DJ_NUFC, cubaricho, Likelylad, CFlan, Johny4317, LFEE, Pilko, small_paul, Ryan, Nattfare, Doctor Zaius, Darth Crooks, geordie_b, Rob, buzz, SteDE, TomCmo, Colo's Short and Curlies, Optimistic Nut (+ 2 Hidden) and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
It's basically what gives us the upper hand even in times of crisis. "Cannit wait man, we're gonna batter them, hope it's 4 or 5 nil, fancy such and such for a hat trick, we're going got Europe, they're a yo-yo team" Then five minutes into the game "s***, why haven't we scored? They've had a shot! Why aren't we all over them? How come there are two teams in the game? f***, what if we don't win? f***s SAKE CLEAR IT SHOOT TACKLE HIM BOO! What if we lose, PANIC PANIC BRUCE MAN WHAT ARE YOU DOING WHY DID HE MISS THAT SHOT, IS HE A MAG?! IT'S BECAUSE BRUCE IS A MAG! f*** OFF STEWARD ARE YOU A f***ing MAG? BET ALL THESE COPPERS ARE MAGS, AND THE MEDIA! THE REF'S A f***ing MAG! AM I A MAG?! Wait, blacked out for a second there. Ah, f***, we've lost again."
Quote from: godzilla on Tuesday 21 July 2020, 11:17:51 PMQuote from: wormy on Tuesday 21 July 2020, 11:12:34 PMIs this one for the Mauriss takeover?In his simple mind he thinks so, let's say the takeover is knocked back; there will be an appeal and then a court case to follow before any bid can be even agreed. Not very bright is Mr Edwards, unless he actually thinks the Saudi bid will win (somehow I don't think he does)What evidence is there to suggest that there'd be a court case ?Would there even be grounds for taking it to court? It's the PL's O&D test, it's not British law to the best of my knowledge. If the buyers fail it,and then are unsuccessful with their appeal, then it's basically tough s*** isn't it ?
Quote from: wormy on Tuesday 21 July 2020, 11:12:34 PMIs this one for the Mauriss takeover?In his simple mind he thinks so, let's say the takeover is knocked back; there will be an appeal and then a court case to follow before any bid can be even agreed. Not very bright is Mr Edwards, unless he actually thinks the Saudi bid will win (somehow I don't think he does)
Is this one for the Mauriss takeover?
Quote from: Wandy on Tuesday 21 July 2020, 11:25:34 PMPeople need to give it a rest with the "there will be a legal battle if it fails" bollocks. There will be no legal repercussions. All parties will say nothing and try to pretend that the whole farce never happened, allowing it to fizzle out with barely a murmur of complant. Meanwhile we will be left to pick up the pieces once again.I get why people keep peddling the legal action line. Its because they feel that someone, somewhere needs to pay a price for making us fans suffer like this. But its not going to happen. Unfortunately we are the ones who will be in bits about this and all of the other parties will just walk away with a shrug.Absolutely no way it fizzles out with the current state of play between Qatar and Saudi. Whoever gets the outcome they favour will immediately spin it as a victory.
People need to give it a rest with the "there will be a legal battle if it fails" bollocks. There will be no legal repercussions. All parties will say nothing and try to pretend that the whole farce never happened, allowing it to fizzle out with barely a murmur of complant. Meanwhile we will be left to pick up the pieces once again.I get why people keep peddling the legal action line. Its because they feel that someone, somewhere needs to pay a price for making us fans suffer like this. But its not going to happen. Unfortunately we are the ones who will be in bits about this and all of the other parties will just walk away with a shrug.
Quote from: The Prophet on Tuesday 21 July 2020, 10:55:46 PMStill seen very little to suggest it won't go through. I can't wait until we're filthy rich.Your continued optimism is what keeps me going tbh No idea where you get it from.
Still seen very little to suggest it won't go through. I can't wait until we're filthy rich.
Another day another twist. Tomorrow the cans will be oot again no doubt
Quote from: Robster on Tuesday 21 July 2020, 11:27:52 PMQuote from: godzilla on Tuesday 21 July 2020, 11:17:51 PMQuote from: wormy on Tuesday 21 July 2020, 11:12:34 PMIs this one for the Mauriss takeover?In his simple mind he thinks so, let's say the takeover is knocked back; there will be an appeal and then a court case to follow before any bid can be even agreed. Not very bright is Mr Edwards, unless he actually thinks the Saudi bid will win (somehow I don't think he does)What evidence is there to suggest that there'd be a court case ?Would there even be grounds for taking it to court? It's the PL's O&D test, it's not British law to the best of my knowledge. If the buyers fail it,and then are unsuccessful with their appeal, then it's basically tough s*** isn't it ?Do you know how many civil cases are taken to court by businesses each year? If the consortium feel (rightly) that they have evidence to show that they have been disqualified due to something outside the remit of the O&D test then they most certainly can and will.
One of the reasons I've lost hope in this happening, is godzillas unflinching confidence.
Quote from: godzilla on Tuesday 21 July 2020, 11:37:05 PMQuote from: Robster on Tuesday 21 July 2020, 11:27:52 PMQuote from: godzilla on Tuesday 21 July 2020, 11:17:51 PMQuote from: wormy on Tuesday 21 July 2020, 11:12:34 PMIs this one for the Mauriss takeover?In his simple mind he thinks so, let's say the takeover is knocked back; there will be an appeal and then a court case to follow before any bid can be even agreed. Not very bright is Mr Edwards, unless he actually thinks the Saudi bid will win (somehow I don't think he does)What evidence is there to suggest that there'd be a court case ?Would there even be grounds for taking it to court? It's the PL's O&D test, it's not British law to the best of my knowledge. If the buyers fail it,and then are unsuccessful with their appeal, then it's basically tough s*** isn't it ?Do you know how many civil cases are taken to court by businesses each year? If the consortium feel (rightly) that they have evidence to show that they have been disqualified due to something outside the remit of the O&D test then they most certainly can and will.Have you read the O&D test recently?It seems pretty obvious that the PIF/PCP/RB bid can (and possibly should) fail the O&D test as written.It seems equally obvious that the PL don't want to do that - because if they did, they would have done it four months ago.The consortium is being given the opportunity to rectify the issues related to piracy. Whether the take that opportunity or not remains to be seen.
Sean, the oracle.
Yes I have thank you. Read my answer again explaining that the premier League can be taken to court by the consortium (once the appeal process has been undertaken) if they feel that they have been disqualified due to events outside of the D&O test, which is what I was stating that they can. They could do this even with events within the D&O test if they feel they have the evidence to support this and that the decision was made incorrectly. That's what the courts are there for (civil as not criminal offence), and as mentioned above was administered recently by the Court of Sport Arbitration between Man City and UEFA.Let's entertain you though about the piracy, please show me one bit of evidence (including the WTO Report) where it states that either the state of KSA or PIF are directly responsible for the transmission of the piracy streams. They were concluded by the same report as being responsible for not doing enough to stop the streams, but that is a totally different to being directly responsible. The WTO Report also concluded that it was the states right to do this under TRIPS. KSA Minister of Sport has now taken steps to address this by the statements made a couple of weeks ago. Obvious has nothing to do with anything you need evidence to back that up.The issue now which is being reported as the problem is due to KSA banning beIN from providing network coverage within Saudi Arabia. This is NOT part of the D&O test and as such is an event outside of the remit.
“Control” means the power of a Person to exercise, or to be able to exercise or acquire, direct or indirect control over the policies, affairs and/or management of a Club, whether that power is constituted by rights or contracts (either separately or in combination) and having regard to the considerations of fact or law involved, and, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, Control shall be deemed to include:(a)the power (whether directly or indirectly and whether by the ownership of share capital, by the possession of voting power, by contract or otherwise including without limitation by way of membership of any Concert Party) to appoint and/or remove all or such of the members of the board of directors of the Club as are able to cast a majority of the votes capable of being cast by the members of that board; and/or(b)the holding and/or possession of the beneficial interest in, and/or the ability to exercise the voting rights applicable to, Shares in the Club (whether directly, indirectly (by means of holding such interests in one or more other persons) or by contract including without limitation by way of membership of any Concert Party) which confer in aggregate on the holder(s) thereof 30 per cent or more of the total voting rights exercisable at general meetings of the Club.For the purposes of the above, any rights or powers of a Nominee for any Person or of an Associate of any Person or of a Connected Person to any Person shall be attributed to that Person;
F.1.6 in the reasonable opinion of the Board, he has engaged in conduct outside the United Kingdom that would constitute an offence of the sort described in Rules F.1.5.2 or F.1.5.3, if such conduct had taken place in the United Kingdom, whether or not such conduct resulted in a Conviction;F. 1 . 5 . 2 .in respect of any offence involving any act which could reasonably be considered to be dishonest (and, for the avoidance of doubt, irrespective of the actual sentence imposed); orF. 1 . 5 . 3 .in respect of an offence set out in Appendix 1 (Schedule of Offences) or a directly analogous offence in a foreign jurisdiction (and, for the avoidance of doubt, irrespective of the actual sentence imposed);