Slim Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 21 minutes ago, gdm said: That’s exactly my point. It’s ludicrous to think it’s 100% getting done because it’s NDM. It comes down to the facts in the case not the people presenting the facts. However yes, a good legal team obviously helps I don't think someone with a reputation of winning would take on the case if they thought there was a big chance they could lose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdm Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 2 minutes ago, Slim said: I don't think someone with a reputation of winning would take on the case if they thought there was a big chance they could lose. No not a big chance but there’s always A chance. By all accounts the PL have some big hitters with big reputations too behind them. Someone has to lose Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest reefatoon Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 Let's hope some kind of agreement can be made prior to it getting that far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 (edited) The fact that the PL haven't made any comment on the CAT case could possibly be a good sign. It seems common practice for companies having anti competition cases brought against them to publicly refute them as baseless (such as Apple and Google recently). The PL have publicly responded to other announcements, such as after the withdrawal of PIF and Ashley's statement, but just 'no comment' on this. Edited May 12, 2021 by Jackie Broon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 2 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said: The fact that the PL haven't made any comment on the CAT case could possibly be a good sign. It seems common practice for companies having anti competition cases brought against them to publicly refute them as baseless (such as Apple and Google recently). The PL have publicly responded to other announcements, such as after the withdrawal of PIF and Ashley's statement, but just 'no comment' on this. 'No comment'.....the go to of the guilty, or having something to hide. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 1 minute ago, gjohnson said: 'No comment'.....the go to of the guilty, or having something to hide. Easy there, stasi. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 There might be non-disclosure agreements from the arbitration I guess. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 1 minute ago, AyeDubbleYoo said: There might be non-disclosure agreements from the arbitration I guess. I very much doubt that would prevent them from denying that they have acted in any unlawfully anti-competitive way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 I honestly don’t know. Not sure of the pros and cons of speaking openly about a case like this. Who knows, maybe they’re trying to settle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 It's probably just easier to say that they can't talk about it. No chance of slipping up then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 I don't think we've even had any of the usual unofficial press releases from the usual suspects saying that the PL are privately confident that they will successfully defend the case. Have we? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 6 minutes ago, Robster said: It's probably just easier to say that they can't talk about it. No chance of slipping up then. Which would indicate that they have something to slip up on...or they don't know what to say. Either way is pretty damning Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/amanda-staveley-newcastle-united-takeover-20577802.amp Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 12 minutes ago, gjohnson said: Which would indicate that they have something to slip up on...or they don't know what to say. Either way is pretty damning Hope so. I'd be a nightmare in that situation. I'm an open book. I'd be saying "No Comment" with either a beaming smile or a face like thunder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 28 minutes ago, gjohnson said: Which would indicate that they have something to slip up on...or they don't know what to say. Either way is pretty damning "Firstly, I am party to strict Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs), so I cannot speak about Newcastle United at this time." This is a direct quote from Staveley....and exactly how the EPL should have answered if they genuinely think they're clean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantail Breeze Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 16 minutes ago, Robster said: Hope so. I'd be a nightmare in that situation. I'm an open book. I'd be saying "No Comment" with either a beaming smile or a face like thunder. Wouldn’t recommend a life of crime then Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawK Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 18 minutes ago, Robster said: Hope so. I'd be a nightmare in that situation. I'm an open book. I'd be saying "No Comment" with either a beaming smile or a face like thunder. same Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manorpark Posted May 14, 2021 Share Posted May 14, 2021 Newcastle fans' big message to the Premier League – 93% still want a Saudi-backed takeover approved - Chronicle Live Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantail Breeze Posted May 14, 2021 Share Posted May 14, 2021 The Chronicle really come across as like a school project I can’t take anything they do seriously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Linton Posted May 14, 2021 Share Posted May 14, 2021 2 hours ago, Fantail Breeze said: The Chronicle really come across as like a school project I can’t take anything they do seriously. Asking the fans if they think PIF and the Saudi state can be considered separate legal entities. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manxst Posted May 14, 2021 Share Posted May 14, 2021 1 hour ago, Joey Linton said: Asking the fans if they think PIF and the Saudi state can be considered separate legal entities. At least the fans gave a decision…. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantail Breeze Posted May 14, 2021 Share Posted May 14, 2021 Keith has released two of his pieces of ‘evidence’ A letter from BeIN we all already knew about, which said they don’t like KSA. The second piece, a letter from Masters that refers to PIF as ‘a company in Saudi Arabia’. Wew. That’ll be that sorted then. Other than the fact it’s factually correct and not inferring ownership. Oh, Richard Key’s deleted tweets are apparently important too, somehow. I hope he’s got some fantastic pieces held back and this isn’t a sign of the quality of evidence he/the club apparently has. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MickMack Posted May 14, 2021 Share Posted May 14, 2021 1 minute ago, Fantail Breeze said: Keith has released two of his pieces of ‘evidence’ A letter from BeIN we all already knew about, which said they don’t like KSA. The second piece, a letter from Masters that refers to PIF as ‘a company in Saudi Arabia’. Wew. That’ll be that sorted then. Other than the fact it’s factually correct and not inferring ownership. Oh, Richard Key’s deleted tweets are apparently important too, somehow. I hope he’s got some fantastic pieces held back and this isn’t a sign of the quality of evidence he/the club apparently has. You seem a little bitter, you’re not jealous Keith is getting more attention than you are you? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts