[Albion] Albion /Union SG - Europe Question

[WASH]

Sorry if it's been covered before, and not wishing a 'curse of the commentator' type thing, but are there any potential issues if both us and Union SG qualify for Europe as Big Tone owns both Clubs? Would it only be an issue if we both ended up in the same European Comp or is it that when an person owns more than one Club only one Club can enter a European Competition and some sort of priority is given to one Club over the other or would it be the owner's discretion who plays in Europe?

 

[Simster]

Sorry if it's been covered before, and not wishing a 'curse of the commentator' type thing, but are there any potential issues if both us and Union SG qualify for Europe as Big Tone owns both Clubs? Would it only be an issue if we both ended up in the same European Comp or is it that when an person owns more than one Club only one Club can enter a European Competition and some sort of priority is given to one Club over the other or would it be the owner's discretion who plays in Europe?

I think this covers it:

RB Leipzig allowed to play in Europe

RB Leipzig and Red Bull Salzburg can both play in the Champions League next season, Uefa confirms.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Hotchilidog]

In a word no.

 

[Ali_rrr]

I think this covers it:

RB Leipzig allowed to play in Europe

RB Leipzig and Red Bull Salzburg can both play in the Champions League next season, Uefa confirms.

www.bbc.co.uk

The main difference is here:

"Red Bull bought Austria Salzburg in 2005, renaming it, but following a restructuring it no longer has a controlling stake and merely sponsors the club."

I suspect article 5 may be a problem.

a. no club participating in a Uefa club competition may, either directly or indirectly:

i. hold or deal in the securities or shares of any other club participating in a Uefa club competition,

ii. be a member of any other club participating in a Uefa club competition,

iii. be involved in any capacity whatsoever in the management, administration and/or sporting performance of any other club participating in a Uefa club competition, or

iv. have any power whatsoever in the management, administration and/or sporting performance of any other club participating in a Uefa club competition;


I think this may prove a stumbling block for us.

 

[Ali_rrr]

If anyone is interested in any further reading of the previous case law:

Arbitration CAS 98/200 AEK Athens and SK Slavia Prague / Union of European Football Associations (UEFA), Award | ArbitrationLaw.com

1. If clubs with the same owner can take part in the same competitions, whether national or international, doubts may arise as to whether the outcome is really undecided in advance. The challenged UEFA Rule is therefore an essential feature for the organization of a professional football...

arbitrationlaw.com

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

All he has to do is gift his shares to his son in trust.

 

[Goldstone1976]

The main difference is here:

"Red Bull bought Austria Salzburg in 2005, renaming it, but following a restructuring it no longer has a controlling stake and merely sponsors the club."

I suspect article 5 may be a problem.

a. no club participating in a Uefa club competition may, either directly or indirectly:

i. hold or deal in the securities or shares of any other club participating in a Uefa club competition,

ii. be a member of any other club participating in a Uefa club competition,

iii. be involved in any capacity whatsoever in the management, administration and/or sporting performance of any other club participating in a Uefa club competition, or

iv. have any power whatsoever in the management, administration and/or sporting performance of any other club participating in a Uefa club competition;


I think this may prove a stumbling block for us.

On this point alone it should not be a problem.

“No club participating….”

AFAIK none of i to iv above apply. Tony does; not the club.

 

[Cotton Socks]

[Albion] - Will Brighton be allowed to play in Europe?

If Brighton qualifies for Europe, I wonder if they will have a problem with Tony Bloom having interests in Brighton and Royale Union Saint-Gilloise, seeing as they are both likely to qualify? Because as I am reading it (and I may be wrong), a person cannot hold interests in two clubs, both...

www.northstandchat.com

 

[BNthree]

Already discussed in another thread but can't recall which one. Tony Bloom seems to be a man that thinks several steps ahead so will definitely have a plan for this situation if it happens.

 

[GT49er]

Already discussed in another thread but can't recall which one. Tony Bloom seems to be a man that thinks several steps ahead so will definitely have a plan for this situation if it happens.

Absolutely. Can't believe Bloom and Barber won't have thought about this already, gone through every clause with a very fine toothcomb and come up with structures in the ownership and governance of both clubs to make sure we're in the clear.

 

[Brian Fantana]

If you want to get very technical about it, UEFA’s regulations stipulate that someone cannot have a ‘decisive influence’ in the running of multiple clubs. And that ‘decisive influence’ must impact on the integrity of the competition that both clubs would participate in together in order to constitute a breach of the rules.

So as Tony has no day-to-day involvement in USG and is essentially a sleeping majority shareholder, it is absolutely fine, IMO.

 

[Live by the sea]

Sorry if it's been covered before, and not wishing a 'curse of the commentator' type thing, but are there any potential issues if both us and Union SG qualify for Europe as Big Tone owns both Clubs? Would it only be an issue if we both ended up in the same European Comp or is it that when an person owns more than one Club only one Club can enter a European Competition and some sort of priority is given to one Club over the other or would it be the owner's discretion who plays in Europe?

There are absolutely no issues at all . Relax .

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

If you want to get very technical about it, UEFA’s regulations stipulate that someone cannot have a ‘decisive influence’ in the running of multiple clubs. And that ‘decisive influence’ must impact on the integrity of the competition that both clubs would participate in together in order to constitute a breach of the rules.

So as Tony has no day-to-day involvement in USG and is essentially a sleeping majority shareholder, it is absolutely fine, IMO.

Whilst that may or may not be the outcome, I do disagree with your logic. ‘Decisive influence’ and ‘day to day involvement’ are not necessarily the same thing so it is not quite as open and shut as you say. Open to interpretation by UEFA. It’s having the power to do something that may be important rather than how much that power has been used so far.

 

[Bodian]

Popped up on the BBC - apparently 'UEFA are to discuss..."

Tony Bloom: Uefa to discuss Brighton ownership issue

Tony Bloom: Uefa to discuss Brighton ownership issue

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Springal]

It is a bit flimsy ‘oh yeah he’s put all his money in but he’s not an owner and has no control’ errrr yeah ok then

 

[GT49er]

Popped up on the BBC - apparently 'UEFA are to discuss..."

Tony Bloom: Uefa to discuss Brighton ownership issue

Tony Bloom: Uefa to discuss Brighton ownership issue

www.bbc.co.uk

Wow! - this could be a nasty shock to Bloom and Barber. I'd bet my house they've never considered this before ......................

 

[Worried Man Blues]

Odds on the final BHAvUSG

 

[Psychobilly freakout]

Wow! - this could be a nasty shock to Bloom and Barber. I'd bet my house they've never considered this before ......................

Be just like UEFA to boot the English team out.

 

[dejavuatbtn]

I have to say I have always been a bit uncomfortable with the relationship with USG. If another PL team had been doing this (and I suspect there are) I’d have been having a go. whilst I am sure we get good advantage from it, I think it’s something that probably needs closing for the good of the game.

 

[Springal]

I have to say I have always been a bit uncomfortable with the relationship with USG. If another PL team had been doing this (and I suspect there are) I’d have been having a go. whilst I am sure we get good advantage from it, I think it’s something that probably needs closing for the good of the game.

Agreed. It is a convenient thing for us and good foresight from Tony with the impact of Brexit and work permits to have done this. But let’s not pretend there is no direct influence when they loan more players from us then any other club. It’s no coincidence