Jump to content
Newcastle-Online

Takeover Thread - July 1st statement, Staveley letter to Tracey Crouch (and response) in OP

Yorkie

by Yorkie
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

mighty__mag

mighty__mag

Posted
Posted (edited)

I'm glad she's finally made a tv appearance and mentioned what's what. I actually feel like we're not being lied to now, one good thing is, its cleared my misconceptions.

 

Here's to it dragging on and on, it would be nice to hear snippets from the actual bodies involved ahead though, it just clears the anxiety and helps with ignoring the total bullshit and attention seeking that others seek on social media etc.

 

 

Edited by mighty__mag

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest reefatoon

Guest reefatoon

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, mighty__mag said:

I'm glad she's finally made a tv appearance and mentioned what's what. I actually feel like we're not being lied to now, one good thing is, its cleared my misconceptions.

 

Here's to it dragging on and on, it would be nice to hear snippets from the actual bodies involved ahead though, it just clears the anxiety and helps with ignoring the total bullshit and attention seeking that others seek on social media etc.

 

 

 


This is true. It puts to bed that this is all just for Ashley to get compensation. Glad that one will now die a death. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
mighty__mag

mighty__mag

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, reefatoon said:


This is true. It puts to bed that this is all just for Ashley to get compensation. Glad that one will now die a death. 

I only started to feel that way because it's gone on forever, and because he is a massive con-artist. We have had over a decade of lies, I can't ever trust someone like Ashley who openly admits to misleading the fans. But if he pulls this off, it will all be water under the bridge and I'll just move on, carrying hate for someone is just pointless.

 

??

Link to post
Share on other sites
nufcjb

nufcjb

Posted
Posted (edited)

Getting airtime on Sky, the general public is now aware of an impending case to be heard about the takeover of NUFC. If the club statement, her letter to Tracy Crouch, her appearance on Sky did not happen, and the arbitration just went on in the background and didn't go our way, the PL and the panel have got away scotch free and wiped their hands clean and say 'what else do you want?' to AS, Fat Mike and NUFC fans. By then, no interview, letters or even crying on tv can do anything to change the decision. There'd be no point for her to go on tv, any letters to MPs, government officials, any sort of statement by the club or Ashley would be useless and just be rumbles of displeasure. PIF would walk away for good and there'd be no point to even fight anymore as the public didn't get to know the ins and outs of the whole case. Even if the arbitration is not played out in public now, at least people will know the PL did not agree to having it that way and the question of 'why' will then be asked. Something to hide Mr. Masters?

 

By  doing this, the PL and the panel now have extra eyes and interest on them making a decision and the past events of the ESL fiasco has actually put them in a position to show the public they are transparent. Amanda's appearance on Sky does not make me anymore confident that the takeover will be approved but it has put the general public's eyes on the matter as compared to previously when this was a closed shop matter.

 

Kind of refreshing going into arbitration that we've heard from Ashley (early June), the club, Amanda's letter and reply from Tracy Crouch and now this interview. At least we're not only hearing pointlesa chatter from that Keith bloke or Liam Kennedy or Luke Edwards or Ben Jacobs or some YouTube channel podcast or even worse still, some right old Twitter coconuts going on making stuff up.

 

 

Edited by nufcjb

Link to post
Share on other sites
Teasy

Teasy

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Yorkie said:

What a pile of cringe that is probably going to be (the GB News thing, not Chi). 

 

I find it absolutely mind-bending that anyone would think Steve Wraith is credible in an NUFC context. Surely the only reason you'd collaborate with a person like that would be to help deliver aspirations of (very niche and local) online fame? 

 

I have no time for Keith Patterson and admittedly know little of his (long since irrelevant) legal endeavours, and I find his coverage on here quite surreal - particularly given how well-versed and wary we are of Twitter bullshittery - but even if I did happen to believe he had some influence - or even insider knowledge - on this whole fiasco, his association with that muppet would be enough to instantly discredit everything. 

 

Glad you qualified that, considering the incredible job Chi Onwurah has done for this takeover.  I think she once wrote about it to someone who actually matters!

 

 

Edited by Teasy

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kanj

Kanj

Posted
Posted

The fucking premier league could have done everyone and themselves a favor, passed this fucking thing - maybe worked on a way to get some additional damages paid for the piracy (ie: working out some settlement) and moved the fuck on with their lives.

Link to post
Share on other sites
mrmojorisin75

mrmojorisin75

Posted
Posted

K, I asked this yesterday and nobody answered so maybe a stupid question but will try again:

 

1) who are the arbitrators, are they appointed solely by the premier league or are they completely independent?

2) is there a feasible route Ashley et al could take this over and above the PL should it fail, such CAS or whatever, or is that absolutely the end?

 

I'm aware there's the CAT case just wondered about this specifically, surely the PL are governed by some body so if they reject how come there's no one to appeal to?

Link to post
Share on other sites
FloydianMag

FloydianMag

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, mrmojorisin75 said:

K, I asked this yesterday and nobody answered so maybe a stupid question but will try again:

 

1) who are the arbitrators, are they appointed solely by the premier league or are they completely independent?

2) is there a feasible route Ashley et al could take this over and above the PL should it fail, such CAS or whatever, or is that absolutely the end?

 

I'm aware there's the CAT case just wondered about this specifically, surely the PL are governed by some body so if they reject how come there's no one to appeal to?

As far as I understand it, one is appointed by the PL, one by the club, the third one is independent (supposedly) however the independent person, a lawyer has done work for the PL previously.?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
BeloEmre

BeloEmre

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, FloydianMag said:

As far as I understand it, one is appointed by the PL, one by the club, the third one is independent (supposedly) however the independent person, a lawyer has done work for the PL previously.?

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
mrmojorisin75

mrmojorisin75

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, FloydianMag said:

As far as I understand it, one is appointed by the PL, one by the club, the third one is independent (supposedly) however the independent person, a lawyer has done work for the PL previously.?

 

 

 

Ah is that the guy they tried to get booted?  Makes sense.  

 

Corrupt to the core :thup:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr Jinx

Dr Jinx

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, RS said:

Fear not. We have the full support of the Saudi Secret Service raking through this lots email history. We’ll be alreet. 


They couldn’t organise an assassination in an embassy that lot!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kanj

Kanj

Posted
Posted

The fact Beloff worked for the PL on certain matters as the O&D test is enough conflict of interest. Recall this wasn’t disclosed until after both sides agreed to him. Whether that was oversight by Ashley’s side or lack of proper disclosure from Beloff or the PL is up for anyone’s interpretation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Manxst

Manxst

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Kanji said:

The fact Beloff worked for the PL on certain matters as the O&D test is enough conflict of interest. Recall this wasn’t disclosed until after both sides agreed to him. Whether that was oversight by Ashley’s side or lack of proper disclosure from Beloff or the PL is up for anyone’s interpretation. 

Isn’t it already established that it was down to lack of disclosure by Beloff? Then after it was noted and Utd objected, he offered to leave to the PL but they turned his offer down?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Joey Linton

Joey Linton

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Kanji said:

The fact Beloff worked for the PL on certain matters as the O&D test is enough conflict of interest. Recall this wasn’t disclosed until after both sides agreed to him. Whether that was oversight by Ashley’s side or lack of proper disclosure from Beloff or the PL is up for anyone’s interpretation. 

https://littletonchambers.com/articles-webinars/rare-public-judgment-on-s-24-application-for-removal-of-arbitrator/

 

Wrong

Link to post
Share on other sites
FloydianMag

FloydianMag

Posted
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Manxst said:

Isn’t it already established that it was down to lack of disclosure by Beloff? Then after it was noted and Utd objected, he offered to leave to the PL but they turned his offer down?

If that’s the case he could have still stepped down regardless of what the PL wanted.

 

 

Edited by FloydianMag

Link to post
Share on other sites
Manxst

Manxst

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, FloydianMag said:

If that’s the case he could have still stepped down regardless of what the PL wanted.

 

 

 

Don’t know. Joeys post above explains it. Sounds like he engaged via private emails with the PL and they both came to the conclusion that they’d prefer him to stay on. For some reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jackie Broon

Jackie Broon

Posted
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, FloydianMag said:

Regardless, the club still wanted to make the point he could show bias before any arbitration took place.

 

I don't buy the 'club wanted to make a point' stuff. The club thought that Beloff should have been removed and lost that argument.

 

I personally (and admittedly completely unqualified to do so) think the decision was flawed and probably challengeable (I see High Court decisions overturned by the Court of Appeal all the time in my line of work, so they're not infallible). Basically the Judge said that the arbitration is just about section A (which is just definitions) not section F (the O&D test) which Beloff forgot to disclose he had given advise on changes to. However, fundamentally section A is just definitions, those definitions only have meaning in relation to the rules themselves, which in this case is section F, so I can't see how the Judge could conclude that section A is a completely separate matter to section F. It just would have taken too long to appeal it.

 

 

Edited by Jackie Broon

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...