Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, gdm said:

There’s fuck all chance this gets done before next season. The PL are clearly not backing down. If pre arbitration discussions and arbitration itself was going well this move wouldn’t be needed 

The Premier League are going to back down, in my opinion.

They will have absolutely no choice, it is going to be very humiliating for them, and it is going to be GREAT for us, as long promised.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, manorpark said:

The Premier League are going to back down, in my opinion.

They will have absolutely no choice, it is going to be very humiliating for them, and it is going to be GREAT for us, as long promised.

Save your positivity for your other thread. Leave us realistic types alone :indi:

Link to post
Share on other sites

But, out of interest:

  • We threatened legal action to get an arbitration
  • We claimed an arbitration will mean no need for legal action
  • We delayed the arbitration
  • Keith had some news which was 11/10 BIG
  • Keith couldn't reveal the news, but that was a positive thing
  • We are now taking out legal action
  • This was Keith's news. It's now a positive thing that it's been revealed, not the other way on.
  • We're claiming the legal action is now a positive thing as there won't be need for arbitration

Just checking that's the order?

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, manorpark said:

The Premier League are going to back down, in my opinion.

They will have absolutely no choice, it is going to be very humiliating for them, and it is going to be GREAT for us, as long promised.

 

4 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

Save your positivity for your other thread. Leave us realistic types alone :indi:

 

1 minute ago, STM said:

[emoji38][emoji38][emoji38]

Not long now, young man . . . 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, LFEE said:

Everyone’s mate Ben… ? 

 

Love him or hate him he’s spot on. If arbitration was going our way this wouldn’t be needed. Ashley isn’t throwing more money at lawyers for fun

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LFEE said:

Everyone’s mate Ben… ? 

 

I don't think he's right in what he is saying here, he is implying that this is totally Ashley's decision without taking legal advice and his lawyer has just agreed to go on no matter what.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think the Consortium Supporters dude(s) have a valid point in there somewhere about the Competition Appeal Tribunal being a fundamental challenge to the homer venue of confidential arbitration. Whether or not it's successful gets deeper than my hip waders--I'd suspect there's an issue in there somewhere about whether the CAT can exercise jurisdiction in light of arbitration being baked into the EPL rules and at least tacitly accepted as a condition of being in the league. And while I think dude(s) overstate confidentiality not being "a thing" outside of arbitration, there's probably a point there, too.

 

 
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, gdm said:

Love him or hate him he’s spot on. If arbitration was going our way this wouldn’t be needed. Ashley isn’t throwing more money at lawyers for fun

Later on he says the other view that this could be positive could be right too, like.

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, LFEE said:

Everyone’s mate Ben… ? 

 

Arbitration is inherently adversarial, as is litigation. In that sense it's not necessarily counter-productive--it's an overlapping thing in a different venue. The CAT case is not purely damages-based, either, it also seeks injunctive relief.

 

 

Edited by B-more Mag
Fuck grammar.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jacobs just showed his ass in the SL saga saying Atletico had left well before they had even considered dropping out. He might be right here, I have no clue, but his opinions should be taken with a grain of salt like everyone else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

But, out of interest:

  • We threatened legal action to get an arbitration
  • We claimed an arbitration will mean no need for legal action
  • We delayed the arbitration
  • Keith had some news which was 11/10 BIG
  • Keith couldn't reveal the news, but that was a positive thing
  • We are now taking out legal action
  • This was Keith's news. It's now a positive thing that it's been revealed, not the other way on.
  • We're claiming the legal action is now a positive thing as there won't be need for arbitration

Just checking that's the order?

No. Keith's big news was going to be whatever dirt he has on the PL and to be published by Kennedy. He's now saying that the club have taken on his anti-competition case and all the relevant files and dirt have been passed to NUFC, so we still don't know the exact nature of Keith's big scoop. He's hinted enough times though - it's related to PL corruption.

As for what this means for the arbitration case, no one seems to know.

 

 

Edited by Candi_Hills

Link to post
Share on other sites

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