PIF, PCP, and RB Sports & Media

[Scotty66]

45 minutes ago, Wilson said:

 

Would that even be allowed considering all this is going on?

 

Genuine question.  

I think so. I'm sure the exclusivity period has ended (hence talk of Ashley keeping the deposit) so he's free to accept any new deal. 

 

However I do think a golden handshake has been made to the PIF deal as maybe Ashley knows getting in with them could help his empire massively. 

[FloydianMag]

29 minutes ago, mrmojorisin75 said:

decent

its an excellent well written article.  Decent

[Kanji]

I missed quite a day yesterday, but good catching up on it all. The press seem to now see this from our perspective. 

[Dokko]

8 minutes ago, Scotty66 said:

I think so. I'm sure the exclusivity period has ended (hence talk of Ashley keeping the deposit) so he's free to accept any new deal. 

 

However I do think a golden handshake has been made to the PIF deal as maybe Ashley knows getting in with them could help his empire massively. 

 

Although Ashley is bowing out of SD I can see him seeking funding for a side project in buying up what remains of the British high street premises and businesses. 

[mrmojorisin75]

29 minutes ago, FloydianMag said:

its an excellent well written article.  Decent

 

Kind of tailed off for me, could have outlined the mismanagement of the club in more detail and maybe mentioned a few other bits and pieces but it was good yeah.

[Wolfcastle]

1 hour ago, Yorkie said:

 

Superb write-up and a message that I'm so pleased is getting spread. This has implications to so much more than just the future of NUFC. 

Absolutely. Far too much "treason doth never prosper" going on throughout football, that blocking NUFC from becoming a force is all well and good when what were seeing is every club outside the top 6 including bigger clubs than some in it are restricted to making up the numbers and have no hope of establishing themselves beyond it and that if your club doesn't like a PL decision they can be bullied with expulsion, whilst the other 6 can get away with anything. Its a disgrace but sadly most people in football will take it because it benefits them and their clubs to stuff us, even though it dooms them too. "for if all prosper, none dare call it treason".

 

 

 

 

Edited September 30, 2021 by Wolfcastle

[nufcjb]

18 hours ago, Facundo Ferreyra said:

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58742750

You guys remember this link and article on the BBC website? Unsurprisingly, you'll have a hard time finding it now if you don't have the link. Not on the main page or the PL section. You'll only find it if you click the Newcastle United section for some reason. Sweep it under anything and everything you can.

[Ankles Bennett]

5 hours ago, Wandy said:

 

Jowell was absolutely pissing himself at that. Wish we could have got a snippet of it as it would have made for a canny meme. 

Refusing to grant more time will probably be the basis of the EPL's grounds of appeal if they lose the jurisdiction case!

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

2 hours ago, ManDoon said:

Pretty sure @Shays Given Tim Flowersworks in the legal field and jokingly said that’s basically what happens in court. 

 

 

If you go to the Court of Appeal you're basically talking to three Judges who have already written their Judgment. Generally the better Judges will have read the important stuff before hearing a case and have a rough idea of what they are going to do without hearing from the Lawyers.  Of course its a joke to say everything is already decided before you speak and you can of course persuade a Judge to take a different path than the one they initially thought they would. But Judge's are Lawyers (usually accomplished Lawyers at that) and so when they read something before a hearing they have already formed a view as to what should be done. 

 

 and sometimes that's abudantly clear. 

 

 

Edited September 30, 2021 by Shays Given Tim Flowers

[Jamie87]

So, tragically, I watched the whole legal proceedings and listened pretty closely. It appears to me that something is being misreported in a lot of articles. This notion that the PL wanted to expel us from the league as a retaliatory action seems to have been confused. I think the threat of expulsion came due to SJHL's submission that they weren't beholden to the PL Rules and Regs as they didn't actually sign anything, it was Mike Ashley, as a legal person signing the docs.. To which the PL response was that they should have. The argument being that SJHL were trying to benefit through their own error or misjudgement, in order to snake out of PL R&Rs to make a CAT case applicable. The threat to expel was a result of this "hole" being discovered and the PL insisting that SJHL should have signed (as an owner of NUL and hence NUFC) up to the Rules and Regs - essentially suggesting that SJHL were a Director (with a capital D) that had not been listed as such. SJHL's further retort was to say: if that's true then why didn't you enforce it and throw us out of the league, so clearly SJHL isn't beholden to the rules, otherwise we'd have been expelled. I don't think the suggestion was that because of the Takeover they were going to expel us, but rather because we were using a loophole to try and prove standing for a CAT case. I should say I am not a lawyer, but of all the waffling, that felt like one of the sections that was in relatively plain English, yet the papers have completely skewed it. It does paint the PL as a shower of twats though, so I'm not going to be mailing any Editors for correction. Ha.

[Jamie87]

I should also say, that on balance, I kind of agreed with the PL, regarding a stay for the CAT case. If arbitration goes in our favour, then why would CAT continue to be an issue. NUFC signed up to the PL Rules and Regs, and part of that is following the arbitration rules. We're trying to sneak out of them by saying "but but but, SJHL didn't technically sign up to them", even though we know they should have. If I wasn't a football fan, and especially an NUFC fan, I'd probably side with the PL on the basis that we are in an arbitration process that needs to be resolved, and we signed up to that process. Don't get me wrong, I think the PL are a corrupt pit of self serving lizards, but I think they have a case to get this thrown out. I hope to high heaven I am wrong. Also, this whole thing has dragged on now so much that I'm starting to be less pro-consortium, on the basis that MA has had (as per reveal in yesterdays proceedings) other "serious offers" on the table. So we are currently swirling the PL toilet bowl with the likely flush of relegation coming, in order to hold out for the consortium who are fighting a legal technicality. At this point, I'd take a new sensible and less wealthy owner, if it meant change came sooner and the long term survival of the club wasn't being risked. I don't think we bounce back from a 3rd relegation, and I don't see KSA buying a Championship club. So I feel like we're putting everything on this takeover - it's oblivion or ascension, no inbetween. That is a shit place to be as a fan. The current NUFC owner is massively responsible for that, the PL are responsible for that, and for me so are the consortium. If they walked away proper, then another buyer can step in. As it stands we are in an enforced limbo as a club, and have become a political football. Fans ultimately are being shown to not matter, to anyone.

 

 

Edited September 30, 2021 by Jamie87

[Anon]

2 minutes ago, Jamie87 said:

I should also say, that on balance, I kind of agreed with the PL, regarding a stay for the CAT case. If arbitration goes in our favour, then why would CAT continue to be an issue. NUFC signed up to the PL Rules and Regs, and part of that is following the arbitration rules. We're trying to sneak out of them by saying "but but but, SJHL didn't technically sign up to them", even though we know they should have. If I wasn't a football fan, and especially an NUFC fan, I'd probably side with the PL on the basis that we are in an arbitration process that needs to be resolved, and we signed up to that process. Don't get me wrong, I think the PL are a corrupt pit of self serving lizards, but I think they have a case to get this thrown out. I hope to high heaven I am wrong. Also, this whole thing has dragged on now so much that I'm starting to be less pro-consortium, on the basis that MA has had (as per reveal in yesterdays proceedings) other "serious offers" on the table. So we are currently swirling the PL toilet bowl with the likely flush of relegation coming, in order to hold out for the consortium who are fighting a legal technicality. At this point, I'd take a new sensible and less wealthy owner, if it meant change came sooner and the long term survival of the club wasn't being risked. I don't think we bounce back from a 3rd relegation, and I don't see KSA buying a Championship club. So I feel like we're putting everything on this takeover - it's oblivion or ascension, no inbetween. That is a shit place to be as a fan. The current NUFC owner is massively responsible for that, the PL are responsible for that, and for me so are the consortium. If they walked away proper, then another buyer can step in. As it stands we are in an enforced limbo as a club, and have become a political football. Fans ultimately are being shown to not matter, to anyone.

 

 

 

 

I think this is the whole argument about the tribunal process itself - if they are turning down or stalling the takeover for their own interests rather than in good faith that would be anti-competitive. Whether that is the case or not is what the trial would argue.

[Jamie87]

9 minutes ago, Anon said:

 

I think this is the whole argument about the tribunal process itself - if they are turning down or stalling the takeover for their own interests rather than in good faith that would be anti-competitive. Whether that is the case or not is what the trial would argue.

 

But their stance is that they've merely applied their own Rules and Regulations, to which NUFC signed up to. There is an agreed process to handle disputes; the arbitration process, to which NUFC also have signed up to. 

 

The legitimacy of our CAT claim seems to hang on the fact that SJHL (erroneously) didn't sign up to the PL Rules and Regs themselves, but rather NUFC and Mike Ashley did. The fact that NUL, SJHL and MASH sit between those two entities in a legal straight line of hierarchy meant that there was no "horizontal" contract constituting an agreement from SJHL. So our case is reliant on SJHL being legally separate to NUFC and Mike Ashley, and hence no beholden to the rules.

 

Which seems an oddly inductive state of argument as the whole fucking mess is about the legal separation of PIF, PZ Newco and the KSA state.

 

Again, I point to the fact that this has become a legal battle of technicalities, which has no moral or emotive reasoning attached to it. Fans are just left in the middle hoping for the best.

[Wilson]

Reading that take on it, if true about SJHL, can't really see any other outcome than another Premier League win. 

[Consortium of one]

I thought the CAT was supposed lay bare the PL's process and show that they did not apply their rules correctly, ie: undue influence from the "top six"  and perhaps BEin/Qatar and how that negatively affected the sale of the club, resulting in finacial damages for MA.

[et tu brute]

1 minute ago, Consortium of one said:

I thought the CAT was supposed lay bare the PL's process and show that they did not apply their rules correctly, ie: undue influence from the "top six"  and perhaps BEin/Qatar and how that negatively affected the sale of the club, resulting in finacial damages for MA.

It is 

[Ben]

What makes Simon Jordan so confident after yesterday the takeover 100% won't now happen, I can't imagine it's spite, so he must have some inside knowledge 

[et tu brute]

13 minutes ago, Ben said:

What makes Simon Jordan so confident after yesterday the takeover 100% won't now happen, I can't imagine it's spite, so he must have some inside knowledge 

Bollocks does he, just like cunt Edwards doesn’t have a clue either. Those two blatantly try to wind up NUFC fans and their attempts work each time. 

 

 

Edited September 30, 2021 by et tu brute

[gjohnson]

5 minutes ago, Ben said:

What makes Simon Jordan so confident after yesterday the takeover 100% won't now happen, I can't imagine it's spite, so he must have some inside knowledge 

You and I both have as much insider knowledge as Simon Jordan has

[Decky]

Simon Jordan is just a wind up merchant loser, if it goes through he will just say things changed since he said that. All he is ever doing on TalkSport is saying outlandish shite and being negative just to get views on Twitter etc. The man never has anything good to say, he’s just another mouthpiece.

[Ankles Bennett]

5 hours ago, gjohnson said:

Being entirely objective and removing human bias and emotion he couldn't. 

However I strongly suspect he'd have already made his decision before even going in to the court. He will have likely been briefed beforehand about most of what Lewis and Jowell were going to say, and was simply carrying out due process.

 

Very little new came out yesterday, the major point being the PLs threat to expel NUFC. However its now very public and people/journalists outside of the NUFC bubble are aware of what has gone on.

I agree they will have already made their decosion beforhand.  i went the COA once to follow a case i had been involved with.  It started about 10 am and adjourned for lunch at 12.30pm  Our Counsel talked for a further hour on returning.  The tribunal of judges went out for 30 mins at 2.30pm and came back and gave their decision verbally but it took the lead judge 2 hours to read out their decision.  You can't tell me they drafted that decision over 30 mins.  They had clearly made their decision before the oral hearing and nothing that was said by either side changed that decision.  They simply gave the appellant his day in court!

[Ankles Bennett]

4 hours ago, Super Duper Branko Strupar said:

 

Are you a Chihuahua?

Ever heard of skeleton arguments?

[Jackie Broon]

45 minutes ago, Jamie87 said:

 

But their stance is that they've merely applied their own Rules and Regulations, to which NUFC signed up to. There is an agreed process to handle disputes; the arbitration process, to which NUFC also have signed up to. 

 

The legitimacy of our CAT claim seems to hang on the fact that SJHL (erroneously) didn't sign up to the PL Rules and Regs themselves, but rather NUFC and Mike Ashley did. The fact that NUL, SJHL and MASH sit between those two entities in a legal straight line of hierarchy meant that there was no "horizontal" contract constituting an agreement from SJHL. So our case is reliant on SJHL being legally separate to NUFC and Mike Ashley, and hence no beholden to the rules.

 

Which seems an oddly inductive state of argument as the whole fucking mess is about the legal separation of PIF, PZ Newco and the KSA state.

 

Again, I point to the fact that this has become a legal battle of technicalities, which has no moral or emotive reasoning attached to it. Fans are just left in the middle hoping for the best.

 

Firstly, the stuff about SJHL being bound by the PL rules is nothing to do with the overall CAT case, it's just an argument in relation to the PL's jurisdiction challenge. The PL's challenge is that section 9 of the Arbitration Act requires a stay on any other proceedings on those matters brought by a party to the arbitration. We've realised that SJHL hasn't signed up to the PL's rules and so technically isn't party to the arbitration. It's just a potential get out of jail free card for us on jurisdiction, it's not our whole jurisdiction case and will have nothing to do with the main CAT case.

 

Secondly, the PL can't just apply their own rules as they wish. They are in effect a regulator of a closed market of competing businesses, deciding who can enter that market and therefore affecting competition within it, they need to do that in accordance with competition law.

 

 

Edited September 30, 2021 by Jackie Broon

[Fantail Breeze]

6 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

Firstly, the stuff about SJHL being bound by the PL rules is nothing to do with the overall CAT case, it's just an argument in relation to the PL's jurisdiction challenge. The PL's challenge is that section 9 of the Arbitration Act requires a stay on any other proceedings on those matters brought by a party to the arbitration. We've realised that SJHL hasn't signed up to the PL's rules and so technically isn't party to the arbitration. It's just a potential get out of jail free card for us on jurisdiction, it's not our whole jurisdiction case and will have nothing to do with the main CAT case.

 

Secondly, the PL can't just apply their own rules as they wish. They are in effect a regulator of a closed market of competing businesses, deciding who can enter that market and therefore affecting competition within it, they need to do that in accordance with competition law.

 

 

 

 

I wouldn’t be so sure on that. I think it’ll be part of our evidence of the PL failing to apply their own rules consistently or fairly.

[RS]

10 minutes ago, Ankles Bennett said:

Ever heard of skeleton arguments?

That’s a bone of contention.