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

[ScottishMagpie]

Tomorrow 3pm, surely?

 

Fuck off!!  ?

[Teasy]

Ashley should just sell and the owners dare the Premier League to throw us out/suspend us.

They have lost £500m in the last week due to the Chinese TV deal being thrown out, the local broadcasters are probably p*ssed that they are likely having to show every game all season, everyone except BeIN would be p*ssed if there was a team missing and a spare game every weekend.

Do they deal, dare the Premier League, and drag it through the courts.

 

Yes mate the Saudis will definitely want a team that isn't even allowed to play in the prem.

 

Don't be daft, they would be allowed to play in the PL, there's no other option.  The PL are playing this game because they're being allowed to.  If they had their bluff called then at worst they would fine the club.  No way on earth do they destroy their own league.

[Dr Jinx]

If it’s to be played out in the media, the onus is now on Mike Ashley/The Club to provide evidence that it was rejected.

[Jackie Broon]

I dont see how it makes any sense for NUFC to release a statement saying the bid had been rejected if indeed Stavely and PIF had not been back in. Surely that would infuriate them? It's also alluding to the fact the the PL have said PIF and KSA are not sufficiently independent which is why the PL rejected it. Again, a f***ing ridiculous political move by NUFC if the second attempt and whatever kind of rejection wasn;t true.

 

None of this makes any sense. Someone's lying and whoever it is is going to look f***ing horrific.

 

Odds on it's us.

 

I can't help but think this was to draw the PL out into a public statement. We're still waiting for a decision and there's 100% grounds to reject it. It's clear the PL are willing to let this impasse go on indefinitely so the club needed to act.

 

It's further evidence that they aren't acting apporiately, which is the point of the statement.

 

Makes sense to me.

 

Absolutely. Pure speculation, but it was possibility intended to force the PL into a position where they had to either:

 

Accept that they had made a formal decision disqualifying PIF, which could be appealed, when they responded with their view that the KSA should be declared as a director.

 

Or, publicly state that they had not made a formal decision disqualifying PIF, which is basically a clear admission of breach of contract (the contract being the rules of the O&D test process). Then possibly use the threat of legal action to force them to make a decision.

 

 

 

[Paully]

[Alberto2005]

Isn't he meant to be a cunt anyway?

[Shearergol]

So...... I’ve been in a pub with a Tory mp tonight. He’s told me that the government told the PL to let this go through and they refused, but pressure is still on.

[Zero]

Anyone mind to give me a brief idea what’s happening now as I have been out of this takeover stuff for weeks. My friend told me it’s back on?

[Elephant]

WE need to put the pressure to PL again.

 

Let’s do this!

[Scoot]

So...... I’ve been in a pub with a Tory mp tonight. He’s told me that the government told the PL to let this go through and they refused, but pressure is still on.

 

The Premier league are adamant this isn't going through like.

 

Won't officially reject it so no one can appeal and obviously won't approve it. What a bunch of corrupt fucking twats.

[Pandamninator]

Isn't he meant to be a cunt anyway?

 

 

Most people who buy Premier League teams are.  Being a nice person doesn't correlate to being a good owner.

[ED209]

So...... I’ve been in a pub with a Tory mp tonight. He’s told me that the government told the PL to let this go through and they refused, but pressure is still on.

 

Grey Horse in Consett?

[Robster]

So...... I’ve been in a pub with a Tory mp tonight. He’s told me that the government told the PL to let this go through and they refused, but pressure is still on.

The PL are not accountable to anyone so they can just stand their ground.

[BlueStar]

Completely fucking amateurish, isn't it?  Any fit and proper Fit and Proper test would clearly fail PIF, but they don't have one, partly because it would fail half the owners in the league.  We've kicked off and said they've rejected it, presumably because they've looked at what we've given them and said it's not good enough to pass the test.  But because saying that isn't technically the same as failing us, they've denied it.  So we say "Oh, you've not rejected it? So we'll just go ahead then?"  And the response is "noooo, you can't do that."

[Strawberry]

So...... I’ve been in a pub with a Tory mp tonight. He’s told me that the government told the PL to let this go through and they refused, but pressure is still on.

The PL are not accountable to anyone so they can just stand their ground.

 

Who do they account for?

[r0cafella]

Completely f***ing amateurish, isn't it?  Any fit and proper Fit and Proper test would clearly fail PIF, but they don't have one, partly because it would fail half the owners in the league.  We've kicked off and said they've rejected it, presumably because they've looked at what we've given them and said it's not good enough to pass the test.  But because saying that isn't technically the same as failing us, they've denied it.  So we say "Oh, you've not rejected it? So we'll just go ahead then?"  And the response is "noooo, you can't do that."

 

Fail them on which grounds? The purpose of the test as far as I recall was to ensure the financial stability of the club is paramount. It’s for this reason not passing it is so controversial.

 

The test isn’t a moral one.

[r0cafella]

So...... I’ve been in a pub with a Tory mp tonight. He’s told me that the government told the PL to let this go through and they refused, but pressure is still on.

The PL are not accountable to anyone so they can just stand their ground.

 

Who do they account for?

 

The 20 member clubs.

[TK-421]

Completely f***ing amateurish, isn't it?  Any fit and proper Fit and Proper test would clearly fail PIF, but they don't have one, partly because it would fail half the owners in the league.  We've kicked off and said they've rejected it, presumably because they've looked at what we've given them and said it's not good enough to pass the test.  But because saying that isn't technically the same as failing us, they've denied it.  So we say "Oh, you've not rejected it? So we'll just go ahead then?"  And the response is "noooo, you can't do that."

 

Fail them on which grounds? The purpose of the test as far as I recall was to ensure the financial stability of the club is paramount. It’s for this reason not passing it is so controversial.

 

The test isn’t a moral one.

 

Just seen an extract posted on Twitter from the O&T test, and there is a section that states a director can be disqualified if required information isn't submitted (or words to that effect). The PL claim they are/have been asking for information that isn't forthcoming, so surely that gives them the grounds the disqualify PIF/The consortium and reject the takeover, if they indeed want to follow their own rules?

 

Then a formal rejection could be formally appealled?

 

Unless Mike Ashley is going to appear on TV with the written rejection, much like Carver did with his letter from Coloccini? Hehe

[BlueStar]

Completely f***ing amateurish, isn't it?  Any fit and proper Fit and Proper test would clearly fail PIF, but they don't have one, partly because it would fail half the owners in the league.  We've kicked off and said they've rejected it, presumably because they've looked at what we've given them and said it's not good enough to pass the test.  But because saying that isn't technically the same as failing us, they've denied it.  So we say "Oh, you've not rejected it? So we'll just go ahead then?"  And the response is "noooo, you can't do that."

 

Fail them on which grounds? The purpose of the test as far as I recall was to ensure the financial stability of the club is paramount. It’s for this reason not passing it is so controversial.

 

The test isn’t a moral one.

 

Just seen an extract posted on Twitter from the O&T test, and there is a section that states a director can be disqualified if required information isn't submitted (or words to that effect). The PL claim they are/have been asking for information that isn't forthcoming, so surely that gives them the grounds the disqualify PIF/The consortium and reject the takeover, if they indeed want to follow their own rules?

 

 

Doesn't that come back to the issue of if MBS calls the shots?  They ask for info on the owner, we give them stuff about assorted PIF goons, they roll their eyes and say "No, the owner"

 

[relámpago blanco]

Have the premier league broken their rules by speaking out about the takeover?  They aren't allowed to comment, they have said this multiple times.

[Robster]

Can the government force them to either "Reject or Approve" rather than just sit on their hands ?

It definitely isn't right that the PL can just sit and do nothing and get away with it.

[James]

Have the premier league broken their rules by speaking out about the takeover?  They aren't allowed to comment, they have said this multiple times.

 

Nah they’ve been able to explain that the produced statements have allowed them to speak

[relámpago blanco]

Can the government force them to either "Reject or Approve" rather than just sit on their hands ?

It definitely isn't right that the PL can just sit and do nothing and get away with it.

Should just list them as a terrorist organisation then they can do whatever they like.  Could have tanks outside of the PL headquarters then.

[Awaymag]

 

So they are not following the process that is set out.  Its clear the PL are trying to keep this in a sort of no mans land so they the consortium cant appeal (as a decision has not been made).  However their process basically says, if information isn't provide then the PL has to decide on the information provided.

[Whitley mag]

Completely f***ing amateurish, isn't it?  Any fit and proper Fit and Proper test would clearly fail PIF, but they don't have one, partly because it would fail half the owners in the league.  We've kicked off and said they've rejected it, presumably because they've looked at what we've given them and said it's not good enough to pass the test.  But because saying that isn't technically the same as failing us, they've denied it.  So we say "Oh, you've not rejected it? So we'll just go ahead then?"  And the response is "noooo, you can't do that."

 

Fail them on which grounds? The purpose of the test as far as I recall was to ensure the financial stability of the club is paramount. It’s for this reason not passing it is so controversial.

 

The test isn’t a moral one.

 

Just seen an extract posted on Twitter from the O&T test, and there is a section that states a director can be disqualified if required information isn't submitted (or words to that effect). The PL claim they are/have been asking for information that isn't forthcoming, so surely that gives them the grounds the disqualify PIF/The consortium and reject the takeover, if they indeed want to follow their own rules?

 

 

Doesn't that come back to the issue of if MBS calls the shots?  They ask for info on the owner, we give them stuff about assorted PIF goons, they roll their eyes and say "No, the owner"

 

There’s no goons on the PIF, all upstanding chaps.