Jump to content

Various: N-O has lost the plot over potential end of Mike Ashley's tenure


Jinky Jim

Recommended Posts

Important line here ?

 

 

Reckon that concludes the matter. Only a matter of time. :aww:

 

Agreed. Cat out of the bag there for me.

 

have SA said they'll allow prosecution of people in their courts?  cause if they don't then i could see that being a major issue based on that

 

That seems to be referring to lifting the ban on beIN broadcasting in SA. If that's what they're requiring they may be on incredibly dodgy ground, because there's certainly no offence involved in not allowing beIN to broadcast in SA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still don’t understand how BEIN have been afforded any influence in this matter.

 

All the PL's finance comes from the broadcasters. Sky Sports apart, BeIN are the PL's biggest broadcasting partner in terms of how much money they give to the PL. It's perfectly understandable that they have to keep them happy.. even discarding Qatar's reputation for large-scale corruption of football officials.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Important line here ?

 

 

Reckon that concludes the matter. Only a matter of time. :aww:

 

Agreed. Cat out of the bag there for me.

 

have SA said they'll allow prosecution of people in their courts?  cause if they don't then i could see that being a major issue based on that

 

That seems to be referring to lifting the ban on beIN broadcasting in SA. If that's what they're requiring they may be on incredibly dodgy ground, because there's certainly no offence involved in not allowing beIN to broadcast in SA.

 

i disagree, a major part of the WTO finding was SA blocking legal redress in their own country for violations

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still don’t understand how BEIN have been afforded any influence in this matter.

 

All the PL's finance comes from the broadcasters. Sky Sports apart, BeIN are the PL's biggest broadcasting partner in terms of how much money they give to the PL. It's perfectly understandable that they have to keep them happy.. even discarding Qatar's reputation for large-scale corruption of football officials.

 

In the context of the fit and proper persons test I just don’t see it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still don’t understand how BEIN have been afforded any influence in this matter.

 

All the PL's finance comes from the broadcasters. Sky Sports apart, BeIN are the PL's biggest broadcasting partner in terms of how much money they give to the PL. It's perfectly understandable that they have to keep them happy.. even discarding Qatar's reputation for large-scale corruption of football officials.

 

In the context of the fit and proper persons test I just don’t see it.

 

I think it's pretty clear that they're operating outside of the guidelines for the test and making it up as they go along. I think that's probably within their right though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Important line here ?

 

 

Reckon that concludes the matter. Only a matter of time. :aww:

 

Agreed. Cat out of the bag there for me.

 

have SA said they'll allow prosecution of people in their courts?  cause if they don't then i could see that being a major issue based on that

 

That seems to be referring to lifting the ban on beIN broadcasting in SA. If that's what they're requiring they may be on incredibly dodgy ground, because there's certainly no offence involved in not allowing beIN to broadcast in SA.

 

i disagree, a major part of the WTO finding was SA blocking legal redress in their own country for violations

 

That doesn't seem to be what he was referring to, he didn't say 'enforce rights', it seems to me that he's referring to beIN not being able to broadcast in SA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still don’t understand how BEIN have been afforded any influence in this matter.

 

All the PL's finance comes from the broadcasters. Sky Sports apart, BeIN are the PL's biggest broadcasting partner in terms of how much money they give to the PL. It's perfectly understandable that they have to keep them happy.. even discarding Qatar's reputation for large-scale corruption of football officials.

 

In the context of the fit and proper persons test I just don’t see it.

maybe but nothing occurs in a vacuum especially this one as BeIN are the victims of beoutq which is the deciding factor in this debacle its no wonder the prem would take their opinion seriously

Link to post
Share on other sites

Important line here ?

 

 

Reckon that concludes the matter. Only a matter of time. :aww:

 

Agreed. Cat out of the bag there for me.

 

have SA said they'll allow prosecution of people in their courts?  cause if they don't then i could see that being a major issue based on that

 

That seems to be referring to lifting the ban on beIN broadcasting in SA. If that's what they're requiring they may be on incredibly dodgy ground, because there's certainly no offence involved in not allowing beIN to broadcast in SA.

 

i disagree, a major part of the WTO finding was SA blocking legal redress in their own country for violations

 

That doesn't seem to be what he was referring to, he didn't say 'enforce rights', it seems to me that he's referring to beIN not being able to broadcast in SA.

 

"to take their rights" were the words he used, guess we interpret it differently

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest godzilla

Still don’t understand how BEIN have been afforded any influence in this matter.

 

All the PL's finance comes from the broadcasters. Sky Sports apart, BeIN are the PL's biggest broadcasting partner in terms of how much money they give to the PL. It's perfectly understandable that they have to keep them happy.. even discarding Qatar's reputation for large-scale corruption of football officials.

 

In the context of the fit and proper persons test I just don’t see it.

 

I think it's pretty clear that they're operating outside of the guidelines for the test and making it up as they go along. I think that's probably within their right though.

 

If they are and they knock it back then the consortium/Ashley legal team will have a field day, as you can't change things mid stream without these changes being certified and published first.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also if true, I’m not sure how the premier league can request to speak to a Saudi minister if he isn’t apart of the PIF.

 

The PL seem to be backing themselves in to a corner and shouldn’t over estimate the leverage they have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nearly 10.5k have signed that petition. Just shows this place is not a true reflection on the feelings of nufc twitter.

 

There you go.

 

Do their opinions not matter? Sure more people have signed that petition in less than a day than are signed up members to NUST.

 

Didn't say they didn't, but NUFC twitter is not even close to be representative of the fan base. Just ask anyone involved in any of the protest work be it Pardew, Ashley stuff, walk outs etc.

 

What's NUST got to do with it?

 

It’s a large enough group of people to be taken seriously And comparable in numbers to NUST, so should not dismissed or looked down upon. Some will also be members of NUST.

 

People on here have called it pathetic, for me looking down upon fellow NUFC fans for venting their frustration in a calm manner is way beyond pathetic.

 

I haven't.

 

But I haven't signed it as I think it's a little dangerous asking for a solution now - if people want the takeover then we simply have to wait until the Premier League approve it. There are clearly incredibly complex issues they are considering.

 

Pushing them to do it quicker - while unlikely to have any influence - if it did, would surely more likely result in a refusal and us being stuck with Ashley going forward?

 

The NUST letter on behalf of their members might have no impact either, in fact it probably will not, but it was a very strong point by point legal rebuttal of some of the nonsense claims by Qatar re the WTO report and others that have written to the Premier League, undertaken by a specialist barrister from 3 Hare Court Chambers and was sent directly to Richard Masters by legal counsel.

 

I haven’t signed it either, simply as I see no point in it. Those petitions don’t work, even for serious issues, so I don’t think it matters in terms of speeding things up, but clearly shows a united front of a group of supporters venting their frustrations in a better manner than we have done previously.

 

Again, for me won’t make a difference.

 

I’m all for the letter sent by NUST, I think it’s was a good reach out and not one done for the spotlight as others have done, backed up with not publishing the contents.

 

So all in I agree mainly with what you say there, the thing I’m not comfortable with is the dismissal of 10k supporters voices as twitter noise, it’s more than that and the number should be respected by all NUFC fans considering it’s not even 24 hours.

 

Ps, not sure how many voted in that poll where 97% wanted the takeover, but I’m sure it was also hosted on Twitter (might be wrong)

 

Pps...just think what 5 t***s with a coffin can do for your fans image a decade on, a petition is a good place to keep all that energy focused in one spot.  :lol:

 

It was a member survey, sent only to members via survey monkey or one of those things.

 

I was being facetious in response to your point about this place not being representative of the wider fan base (which I agree with) - we don't appear to really be disagreeing and clearly it is a little more than twitter noise - but my point being in general, all my experience in this sort of thing is that twitter (where we've seen most of the traction for the petition) clearly isn't respective of the wider fan base either - we've seen that time and time again over the years with loads of noise on twitter and little to no action on the ground by the masses that still descend on SJP.

 

:thup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

thought that ben jacobs tweet was interesting mind, that the PL wanted clarification of that one bloke who was linked to piracy (or something) and is also on the board of PiF....there's always been the question over legal entities etc. but if he's heavily implicated in the piracy stuff then it might be what they're targetting

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest godzilla

thought that ben jacobs tweet was interesting mind, that the PL wanted clarification of that one bloke who was linked to piracy (or something) and is also on the board of PiF....there's always been the question over legal entities etc. but if he's heavily implicated in the piracy stuff then it might be what they're targetting

 

No, didn't say he was linked to the piracy, it said he was the one who issued the Saudi response to the WTO report (i.e. email-gate)

Link to post
Share on other sites

thought that ben jacobs tweet was interesting mind, that the PL wanted clarification of that one bloke who was linked to piracy (or something) and is also on the board of PiF....there's always been the question over legal entities etc. but if he's heavily implicated in the piracy stuff then it might be what they're targetting

The Football Law opinion indicates that Saudi and Qatari lawyers accept that PIF is a separate legal entity.

 

∆ On 2 June 2020 Qatari- and Saudi- based lawyers provided confirmation to this author that KSA PIF is a separate legal entity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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