Various: N-O has lost the plot over potential end of Mike Ashley's tenure

[GWN]

HTT that is the best thing I've read in this entire thread

 

I'm in , great post 

[xLiaaamx]

That's a great post, Ive always been a bit confused as to how what is a third party can dictate who owns a business.

[Chris_R]

That's a great post, Ive always been a bit confused as to how what is a third party can dictate who owns a business.

 

Well they don't. They dictate whether that business can compete in the PL though.

[junkhead]

Not sure I share your confidence HTT. I don't even think it's up to the PL anymore - do they really have the constitution to make a decision on Yemen war crimes, Saudi royal court relations and decentralised distribution of pirated content?

 

The Qatari involvement has turned the test from a simple accounting exercise into a full-blown political game. The outcome will be decided, as with any other political game, on the basis of influence and money, but at a higher stage than the PL board. Only involvement from the UK government can allow or stop this takeover now.

 

Unfortunately it seems that Qatar is already throwing a lot of money to stop this - now there's a clear paid-agenda in the media, including Hattice Weekly (to the horror of the moralists on here), while SA has responded only with mobilising their bot twitter-sphere to spread messages of future glory.

 

If Saudi Arabia doesn't care enough to put equal pressure on the PL and UK govt, then a PIF-led takeover won't go through.

[Dr Jinx]

Aye good post, the fact remains however that they have denied some clubs in the owners and directors, or at least delayed it.

 

There is nothing to suggest from the companies house that the deal has progressed any further since the 9th April. In fact, there’s nothing to suggest that the PL had even begun the checks up until that Masters chap started speaking about it in the last few days.

 

The trusted Journalists have come up with diddly squat over the last month, let’s face it, even Caulkin has come up short here.

 

But I see this as a good thing. Those BZG wankers couldn’t shut up about this last year. Silence is golden as far as I’m concerned. Some professionalism is never a bad thing.

 

The Saudis are a problem though. They need to keep their powder dry until this deal gets done. All this showing football games without the right to do so if just stupid. Piracy is the only issue that can derail this thing. They need to do better, they have the money. Pay for the rights.

 

I will say one thing though.. after all this opposition from Qatar, they will mean business if and when this deal goes through. Just to rub salt if anything.

[Tyne81]

I may well have missed it but I can't remember the mass outrage towards the Saudis and their investments in the likes of Disney and Tesla.

 

Anyway I don't really follow this thread but is the theory of the takeover being officially announced this Monday still valid or not?

[Judge Holden]

I may well have missed it but I can't remember the mass outrage towards the Saudis and their investments in the likes of Disney and Tesla.

 

Anyway I don't really follow this thread but is the theory of the takeover being officially announced this Monday still valid or not?

It never was valid.

[r0cafella]

As mentioned the deal is at the final stage which is approval from the premier league. We just need to wait for the rubber stamp.

 

It will take as long as it takes.

[Ikon]

As mentioned the deal is at the final stage which is approval from the premier league. We just need to wait for the rubber stamp.

 

It will take as long as it takes.

 

[Happinesstan]

Spot on mini thread by Liam Kennedy

 

 

Absolute nonsense thread. Things like this shouldn't just be accepted and rushed through just to help the mental health of Newcastle fans

 

Absolute nonsense post. No it wont change nowt and they won't be concerned about nufc fans mental health, but they should be concerned with an owner taking fans money for no reason and not giving them any clue about whats going on.

 

I understand your reasons behind not wanting it to happen etc but not everything the 'pro takeover fans' say is bollocks.

 

That lads most definitely bringing to light a few things that need to be said with regards to staff and refunds.

 

They should be concerned with the current c*** of an owner taking the p*ss out of fans and staff. 100%.

 

This is nowt to do with being anti or pro the takeover. Takeovers of companies take time , you can't just rush things through especially when possibly important information has just come to light, regarding the piracy thing. If they give a timeline of say 2 weeks, then what if more information becomes available in 13 days time that could affect the decision?

 

But you are anti-takeover by PIF, let's get that out there just to clarify.

 

I don't think anybody needs that clarified but thanks anyway

 

have you ever been involved with an acquisition of a company?

 

I have and right now, if this was not a football club company, legally following everything that has passed to this point in terms of the sale/purchase of what is a legal fully registered and recognised trading business enterprise, this is a done deal.

 

No-one can pull out, even if monies owed to all parties were still to be transferred to close any holding account and therefore financially complete the deal at each end, the legal fact of the matter is that again, as of now, as of how far along this is, it’s a done deal.

 

It’s a done deal because the buyer’s money has been paid (as per whatever any agreements exist between the two etc.) into an account, and that money is locked in now.

 

Again the buyer can’t just withdraw that money and the seller can’t just return it or not accept it.

 

Not unless both mutually agree to terminate everything and both sides would have to do that, one or the other cannot just pull out, they would face legal proceedings which for example if Ashley decided to withdraw, could see him lose the business full stop and even pay them the actual agreed price to get out of it. Likewise the seller could end up having to pay up the full agreed price as compensation and end up with nothing.

 

Of course no-one knows the stipulations and clauses in any detail which could see both seller or buyer allowed to break off from the deal mutually or forego a security deposit etc.

 

If this was a none football club business, however, even without the transfer of funds at the end of all parties, it would to all intents and purposes be a done deal.

 

Legally as a business it’s a done deal, even without the transfer of funds which of course would follow and conclude everything officially and leave nothing to be withdrawn, rejected, opposes or contested.

 

Right now, it can’t be concluded officially as a legal football club entity as well as a legal business entity, funds transferred or not, until the PL approve the takeover in compliance with their own TOS that legally grants the business it’s status to operate as a football club in the PL’s competition.

 

If they don’t approve the takeover, legally, as business, they will still own NUFC or can’t be stopped owning the club as a business and can still apply to register to operate as a football club or retain their status as a football club with the FA and EFL, which legally they can’t be denied or can be revoked. And if I’m correct in thinking, membership as such grants all football clubs who are members with the right to participate in any competition the FA/FL grant licence to operate under them which the PL must comply with in order to run their own competition as long as member clubs also comply. As such any Football Association member club can enter any competition/win promotion if they adhere to the TOS of those competitions which is based solely on sporting, spectator, stadium, safety, policing, stewarding and the ability to financially support putting out a team to fulfil all fixture requirements in general for all of the FA/FL licenced competitions.

 

In short there are so many legal ways around things and as a business, legally as things stand, this is a done deal, only because this is also a football club requiring additional  approval to also operate as a football club in the competition ran by the PL, legally, it’s not a done deal on that side.

 

It would take an unprecedented ruling by the PL to deny NUFC’s legal status as a PL club and in ways that 100% couldn’t be contested and overruled which would also legally challenge the status of NUFC operating as registered and recognised business entity which again, right now, Ashley no longer owns because he’s sold it as a business and now it rests with the PL as to whether they will also legally own a PL football club.

 

Every challenge, opposition, red flag, raised question mark, ethical, moral, financial, individually as persons involved, criteria, the PL has to go over with a fine tooth comb, and no matter what, they will eventually have no legal or sporting, financial or business basis in which to deny NUFC’s PL status as per their own TOS, unless they rewrite them and force every PL club to satisfy and risk losing their licence to run their competition under the FA who grants any football club great and small, professional or amateur, in the entire football pyramid, providing they adhere to their TOS, the right and status to enter/participate in every one of their competitions or any they licence to.

 

I personally think the checks have been done, funds have or are being transferred to all parties involved and the only thing delaying any official announcement is to allow the PL to focus on restarting the season first and when that’s done every party involved will have had enough time to work on their own individual PR pieces and can also release media Q&As that they can all answer in unison in terms of any questions about privacy, dead widows letters, amnesty international, human rights issues and so on.

 

The PL want this as much as we do, they want their money, they want another contender and an extra European super club to relegate rivals from Spain and Italy, they want an injection of big spending in the transfer market and want above all else, for them and anyone else to come and buy their product and no-one elses.

 

I recommend everyone ignores any scare mongering or hyperbole in the press who no fuck all, be patient, relax and be confident that legally as a business, this is at the stage now where it’s a done deal, where legally as a football club, there is no other conclusion, and that’s what will soon be confirmed.

 

And we will only find out when the official site says say, in black and white.

 

So it's not a done deal then.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Not sure I share your confidence HTT. I don't even think it's up to the PL anymore - do they really have the constitution to make a decision on Yemen war crimes, Saudi royal court relations and decentralised distribution of pirated content?

 

The Qatari involvement has turned the test from a simple accounting exercise into a full-blown political game. The outcome will be decided, as with any other political game, on the basis of influence and money, but at a higher stage than the PL board. Only involvement from the UK government can allow or stop this takeover now.

 

Unfortunately it seems that Qatar is already throwing a lot of money to stop this - now there's a clear paid-agenda in the media, including Hattice Weekly (to the horror of the moralists on here), while SA has responded only with mobilising their bot twitter-sphere to spread messages of future glory.

 

If Saudi Arabia doesn't care enough to put equal pressure on the PL and UK govt, then a PIF-led takeover won't go through.

 

Any issues of human rights will not be entertained at all by the PL who if they even dared to raise such issues would end up violating their own TOS. They have no business speculating or moralising on such issues as they have zero to do with anything. All the protests in the world by Amnesty Internationally and letters from a dead widow wouldn’t influence the PL one way or another and if it did, they’d be challenged so hard legally on any grounds they’d end up having every one of their approved takeovers scrutinised.

 

Such complaints will reach them, but ultimately they will end up in the bin and only ever responded to out of courtesy which will result in a simple diplomatic, non commital, non confrontational generic type response and that’s because it’s not down to the PL to be judge and jury over such issues, only the issues of ownership in terms of if the funds are legitimate, if the people have no criminal record or links and if legally, they can prove and show that they tick every box or criteria set out in the PL’s TOS and they do and with distinction.

 

Nah issues of piracy has to be looked into and cross checked and rightfully so, but whatever the WTO or others claim, proving any illegal criminal activity or breach of TOS is neither something they have any authority over (legally) nor they have the right to delve into deeper to undercover. It’s more a criminal matter than a sporting matter or even a member of a board matter. Again NUFC will be bought first and foremost as a legally registered and recognised business entity and that’s what they or anyone will be buying and can not operate PL approval or not without.

 

Nothing will or can prevent this and because of the stage where they are at right now, legally they pretty much have bought NUFC and if any funds are still to be transferred to rubber stamp this officially it’s because legally they are seeking approval top also operate as a football club entity which they just need one final check for such status.

 

Whatever game those on opposition are playing, all they can do is delay the inevitable and at some point the PL will sanction the takeover because our would be new owners will have eventually satisfied their test and ticked all boxes which again, they tick and with distinction. Piracy this, human rights that, morals this, nothing stands up, not enough for the PL to cross check with their own TOD and deny. If they did go down that path, they’d be open to the mother of all legal challenges and would have every one of their takeover approvals scrutinised.

 

If that failed, NUFC as a football entity cannot be denied it’s status as members of the FA/EFL whose TOS the PL’s give way to effectively.

 

The PL’s test are not about ethics, morals, human rights, piracy, but about their own disclaimer which covers them in the event of any theft, damage, loss or whatever. That’s all they care about.

 

It’s only because of political issues they have to ‘double check’ everything and they will, and they will find, as they would any other way, nothing that would allow them as per their own TOS, the FAs or even any other legal way, to reject this deal which again as a business, is done and dusted and believe you me, the government’s own tests would stand up in a court of law far more than the PL’s would which let’s remember have not once rejected a takeover and if we need know more, approved Mike Ashley’s takeover and if this wasn’t SA buying the club but some American Hedge Fund or narcissistic rich bloke, we’d have ran out of cans ages ago.

 

Not that they actually care, they don’t, no-one does, the Queen, the Government, companies house, Ashley, none of them. Their money is as green as anyone else’s...

[NEEJ]

There's a good article in the Athletic today on the PIF and how the acquisition of NUFC fits into their 2030 vision. It goes through some of their other investments this year too.

[Yorkie]

There's a good article in the Athletic today on the PIF and how the acquisition of NUFC fits into their 2030 vision. It goes through some of their other investments this year too.

 

Yeah that was a great read. Particularly interesting re their potential idea to mimic the City Football Group model, with them supposedly already having looked into Botafogo. Do they just love black and white stripes or summin?

[Guest Butcher]

Fantastic read that. Can’t wait for it to be confirmed.

 

Would love a United Football Group model tbh.

[Guest The Little Waster]

 

Oh dear

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Spot on mini thread by Liam Kennedy

 

 

Absolute nonsense thread. Things like this shouldn't just be accepted and rushed through just to help the mental health of Newcastle fans

 

Absolute nonsense post. No it wont change nowt and they won't be concerned about nufc fans mental health, but they should be concerned with an owner taking fans money for no reason and not giving them any clue about whats going on.

 

I understand your reasons behind not wanting it to happen etc but not everything the 'pro takeover fans' say is bollocks.

 

That lads most definitely bringing to light a few things that need to be said with regards to staff and refunds.

 

They should be concerned with the current c*** of an owner taking the p*ss out of fans and staff. 100%.

 

This is nowt to do with being anti or pro the takeover. Takeovers of companies take time , you can't just rush things through especially when possibly important information has just come to light, regarding the piracy thing. If they give a timeline of say 2 weeks, then what if more information becomes available in 13 days time that could affect the decision?

 

But you are anti-takeover by PIF, let's get that out there just to clarify.

 

I don't think anybody needs that clarified but thanks anyway

 

have you ever been involved with an acquisition of a company?

 

I have and right now, if this was not a football club company, legally following everything that has passed to this point in terms of the sale/purchase of what is a legal fully registered and recognised trading business enterprise, this is a done deal.

 

No-one can pull out, even if monies owed to all parties were still to be transferred to close any holding account and therefore financially complete the deal at each end, the legal fact of the matter is that again, as of now, as of how far along this is, it’s a done deal.

 

It’s a done deal because the buyer’s money has been paid (as per whatever any agreements exist between the two etc.) into an account, and that money is locked in now.

 

Again the buyer can’t just withdraw that money and the seller can’t just return it or not accept it.

 

Not unless both mutually agree to terminate everything and both sides would have to do that, one or the other cannot just pull out, they would face legal proceedings which for example if Ashley decided to withdraw, could see him lose the business full stop and even pay them the actual agreed price to get out of it. Likewise the seller could end up having to pay up the full agreed price as compensation and end up with nothing.

 

Of course no-one knows the stipulations and clauses in any detail which could see both seller or buyer allowed to break off from the deal mutually or forego a security deposit etc.

 

If this was a none football club business, however, even without the transfer of funds at the end of all parties, it would to all intents and purposes be a done deal.

 

Legally as a business it’s a done deal, even without the transfer of funds which of course would follow and conclude everything officially and leave nothing to be withdrawn, rejected, opposes or contested.

 

Right now, it can’t be concluded officially as a legal football club entity as well as a legal business entity, funds transferred or not, until the PL approve the takeover in compliance with their own TOS that legally grants the business it’s status to operate as a football club in the PL’s competition.

 

If they don’t approve the takeover, legally, as business, they will still own NUFC or can’t be stopped owning the club as a business and can still apply to register to operate as a football club or retain their status as a football club with the FA and EFL, which legally they can’t be denied or can be revoked. And if I’m correct in thinking, membership as such grants all football clubs who are members with the right to participate in any competition the FA/FL grant licence to operate under them which the PL must comply with in order to run their own competition as long as member clubs also comply. As such any Football Association member club can enter any competition/win promotion if they adhere to the TOS of those competitions which is based solely on sporting, spectator, stadium, safety, policing, stewarding and the ability to financially support putting out a team to fulfil all fixture requirements in general for all of the FA/FL licenced competitions.

 

In short there are so many legal ways around things and as a business, legally as things stand, this is a done deal, only because this is also a football club requiring additional  approval to also operate as a football club in the competition ran by the PL, legally, it’s not a done deal on that side.

 

It would take an unprecedented ruling by the PL to deny NUFC’s legal status as a PL club and in ways that 100% couldn’t be contested and overruled which would also legally challenge the status of NUFC operating as registered and recognised business entity which again, right now, Ashley no longer owns because he’s sold it as a business and now it rests with the PL as to whether they will also legally own a PL football club.

 

Every challenge, opposition, red flag, raised question mark, ethical, moral, financial, individually as persons involved, criteria, the PL has to go over with a fine tooth comb, and no matter what, they will eventually have no legal or sporting, financial or business basis in which to deny NUFC’s PL status as per their own TOS, unless they rewrite them and force every PL club to satisfy and risk losing their licence to run their competition under the FA who grants any football club great and small, professional or amateur, in the entire football pyramid, providing they adhere to their TOS, the right and status to enter/participate in every one of their competitions or any they licence to.

 

I personally think the checks have been done, funds have or are being transferred to all parties involved and the only thing delaying any official announcement is to allow the PL to focus on restarting the season first and when that’s done every party involved will have had enough time to work on their own individual PR pieces and can also release media Q&As that they can all answer in unison in terms of any questions about privacy, dead widows letters, amnesty international, human rights issues and so on.

 

The PL want this as much as we do, they want their money, they want another contender and an extra European super club to relegate rivals from Spain and Italy, they want an injection of big spending in the transfer market and want above all else, for them and anyone else to come and buy their product and no-one elses.

 

I recommend everyone ignores any scare mongering or hyperbole in the press who no fuck all, be patient, relax and be confident that legally as a business, this is at the stage now where it’s a done deal, where legally as a football club, there is no other conclusion, and that’s what will soon be confirmed.

 

And we will only find out when the official site says say, in black and white.

 

So it's not a done deal then.

 

Legally they’ve bought a business that is registered and recognised as an entity as such and that’s what NUFC is, they are not buying something that only exists if the PL approves them, which if they didn’t approve, would still not prevent the actual sale/purchase of NUFC the business nor result in the club losing its FA membership which grants the club the right to participate/compete in any competitions they licence out to be ran by others under them.

 

That’s just one of many back door ways they could get around a negative vote. Legally, of course, in an actual court of law, they would also be able to overturn any negative ruling and there is no sporting court of law that exists that trumps an actual legal business court of law which is where NUFC is legally and rightfully able to most challenge any prevention of a fair and proper business trading.

 

In short, the PL wouldn’t dare reject the takeover and if they did they need more than some piracy report funded by a rival or some amnesty international opposition or crocodile tear letters from a widow. If they were to consider such opposition, what’s stopping me writing my own letter of objection because I read they throw gay people off roof tops or because I don’t like that their interpretation of Islam oppressed women drivers and voters.

 

It’s nonsensical to even consider the PL, a non legal and recognised authority other than its governing over its own rules which itself is governed by the FAs rules, can deny legally a recognised and registered business from operating as a football club and with it competing fairly and properly with others in the same industry and trade based on heresay, rumour, religious interpretation and above all else none U.K. legal business or sporting conditions that cannot be proven otherwise. Fact backed that SA is recognised as an ally, a trade partner and a business investor in and by the U.K., privately, publicly and independently, free to exercise their legal right to operate, run, buy, sell, own, share in and do business in every industry here, even in football.

 

I guarantee if they wrote a letter to the queen it would have more of an impact than a million letters from Amnesty International would.

 

Anyway, what excites me a lot is if they wanted to just pass any old test or get through any tests through the back door, they could do so easily, these tests are not some thorough intensive interrogation kind of test, from what I’ve learned these tests centre on business plans, proof of funds, what if scenarios like relegation and how any new would be owner plans to ensure they invest their money into the game to their benefit of fans, the game in general and other factors.

 

Piracy? If they can’t prove anything they will simply demand assurances and even if they had proof, unless it would stand up in a criminal court of law that’s one path they won’t want to go down just to find out if someone is guilty or not, and why would they, that’s not for them to prove one way or another in the same way it’s not for them to judge a company, NUFC, and it’s owners and directors as people with no criminal records, on any allegations or personal religious beliefs or thoughts others have an issue with or over.

 

NUFC aren’t being bought by a state, they are being bought by a legally registered, recognised, trading partner and world wide investment firm with actual shares in the companies the PL are in business with who will be co-owned and ran by successful legit people of distinction and whether someone from the Saudi Royal Family happens to be on the board or has shares or not is no reason whatsoever to object against the takeover.

 

To claim Saudi Arabia will own/run NUFC is like saying our own Royal Family own/run the FA because Prince William is President!

 

Now see if they object to that, anyone...

 

 

[Slim]

Interesting article written by Indykiller for those who said hes not legit.

 

https://www.ft.com/content/cd16ae47-ebba-426d-95cc-602bbb20d88e

[veriaqa]

There's a good article in the Athletic today on the PIF and how the acquisition of NUFC fits into their 2030 vision. It goes through some of their other investments this year too.

 

Yeah that was a great read. Particularly interesting re their potential idea to mimic the City Football Group model, with them supposedly already having looked into Botafogo. Do they just love black and white stripes or summin?

 

Supposedly it's the colours of Islam or something.

[Mikky]

There's a good article in the Athletic today on the PIF and how the acquisition of NUFC fits into their 2030 vision. It goes through some of their other investments this year too.

 

Yeah that was a great read. Particularly interesting re their potential idea to mimic the City Football Group model, with them supposedly already having looked into Botafogo. Do they just love black and white stripes or summin?

 

Supposedly it's the colours of Islam or something.

 

Will probably be green then - although in Islam we don’t really have a colour as such

[Stifler]

Man City change the colours of their bought teams to sky blue to fit into their identity. Red Bull obviously change the colours of their teams to fit into their identity.

 

If they are to create a group of clubs, it would make sense to target clubs who play in Black and White.

[Mikky]

Man City change the colours of their bought teams to sky blue to fit into their identity. Red Bull obviously change the colours of their teams to fit into their identity.

 

If they are to create a group of clubs, it would make sense to target clubs who play in Black and White.

 

This

Though having a green away too will mean shirts selling like hot cakes in Saudi

[veriaqa]

What will they buy in Italy, Juve or Udinese?

[Dr Jinx]

Seeming as we have nothing but time, let’s pull this apart and see where in the rules exactly that could scupper us??

 

 

F.1.

A Person shall be disqualified from acting as a Director and no Club shall be permitted to have any Person acting as a Director of that Club if:

 

F.1.1. in relation to the assessment of his compliance with Rule F.1 (and/or any similar or equivalent rules of The Football League or The Football Association) at any time, he has:

 

F.1.1.1.

F.1.1.2.

failed to provide all relevant information (including, without limitation, information relating to any other individual who would qualify as a Director but has not been disclosed, including where he or they are acting as a proxy, agent or nominee for another Person); or

provided false, misleading or inaccurate information;

 

F.1.2. either directly or indirectly he is involved in or has any power to determine or influence the management or administration of another Club or Football League club;

 

F.1.3. either directly or indirectly he holds or acquires any Significant Interest in a Club while he either directly or indirectly holds any interest in any class of Shares of another Club;

 

F.1.4. he becomes prohibited by law from being a director (including without limitation as a result of being subject to a disqualification order as a director under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 (as amended or any equivalent provisions in any jurisdiction which has a substantially similar effect) (“the CDDA”), or being subject to the terms of an undertaking given to the Secretary of State under the CDDA unless a court of competent jurisdiction makes an order under the CDDA permitting an appointment as a Director);

 

F.1.5. he has a Conviction (which is not a Spent Conviction) imposed by a court of the United Kingdom or a competent court of foreign jurisdiction:

 

F.1.5.1. F.1.5.2.

F.1.5.3.

in respect of which an unsuspended sentence of at least 12 months’ imprisonment was imposed;

in respect of any offence involving any act which could reasonably be considered to be dishonest (and, for the avoidance of doubt, irrespective of the actual sentence imposed); or

in respect of an offence set out in Appendix 1 (Schedule of Offences) or a directly analogous offence in a foreign jurisdiction (and, for the avoidance of doubt, irrespective of the actual sentence imposed);

 

F.1.6. in the reasonable opinion of the Board, he has engaged in conduct outside the United Kingdom that would constitute an offence of the sort described in Rules F.1.5.2 or F.1.5.3, if such conduct had taken place in the United Kingdom, whether or not such conduct resulted in a Conviction;

 

 

F.1.7. he becomes the subject of:

 

F.1.7.1. an Individual Voluntary Arrangement (including any fast track voluntary arrangement);

 

F.1.7.2. a debt relief order (in accordance with the provisions of Part 7A of the 1986 Act);

 

F.1.7.3. an administration order (in accordance with Part 6 of the County Courts Act 1984);

 

F.1.7.4. an enforcement restriction order (in accordance with the provisions of Part 6A of the County Courts Act 1984);

 

F.1.7.5. a debt management scheme or debt repayment plan (in accordance with provisions of Chapter 4 of Part 5 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007),

or any equivalent provision in any other jurisdiction which has a substantially similar effect, and in each case as may be amended from time to time;

 

F.1.8. he becomes the subject of an Interim Bankruptcy Restriction Order, a Bankruptcy Restriction Order or a Bankruptcy Order (or any equivalent provisions in any jurisdiction which has a substantially similar effect);

 

F.1.9. he is or has been a Director of a Club which, while he has been a Director of it, has suffered two or more unconnected Events of Insolvency in respect of each of which a deduction of points was imposed (and for the purposes of this Rule F.1.9 and Rule F.1.10 a Person shall be deemed to have been a Director of a Club which has suffered an Event of Insolvency if such Event of Insolvency occurred in the 30 days immediately following his having resigned as a Director of that Club);

 

F.1.10. he has been a Director of two or more Clubs (or clubs) each of which, while he has been a Director of them, has suffered an Event of Insolvency in respect of each of which a deduction of points was imposed;

 

F.1.11. he is subject to a suspension or ban from involvement in the administration of a sport by any ruling body of a sport that is recognised by the International Olympic Committee, UK Sport, or Sport England, another of the home country sports councils, or any other national or international sporting association or governing body, whether such suspension or ban is direct or indirect (for example a direction to Persons subject to the jurisdiction of the ruling body that they should not employ, contract with or otherwise engage or retain the services of an individual);

 

F.1.12. he is subject to any form of suspension, disqualification or striking-off by a professional body including, without limitation, the Law Society, the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority, the Bar Council or the Institute of Chartered Accountants of England and Wales or any equivalent body in any jurisdiction outside England and Wales, whether such suspension, disqualification or striking-off is direct or indirect (for example a direction to Persons subject to the jurisdiction of the professional body that they should not employ, contract with or otherwise engage or retain the services of an individual);

 

F.1.13. he is required to notify personal information pursuant to Part 2 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003; or

 

F.1.14. he is found to have breached (irrespective of any sanction actually imposed), or has admitted breaching (irrespective of whether disciplinary proceedings were brought or not):

 

F.1.14.1. Rule J.6; or

F.1.14.2. any other rules in force from time to time in relation to the prohibition on betting on football (whether in England or Wales or elsewhere);

 

F.1.15. he is an Intermediary and/or is registered as an intermediary or agent pursuant to the regulations of any national member association of FIFA.

 

 

 

F.2.

Not later than 14 days before the commencement of each Season each Club shall submit to the Board a duly completed Declaration in respect of each of its Directors signed by the Director to which it refers and by an Authorised Signatory, who shall not be the same Person.

 

F.3.

Within 21 days of becoming a member of the League each Club promoted from The Football League shall likewise submit to the Board a duly completed Declaration in respect of each of its Directors signed as aforesaid.

 

F.4.

If any Person proposes to become a Director of a Club (including for the avoidance of doubt by virtue of being a shadow director or acquiring Control of the Club):

 

F.4.1. the Club shall, no later than 10 Working Days prior to the date on which it is anticipated that such Person shall become a Director, submit to the Board a duly completed Declaration in respect of that Person signed by him and by an Authorised Signatory, at which point that Person shall be bound by and subject to the Rules;

 

F.4.2. within five Working Days of receipt thereof the Board shall confirm to the Club whether or not he is liable to be disqualified as a Director under the provisions in Rule F.1, and if he is so liable the Board will take the steps set out in Rule F.6; and

 

F.4.3. he shall not become a Director until the Club has received confirmation from the Board pursuant to Rule F.4.2 above that he is not liable to be disqualified as a Director under the provisions of Rule F.1.

 

 

F.5.

Upon the happening of an event which affects any statement contained in a submitted Declaration:

 

F.5.1. the Director in respect of whom the Declaration has been made shall forthwith give full written particulars thereof to his Club; and

 

F.5.2. the Club shall thereupon give such particulars in writing to the Board.

 

F.6.

Upon the Board becoming aware by virtue of the submission of a Declaration or in the circumstances referred to in Rule F.5 or by any other means that a Person is liable to be disqualified as a Director under the provisions of Rule F.1, the Board will:

 

F.6.1. give written notice to the Person that he is disqualified, giving reasons therefore, and (in the case of a Person who is a Director) require him forthwith to resign as a Director; and

 

F.6.2. give written notice to the relevant Club that the Person is disqualified, giving reasons therefore, and (in the case of a Person who is a Director) in default of the Director’s resignation, it shall procure that within 28 days of receipt of such notice the Director is removed from his office as such.

 

 

F.7.

Any Club which fails to comply with its obligations under the foregoing provisions of this Section of these Rules or which submits a Declaration which is false in any particular shall be in breach of these Rules and will be liable to be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of Section W of these Rules (Disciplinary).

 

F.8.

Any Director who fails to comply with his obligations under the foregoing provisions of this Section of these Rules or who fails to complete and sign a Declaration and any Director or Authorised Signatory who signs a Declaration which is false in any particular shall likewise be in breach of these Rules and liable to be dealt with as aforesaid.

 

F.9.

If a Director who receives a notice under the provisions of Rule F.6.1 fails to resign and his Club fails to procure his removal from office as required, or if a Club proceeds with the appointment as a Director of a Person to whom Rule F.4 applies despite having received a notice under the provisions of Rule F.6.2, the Board shall have power to suspend the Club by giving to it notice in writing to that effect.

 

F.10.

A suspended Club shall not play in:

F.10.1. any League Match;

 

F.10.2. any matches organised as part of the Games Programmes or matches in the Professional Development Leagues (as those terms are defined in the Youth Development Rules);

 

F.10.3. any of the competitions set out in Rule L.9; or

 

F.10.4. any other match.

 

F.11.

For the purposes of the League competition, the Board shall have power to determine how the cancellation of a League Match caused by the suspension of one of the Clubs which should have participated in it shall be treated.

 

F.12.

Upon being reasonably satisfied that the Director of the suspended Club has resigned or has been removed from office, the Board shall have power to withdraw the suspension by giving to it notice in writing to that effect.

 

 

 

F.13.

Any Person or Club who receives notice under Rule

F.6 has a right to appeal the disqualification notice(s) in accordance with the following Rules. However, for the avoidance of doubt, unless and until any such appeal is upheld, the disqualification notice(s) will remain in full effect.

 

F.14.

Any Person or Club wishing to appeal a disqualification notice must, within 21 days of the date of that notice, send or deliver to the Board a notice of appeal, setting out full details of the grounds of appeal of that Person or Club, together with a deposit of £1,000.

 

F.15.

The only grounds upon which a Person or Club may appeal a disqualification notice are:

 

F.15.1. none of the Disqualifying Events set out in Rule F.1 apply;

 

F.15.2. in respect of a Conviction of a court of foreign jurisdiction under Rule F.1.5, or a finding of the conduct referred to in Rule F.1.6, or a suspension or ban by a sport ruling body under Rule F.1.11, or a suspension, disqualification or striking-off by a professional body under Rule F.1.12, or a finding of a breach of rule by a ruling body of football pursuant to Rule F.1.14.2, there are compelling reasons why that particular Conviction, suspension, ban, finding, disqualification or striking-off, should not lead to disqualification;

 

F.15.3. it can be proven that the Disqualifying Event has, or will within 21 days of the notice of appeal, cease to exist;

 

F.15.4. the Disqualifying Event is a Conviction imposed between 19th August 2004 and 5 June 2009 for an offence which would not have led to disqualification as a Director under the Rules of the League as they applied during that period; or

 

F.15.5. the Disqualifying Event is a Conviction which is the subject of an appeal which has not yet been determined and in all the circumstances it would be unreasonable for the individual to be disqualified as a Director pending the determination of that appeal.

 

F.16.

An appeal under the provisions of Rule F.13 shall lie to an appeal tribunal which shall hear the appeal as soon as reasonably practicable. The appeal tribunal shall be appointed by the Chair of the Judicial Panel and shall comprise three members of the Judicial Panel including a legally qualified member who shall sit as chairman of the tribunal.

 

F.17.

The chairman of the appeal tribunal shall have regard to the procedures governing the proceedings of Commissions and Appeal Boards set out in Section W of these Rules (Disciplinary) but, subject as aforesaid, shall have an overriding discretion as to the manner in which the appeal is conducted.

 

F.18.

The Person or Club advancing the appeal shall have the burden of proving the complaint. The standard of proof shall be the balance of probabilities.

 

F.19.

The appeal tribunal shall make its decision unanimously or by majority. No member of the appeal tribunal may abstain.

 

F.20.

The appeal tribunal shall give written reasons for its decision.

 

F.21.

The appeal tribunal shall have the following powers:

 

F.21.1. to allow the appeal in full;

 

F.21.2. to reject the appeal;

 

F.21.3. if it determines that a Disqualifying Event exists, to determine that the individual concerned should not be banned for that period during which they will remain subject to it and substitute such period as it shall reasonably determine, having regard to all of the circumstances of the case;

 

F.21.4. to declare that no Disqualifying Event ever existed or that any Disqualifying Event has ceased to exist;

 

F.21.5. to order the deposit to be forfeited to the League or to be repaid to the appellant person or Club; and

 

F.21.6. to order the appellant Person or Club to pay or contribute to the costs of the appeal including the fees and expenses of members of the appeal tribunal.

 

F.22.

The decision of the appeal tribunal shall be final and binding on the appellant Person and Club.

 

Persons Prohibited by Law from entering the United Kingdom etc

 

F.23.

No Person may acquire any Holding in a Club if, pursuant to the law of the United Kingdom or the European Union:

 

F.23.1. he is prohibited from entering the United Kingdom; or

 

F.23.2. no funds or economic resources may be made available, directly or indirectly, to or for his benefit.

 

 

Disclosure of Ownership and Other Interests

G.1.

A Club shall forthwith give notice in Form 6 to the Board if any Person either directly or indirectly:

 

G.1.1. holds;

G.1.2. acquires; or

G.1.3. having held or acquired, ceases to hold,

any Significant Interest in the Club.

 

G.2.

A Club shall forthwith give notice to the Board if it either directly or indirectly:

 

G.2.1. holds;

G.2.2. acquires; or

G.2.3. having held or acquired, ceases to hold,

any Significant Interest in any other Club (or club) and in this Rule G.2, the definition of Significant Interest shall be deemed to apply to clubs in the same way as to Clubs.

 

G.3.

A Club shall forthwith give notice to the Board if it is aware or if it becomes aware that any holder of a Significant Interest in it either directly or indirectly:

 

G.3.1. holds;

G.3.2. acquires; or

G.3.3. having held or acquired, ceases to hold,

any Significant Interest in any other Club (or club) and in this Rule G.3, the definition of Significant Interest shall be deemed to apply to clubs in the same way as to Clubs.

 

G.4.

A notice given pursuant to the provisions of Rule G.1, G.2 and G.3 shall:

 

G.4.1. identify the Person holding, acquiring or ceasing to hold the Significant Interest in question;

 

G.4.2. set out all relevant details of the Significant Interest including without limitation the number of Shares, their description and the nature of the interest; and

 

G.4.3. set out where appropriate the proportion (expressed in percentage terms) which the relevant Shares in respect of which the Significant Interest exists bear to the total number of Shares of that class in issue and of the total issued Shares.

 

G.5.

Each Club shall publish the identities of the ultimate owner of each Significant Interest in the Club.

 

G.6.

The Board shall maintain a register which shall include the particulars set out in Rule G.4 and the said register shall be available for inspection by any Club by prior appointment.

 

G.7.

Each Club shall forthwith give notice in writing to the Board if any Person identified in a notice given in accordance with Rule G.1.1 or Rule G.1.2 either directly or indirectly holds acquires or ceases to hold any Holding in the Club.

 

 

F.18.

The Person or Club advancing the appeal shall have the burden of proving the complaint. The standard of proof shall be the balance of probabilities.

 

F.19.

The appeal tribunal shall make its decision unanimously or by majority. No member of the appeal tribunal may abstain.

 

F.20.

The appeal tribunal shall give written reasons for its decision.

 

F.21.

The appeal tribunal shall have the following powers:

 

F.21.1. to allow the appeal in full;

F.21.2. to reject the appeal;

F.21.3. if it determines that a Disqualifying Event exists, to determine that the individual concerned should not be banned for that period during which they will remain subject to it and substitute such period as it shall reasonably determine, having regard to all of the circumstances of the case;

 

F.21.4. to declare that no Disqualifying Event ever existed or that any Disqualifying Event has ceased to exist;

 

F.21.5. to order the deposit to be forfeited to the League or to be repaid to the appellant person or Club; and

 

F.21.6. to order the appellant Person or Club to pay or contribute to the costs of the appeal including the fees and expenses of members of the appeal tribunal.

 

F.22.

The decision of the appeal tribunal shall be final and binding on the appellant Person and Club.

 

Persons Prohibited by Law from entering the United Kingdom etc

 

F.23.

No Person may acquire any Holding in a Club if, pursuant to the law of the United Kingdom or the European Union:

 

F.23.1. he is prohibited from entering the United Kingdom; or

 

F.23.2. no funds or economic resources may be made available, directly or indirectly, to or for his benefit.

 

 

[t00nraider]

Sorry if already mentioned, another spanner in the works / further delay

 

"The Football Association have written to Saudi Arabia's main TV sports station to threaten legal action over the illegal broadcasting of vintage FA Cup matches involving Newcastle United. "

 

 

[Manxst]

What will they buy in Italy, Juve or Udinese?

 

Wasn’t it Juve that had links with Gaddafi and his son a few years back? Bet even that wouldn’t have taken this long for the PL to approve....