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

[manorpark]

2 minutes ago, et tu brute said:

Not disputing what he’s saying, I don’t know if his confidence is correct and none of us can until the cases are decided. Just think he would have been better to just let the legal side play out. Just my opinion anyway.

I have always been of the opinion, since I started listening to Keith, that he not only says just what the various legal teams say that he can say, and no more, but that often he says things that they specifically "ask him" to say.

It all appears to be part of a drip-feed plan, spoken by Keith, co-ordinated by the legal teams.

That is just how it (always) seems, to me.  

[Whitley mag]

The most interesting point tonight is obviously Jacobs claiming new evidence exists to prove Saudi’s behind ESL. Matt Slater has also hinted at this so it will be interesting to  see how conclusive this is. In terms of UEFA I think it will simply relate to piracy in relation to bidding for UCL rights, or the broadcast of Euro’s this summer.

As I’ve said all along though it’s the same journalists and entirely predictable so I’ll reserve judgement on any impact.

It would be all very convenient to shift the focus at this point from the clubs involved in the ESL, to try and deflect attention and blame those nasty Saudi’s for funding it.

It would also surely be completely inconsistent with recent soundings from Ghodoussi and Reuben, who came out strongly against ESL. 

The propaganda war will undoubtedly heat up prior to cases being heard. 

 

[et tu brute]

9 minutes ago, manorpark said:

I have always been of the opinion, since I started listening to Keith, that he not only says just what the various legal teams say that he can say, and no more, but that often he says things that they specifically "ask him" to say.

It all appears to be part of a drip-feed plan, spoken by Keith, co-ordinated by the legal teams.

That is just how it (always) seems, to me.  

You may well be right, personally I think I’d would have just preferred waiting for the legal cases to play out. So tired of listening to the people on both sides of the fence arguing the same things over and over this last year, when in reality nobody knows what the legal arguments are for either side, which will be presented and what actual documentation each side have to support their argument. Obviously I hope the QCs representing the club have all the aces up their sleeves, as I said nobody but people directly involved with the case will really know. Even then it’s up to the deciding authorities in charge of the cases to make that decision.

[Candi_Hills]

33 minutes ago, manorpark said:

I have always been of the opinion, since I started listening to Keith, that he not only says just what the various legal teams say that he can say, and no more, but that often he says things that they specifically "ask him" to say.

It all appears to be part of a drip-feed plan, spoken by Keith, co-ordinated by the legal teams.

That is just how it (always) seems, to me.  

I honestly don't know what to make of Keith. "Amanda said she wanted fan led action and that's why I stepped forward." Listening to it again, I think he might just be saying that he responded to her public request for fan action, although he has said on twitter before that he's had contact with buyer and seller. Then again, he has repeatedly stated that he needed to first establish whether there was still a willing buyer and seller, so his contact with the buyers may just have been some preliminary legal letter.

It's a comforting thought to think Amanda has her hand up his arse and is working him like Rod Hull but I think the truth might be that he really is the little man who tried to take on the machine and he gets bits of info here and there. A lot of what he says is obviously informed by Robert O'Donoghue. I wish she'd put her hand up my arse.

 

 

Edited May 28, 2021 by Candi_Hills

[Fantail Breeze]

17 minutes ago, Candi_Hills said:

I honestly don't know what to make of Keith. "Amanda said she wanted fan led action and that's why I stepped forward." Listening to it again, I think he might just be saying that he responded to her public request for fan action, although he has said on twitter before that he's had contact with buyer and seller. Then again, he has repeatedly stated that he needed to first establish whether there was still a willing buyer and seller, so his contact with the buyers may just have been some preliminary legal letter.

It's a comforting thought to think Amanda has her hand up his arse and is working him like Rod Hull but I think the truth might be that he really is the little man who tried to take on the machine and he gets bits of info here and there. A lot of what he says is obviously informed by Robert O'Donoghue. I wish she'd put her hand up my arse.

He was getting close to sounding silly at points. Claiming O’Donoghue reckons the BeIN letter could win the case on its own was scarcely believable and appeared to be a massive exaggeration. 

Especially when Jacobs claims there is evidence it was sent to all 19 clubs and not just the top 6.

[Dr Jinx]

Watched it, well much of it. I found Keith to be quite belittling in his attitude towards Ben, who made his points quite well, but then he is an experienced journalist/pundit so he should be making his points better.

Keith seemed so desperate to be right that he just sort of kept rephrasing the same questions over and over again without ever getting anywhere.

I suppose if he was actually being accused of leaking info that clears up things but it doesn't prove anything one way or the other that the PL did something illegal. Things get leaked to journalists all the time, that's how stories break.

We didn't learn anything really, well maybe to be wary of breaking news next week..

The point remains, it's all on how the judge rules in the jurisdiction claim. We're not winning arbitration.

Even if the CAT case is weak, the PL won't want any sensitive info coming out that makes them look bad. This is why they could settle.

We lose the jurisdiction and the whole thing is dead in the water. 

[LV]

Why are we not winning arbitration? 

[Ben]

5 hours ago, Dr Jinx said:

Watched it, well much of it. I found Keith to be quite belittling in his attitude towards Ben, who made his points quite well, but then he is an experienced journalist/pundit so he should be making his points better.

Keith seemed so desperate to be right that he just sort of kept rephrasing the same questions over and over again without ever getting anywhere.

I suppose if he was actually being accused of leaking info that clears up things but it doesn't prove anything one way or the other that the PL did something illegal. Things get leaked to journalists all the time, that's how stories break.

We didn't learn anything really, well maybe to be wary of breaking news next week..

The point remains, it's all on how the judge rules in the jurisdiction claim. We're not winning arbitration.

Even if the CAT case is weak, the PL won't want any sensitive info coming out that makes them look bad. This is why they could settle.

We lose the jurisdiction and the whole thing is dead in the water. 

For me, the whole case rests on this, Keith is basically blackmailing them to go the easy route, TBF if it works then so be it.

My personal feeling when everything is stripped away is you can't deal with the Saudis on arms but not football clubs.

# the bit in bold you can't see #

 

 

Edited May 29, 2021 by Ben

[Decky]

Keith was way out of his depth last night arguing with Ben and was embarrassing at times. 
 

FWIW I support what he’s doing and I’m fully behind him but him and Ben were night and day.

 

 

Edited May 29, 2021 by Decky

[gdm]

19 minutes ago, Decky said:

Keith was way out of his depth last night arguing with Ben and was embarrassing at times. 
 

FWIW I support what he’s doing and I’m fully behind him but him and Ben were night and day.

Not surprising one is a professional and one is a bit of joke 

[Darth Crooks]

9 hours ago, Candi_Hills said:

I honestly don't know what to make of Keith. "Amanda said she wanted fan led action and that's why I stepped forward." Listening to it again, I think he might just be saying that he responded to her public request for fan action, although he has said on twitter before that he's had contact with buyer and seller. Then again, he has repeatedly stated that he needed to first establish whether there was still a willing buyer and seller, so his contact with the buyers may just have been some preliminary legal letter.

It's a comforting thought to think Amanda has her hand up his arse and is working him like Rod Hull but I think the truth might be that he really is the little man who tried to take on the machine and he gets bits of info here and there. A lot of what he says is obviously informed by Robert O'Donoghue. I wish she'd put her hand up my arse.

Loved the leftfield ending to that ?

[NE27]

10 hours ago, Fantail Breeze said:

He’s an journalist predominantly focusing on Middle East and sport, it’s a major news story crossing over his two fields. It’d be like Laura Kuennsberg not reporting on a political news story.

That’s also why his opinion is a good one to listen to. His contact book is far greater (and balanced) than people like Liam Kennedy.

Fair, I honestly didn't know where he came from.

Fortunately I gave up reading all the far fetched stories/overtly negative stories last year. 

 

Bad for your mental health!

[manorpark]

10 minutes ago, gdm said:

Not surprising one is a professional and one is a bit of joke 

One is a Journalist and one (thankfully) is not.

[The Prophet]

It would be highly convenient, if the PL could shift the blame for the vastly unpopular ESL, away from the top six and onto a party who threatens to break them apart. It would be totally irrelevant to any take over, but as above it would be a great way to discredit the opposition before they even kick off the hearing.

 

 

Edited May 29, 2021 by The Prophet

[Whitley mag]

To quote Jacobs the evidence to come out this week will be damaging to the separation argument. Let’s see, I’ll be absolutely amazed if PIF have directly backed the ESL with finance. If PIF have shares in a company that pledged funds to the ESL as a partner, then I think the link will be tenuous and more clear agenda to shift blame from America and ESL clubs.

He may sound eloquent, plausible and knows what he’s talking about, however only one person on the show last night has track record of being liberal with the truth.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-1251554/CHARLES-SALE-Official-BBC-report-bares-Ben-Jacobs-sabotage-saga.html

Also ask Andrew Musgrove at the Chronicle why they had to pull an article last year due to misinformation provided by Ben Jacobs.

Keith rightly challenged him last night and I certainly know who I think is more genuine and trustworthy.

 

 

 

Edited May 29, 2021 by Whitley mag

[Fantail Breeze]

 An 11 year old article about a bizarre sabotage of an interview = Ben Jacobs can’t be right about anything.

Keith didn’t “challenge” him at all. He asked the same question (“Who is your PL source?”) over and over again in about 30 different ways of asking.

The questions he put to Jacobs were really poor. Keith was content on (and failed) trying to discredit Jacobs rather than asking relevant and good questions to tease out information about the current goings on.

Whitley has failed to find any positive spin for last night so it’s back into defence mode and immediately jump to trying to discredit Jacobs.

 

 

Edited May 29, 2021 by Fantail Breeze

[Whitley mag]

24 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said:

 An 11 year old article about a bizarre sabotage of an interview = Ben Jacobs can’t be right about anything.

Keith didn’t “challenge” him at all. He asked the same question (“Who is your PL source?”) over and over again in about 30 different ways of asking.

The questions he put to Jacobs were really poor. Keith was content on (and failed) trying to discredit Jacobs rather than asking relevant and good questions to tease out information about the current goings on.

Whitley has failed to find any positive spin for last night so it’s back into defence mode and immediately jump to trying to discredit Jacobs.

He provided misinformation to the Chronicle last year not 12 years ago. Ben Jacobs has done a good enough job of discrediting himself without mine or Keith’s help.

To be honest I thought Jacobs made a tit of himself when he claimed the clubs case wasn’t NCSL’s. How the hell does he know what’s in the clubs case ? The PL don’t even know what the club are claiming in damages.

You’ve bigged up Jacobs performance and I’ve provided balance. All Jacobs provided last night was that there’s potentially new evidence re ESL and that MBS had a conversation with Boris. If that’s what the PL are relying on for separation argument I’m not worried in the least.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 29, 2021 by Whitley mag

[Whitley mag]

Worth reading this thread before the propaganda and attempts to influence arbitration ramp up. Also worth asking yourself why PL choose the likes of Slater and Jacobs to leak info to.

 

 

 

Edited May 29, 2021 by Whitley mag

[Whitley mag]

This would tie in with Luke Edwards getting all excited about some info putting an end to the takeover once and for all a few weeks back. He wasn’t able to substantiate it then let’s see what they come out with in next week. I predict it won’t be anything but smears and more tenuous links pedalled by certain journalists at the behest of invested parties.

 

 

Edited May 29, 2021 by Whitley mag

[Joey Linton]

11 minutes ago, Whitley mag said:

Worth reading this thread before the propaganda and attempts to influence arbitration ramp up. Also worth asking yourself why PL choose the likes of Slater and Jacobs to leak info to.

 

Jacobs "leaks" stuff last night but Keith has been "revealing" stuff for weeks on the podcast.

In all seriousness, you'd be taken far more seriously if you just admitted that last night didn't go particularly well, rather than just swerving it. Jacobs and Keith were like night and day last night, very little point not just acknowledging that. 

[Wandy]

The problem with Keith is that he is so dreadfully ineloquent that it is difficult to take him seriously. That's a bit of shallow view to take but unfortunately it's the way the world works, so he doesn't inspire any confidence. None of this will matter of course if the evidence he keeps referring to is as hard hitting as he claims. To be honest though, I really have my doubts that it is.

As far as Jacobs goes, although I more or less believe him when he says he is impartial, you can clearly tell that he loves it when a new bit of scandal or drama pops up in this story, hence him fizzing about the latest rumours around Saudi and the ESL.

[Thumbheed]

Mad seeing the same people who've shamelessly transitioned from "the takeovers off" to "the takeover won't go through" still have the balls to try and call out someone else's judgement/opinions.  

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 29, 2021 by Thumbheed

[Whitley mag]

10 minutes ago, Joey Linton said:

Jacobs "leaks" stuff last night but Keith has been "revealing" stuff for weeks on the podcast.

In all seriousness, you'd be taken far more seriously if you just admitted that last night didn't go particularly well, rather than just swerving it. Jacobs and Keith were like night and day last night, very little point not just acknowledging that. 

Keith is genuinely trying to keep fans in the loop and only reveals what he can. 

Interested to know which particular  piece of information which was discussed last night that makes you think takeover won’t happen ? Jacobs is more eloquent and Keith is more abrupt and confrontational. However, not sure what you’re point is it wasn’t an election debate. Jacobs apart from teasing new evidence provided nothing new to suggest takeover won’t go through.
 

[manorpark]

14 minutes ago, Wandy said:

The problem with Keith is that he is so dreadfully ineloquent that it is difficult to take him seriously. That's a bit of shallow view to take but unfortunately it's the way the world works, so he doesn't inspire any confidence. None of this will matter of course if the evidence he keeps referring to is as hard hitting as he claims. To be honest though, I really have my doubts that it is.

As far as Jacobs goes, although I more or less believe him when he says he is impartial, you can clearly tell that he loves it when a new bit of scandal or drama pops up in this story, hence him fizzing about the latest rumours around Saudi and the ESL.

One is a Journalist and one (thankfully) is not.

[Joey Linton]

3 minutes ago, Whitley mag said:

Keith is genuinely trying to keep fans in the loop and only reveals what he can. 

Interested to know which particular  piece of information which was discussed last night that makes you think takeover won’t happen ? Jacobs is more eloquent and Keith is more abrupt and confrontational. However, not sure what you’re point is it wasn’t an election debate. Jacobs apart from teasing new evidence provided nothing new to suggest takeover won’t go through.
 

Jacobs teasing?

 

Every week from midweek man, it's "tune in to the three amigos podcast this friday where we'll reveal..." etc etc