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules--regulations/appendix-3---owners-and-directors-test/ A lot of legalese that I can't really follow but I'm guessing this is the sticking point: (v) dishonestly receiving a programme broadcast from within the UK with intent to avoid payment under Section 297 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988; It specifically states that it only applies to unspent convictions from within England and Wales though (which seems fairly ridiculous and anachronistic but there we go) so it's hard to see how this would apply. Here's the Premier League version (see Section F beginning on page 121): https://resources.premierleague.com/premierleague/document/2020/04/17/049a315f-f4a8-4706-bcec-75ec9ddf7f73/2019-20-PL-Handbook-170420.pdf I think the argument would be that copyright infringement regarding unauthorized broadcast of games is an offence designated in Appendix 1, at page 483, which is disqualifying for a prospective director under rules F.1.6 and F.1.5.3 on page 121. I doubt it will be taken seriously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
toontownman Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 The Premier League isn't going to be doing a full police investigation into anything. They will simply be checking if they have been convicted of any wrong doing. If they haven't been convicted for anything then they don't have grounds to deny the buyers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 Ah thanks so the PL version specifies that convictions abroad also count, but otherwise that particular rule is the same (as set out in Appendix 1). Don't see how it changes anything really. But no conviction ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts