Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

This is all providing Edward's and BBC's source is correct.

 

The source was the PL. They leaked it to recover some credibility/move the noise towards the buyers probably through frustration at getting insufficient/unclear data from the 3 sets of lawyers working the deal.

 

The whole thing is a clusterfuck.

 

Yeah, the buyers would have come out and disputed it if it was made up bollocks. Don't think the PL are totally at fault here.

 

They haven't commented throughout, other than Caulkin being told they remain positive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't really think it tells us anything TBH, there are several ways to perceive what message he's trying to get across.  Is he giving them the green light to block it, or is he sending a message to those MPs who have challenged it to let the PL do their job?

 

Or is that a public denial of involvement, but privately they're telling them to get it sorted?

 

Fuck knows!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that not the official line that we've heard before, that UK Gov 'wont get involved', however behind the scenes, still putting pressure on the PL, and thus maintain diplomatic/trade relations with KSA?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest godzilla

he's just sticking with what they've always publicly said ie its none of our business and a matter for the premier league to deal with

 

Yep they have done that from basically day one

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I don't really see anything new there. They're just reiterating it's for the PL to decide. They're not going to come out and say 'don't worry, we'll sort this out', are they? And rightly so.

 

If the Government indicated in any way that they'd help push through this kind of takeover for an opposing PL club we'd be raging. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The gov pressure is absolute. Put it through so we get billions in trade or no crowds at games for all of next season. If the gov were going to grt involved, when billions are at stake there's no fucking about hinting at shit and asking nicely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Gov giving a free pass to block it.

 

It’s a politician speaking so take it with a massive pinch of salt.

 

They’ll be saying one thing and doing another. As politicians do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The gov pressure is absolute. Put it through so we get billions in trade or no crowds at games for all of next season. If the gov were going to grt involved, when billions are at stake there's no fucking about hinting at shit and asking nicely.

 

Aye, they're dead honest with the public are this Government  :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Gov giving a free pass to block it.

 

I disagree, in my view its the government distancing themselves from any involvement in the EPL decision making.

 

If the KSA thought for one minute the UK government had directed the EPL to block the takeover, I have no doubt the arms deal with KSA would be cancelled forthwith, which would then have a detrimental effect upon the UK economy at a time when the government is doing all it can to attract investment due to Covid19.

 

This is also why they probably want the takeover to go ahead, but can't come out and publicly support it for fear of attracting adverse publicity from Amnesty etc for apparently supporting the regime despite its human rights abuses and TV piracy.

 

In other words the government is sitting on the fence quite happy to see the EPL take the rap whichever way this takeover goes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kind of reads to me like he's talking about the Premier League expecting the government to give the a recommendation/make a decision for him.

 

Either way there's like five different sides to this all talking about different things. Really well-handled situation all around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That guy is the undersecretary for sport, a junior minister like 3rd or fourth in line in the department for DCMS.  So I'd hardly put his comments down as some kind of definitive government line.

 

Having said that the department for DCMS have been pretty consistent from the start publicly in saying they will not interfere.  Mainly in saying they will not support blocking the deal, but obviously not interfering goes both ways.  So not sure why people are getting their knickers in a twist over that statement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...