Beamish Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 21 minutes ago, gdm said: Last I’m bothering with you but needs to be said. Stop this. You know fuck all. Even in staveley’s interview she concedes the possibility they will lose arbitration and says “at some point it will be out of our control and that will be a great shame” positivity is fine but stop going on like you know for certain we will win it. I’d say the way AS is talking the cards are stacked in PL’s favour if anything Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 Just now, BlueStar said: PIF clearly isn't separate form the state, so I guess we're hoping one set of bullshit merchants in the form of the PL accepts the bullshit excuse of another? This actually depends. is a person separate for a company they own? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandy Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 7 minutes ago, Whitley mag said: This has also always been insinuated, I mean why would you refuse further evidence when you have basically said you can’t come to a decision. Also, surely this extra evidence would be presented at arbitration? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitley mag Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 5 minutes ago, Wandy said: That is surely another issue that would be handled by the CAT then? Would it also look unreasonable in arbitration and they hadn’t considered all the evidence ? Just seems like this was their excuse to stop it and we’re sticking to it no matter what you present. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Linton Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 1 hour ago, Hhtoon said: Why are the PL wasting their time with all of these delays if they're going to win arbitration? What has that got to do with manorpark's insistence that it is going through regardless? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazarus Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 (edited) 15 minutes ago, r0cafella said: This actually depends. is a person separate for a company they own? I made this argument months ago. Under UK company law, a person is a separate legal entitity to the company, even if they are both Director and sole Shareholder. Under Saudi law......things may be different. The waters are starting to get very muddy as to why the takeover stalled I feel. Different reasons are being quoted by different sources (and I don't mean the ITK twitter bollox crowd). Edited July 8, 2021 by Lazarus Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 21 minutes ago, Wandy said: I'm not sure if it specifically says that they should. They may have worded it loosely to wangle themselves out of it. Best ask someone like @Jackie Broon about that. If it does, then that's another issue that the CAT will deal with. My completely unqualified opinion is that the O&D test is worded in a clear unequivocal way that it applies from when a declaration of a new director/owner is submitted by the club and requires that those directors are immediately disqualified if the PL believes that a director/owner has not been disclosed in the declaration/s. But the PL went about it a different way, saying the O&D test doesn't start until they are satisfied that all of the owners and directors have disclosed, and the arbitration probably won't consider whether they were right to do that or not because it's just dealing with the definitions in Section A rather than the test in Section F. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcjb Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 999 pages of.................... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandy Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 1 minute ago, Jackie Broon said: My completely unqualified opinion is that the O&D test is worded in a clear unequivocal way that it applies from when a declaration of a new director/owner is submitted by the club and requires that those directors are immediately disqualified if the PL believes that a director/owner has not been disclosed in the declaration/s. But the PL went about it a different way, saying the O&D test doesn't start until they are satisfied that all of the owners and directors have disclosed, and the arbitration probably won't consider whether they were right to do that or not because it's just dealing with the definitions in Section A rather than the test in Section F. Yeah, this issue will be handled by CAT then. Stalling tactics and allegedly collaborating with other parties to block the takeover from ever happening. The PL surely haven't got a leg to stand on in trying to stop the CAT from happening. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ankles Bennett Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 I don't see why the PL can't allow the takeover with a caveat that any indication of interference by the KSA and NUFC will be expelled from the PL. A simple solution that works surely!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Lazarus said: I made this argument months ago. Under UK company law, a person is a separate legal entitity to the company, even if they are both Director and sole Shareholder. Under Saudi law......things may be different. The waters are starting to get very muddy as to why the takeover stalled I feel. Different reasons are being quoted by different sources (and I don't mean the ITK twitter bollox crowd). Yeah, people are getting far to hung up on 'legal separation', it's far more complex than that, it's about the definition of 'control' in section A. The definition of control is incredibly broad, there could be legal separation but still be control, or the potential of control, which would be control by their definition. However, it's so broad it could probably be interpreted to include banks where clubs have been bought with loans, other states such as China and the UAE who can potentially impose control over their citizens or even potential controls over businesses by UK government. It's so broad that there has to be a line drawn somewhere, and the PL may have already drawn that line with other decisions, such as Crystal Place and Manchester City. Edited July 8, 2021 by Jackie Broon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 (edited) Reading the rules stuff makes it look like the PL are correct in terms of wanting to know who exactly is in charge....however their repeated 'No comment', wanting things done privately, and suspect approvals of dodgy takeovers (Palace, where they don't even know who the owners actually are, Burnley who essentially used Burnleys own money to buy them mini Man U style) in the past makes them look like there's something to hide. Suggests to me that there's something from Liverpool/Tottenham that would prove they're acting unfairly in the interest of the whole league rather than just for a few teams, and they don't want this to be shown. ESL probably in there too somehow....maybe a nice brown envelope for Masters if he agreed to it Edited July 8, 2021 by gjohnson correction Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hhtoon Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 35 minutes ago, Joey Linton said: What has that got to do with manorpark's insistence that it is going through regardless? About as much as your response to him I'd imagine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 Staveley isn't even the owner, yet she speaks about the club a million times better than the one who has been in charge for a decade and a half. Of course, talk is cheap, and what will really matter is what she does if and when she gets control, but hearing a potential owner/chairwoman talk about us like that gives you hope. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 May I wish this thread farewell and look forward to brighter days for the next version Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowlingcrofty Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 Literally only posting here to push this crap thread closer to 1000 pages. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdm Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 Hopefully We’ll get an answer in the next thread Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 Thinking aloud...so bear with me.... Say PIF turn around and say 'yes PIF are part of the state, the representative of the state is Al Rummiyan' What more could they legitimately ask for without questions being asked about most clubs owners? eg Abramovich is clearly and obviously under Putins control much like Moshiri and Usmanov at Everton, City's owners are beholden to UAE, West Ham's dodgy stadium deal, even Leicester are influenced by the Thai Government. Showing a team that isn't state influenced in some way or another is probably easier Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manorpark Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 1 hour ago, gdm said: Last I’m bothering with you but needs to be said. Stop this. You know fuck all. Even in staveley’s interview she concedes the possibility they will lose arbitration and says “at some point it will be out of our control and that will be a great shame” positivity is fine but stop going on like you know for certain we will win it. I’d say the way AS is talking the cards are stacked in PL’s favour if anything For goodness sake stop this pointless backbiting! So, yes, your analysis leads you to a different degree of certainty or lack of certainty to me . . so what? In life when you know you are right, have the balls to say so . . . THAT is what I do. Don't be timid ("I think" maybe I might be right, perhaps, I'm not sure") just say what you think . . . THAT is what I do. If you don't agree, that is fine by me, I would love to hear from you about that. But, don't tell me what to think and write in here, I worked out the realities a long time ago, and my opinions are only stronger now with all the events of this week. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 (edited) 12 minutes ago, gjohnson said: Thinking aloud...so bear with me.... Say PIF turn around and say 'yes PIF are part of the state, the representative of the state is Al Rummiyan' What more could they legitimately ask for without questions being asked about most clubs owners? eg Abramovich is clearly and obviously under Putins control much like Moshiri and Usmanov at Everton, City's owners are beholden to UAE, West Ham's dodgy stadium deal, even Leicester are influenced by the Thai Government. Showing a team that isn't state influenced in some way or another is probably easier The issue is that would effectively make the state's actions indirectly subject to UK criminal law at the whim of an unaccountable sporting organisation. There's no way any state would accept that, let alone a state like Saudi Arabia. Edited July 8, 2021 by Jackie Broon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdm Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 4 minutes ago, manorpark said: For goodness sake stop this pointless backbiting! So, yes, your analysis leads you to a different degree of certainty or lack of certainty to me . . so what? In life when you know you are right, have the balls to say so . . . THAT is what I do. Don't be timid ("I think" maybe I might be right, perhaps, I'm not sure") just say what you think . . . THAT is what I do. If you don't agree, that is fine by me, I would love to hear from you about that. But, don't tell me what to think and write in here, I worked out the realities a long time ago, and my opinions are only stronger now with all the events of this week. If you blindly believe we will win it then fair enough but you say it like it’s a fact. It’s not a fact it’s so far from a fact even AS acknowledged it might not happen. You constantly saying ‘it will happen’ with nothing to back it up just grates on people. I’m not bothering arguing with you about it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 3 minutes ago, manorpark said: For goodness sake stop this pointless backbiting! So, yes, your analysis leads you to a different degree of certainty or lack of certainty to me . . so what? In life when you know you are right, have the balls to say so . . . THAT is what I do. Don't be timid ("I think" maybe I might be right, perhaps, I'm not sure") just say what you think . . . THAT is what I do. If you don't agree, that is fine by me, I would love to hear from you about that. But, don't tell me what to think and write in here, I worked out the realities a long time ago, and my opinions are only stronger now with all the events of this week. 'Knowing' you're right and 'Thinking' you're right are two very different things. As it stands you 'think' you are right, but present your opinions as 'knowing' you are right. The reality is that no-one 'knows' what is right yet as things are still being worked on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 17 minutes ago, gdm said: Hopefully We’ll get an answer in the next thread Is there a page limitation on this board? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 I don't understand why positivity bothers people so much. If I said England ARE going to win on Sunday, would it bother folk as much? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest reefatoon Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 What a fitting way to see out this thread. Hand bags a go go Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts