[Football] If Palace can't play in the Europa League

[mile oak]

I’m not sure taking them out of one competition, and putting them in another competition where they will have broken the same rules, is likely to survive any legal challenge which would inevitably come.

Are

Each PL place is £3m, financial this competition offers very little

lots of spins offs though extra matches Tv revenue etc. and a TROPHY IF YOU WIN!

 

[GT49er]

Matt Lawton does make a very good point, that selling his 43% share with 25% voting rights will make it very difficult to sell to anyone.

Yes, listening to that at the moment. Just watched SSN's expert (can't remember his name) explaining the rules - but he's actually passionately supporting Palarse - it would be outrageous if they were denied the place they've earned and deserved, and all that! Watch from about 8.00 onwards -

Some independent expert analysis, that!
Genuine question to somebody who knows more than I do - why is it only Palace who are facing possible expulsion. How come Lyon's place isn't in jeopardy?

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

I'm sure it's been pointed out elsewhere

But how do Redbull get around it?

When Leeds have the league wrapped up by Christmas, will they have issues?

I'm assuming they get around it by saying it's sponsorship ?

 

[Justice]

UEFA's rules forced Tony Bloom to sell shares in USG. Since that date USG have become Belgian Champions and will be playing in the Champions League. Therefore, those shares he had to sell then are a lot more valuable now.

The same is likely to be the case for Marinakis' Forest shares now they have qualified for Europe for the first time in decades.

Contrast that with Textor's shares that have increased in value since Palace won the cup and qualified for Europe. If he sells now the market rate is higher than what it was on 1st March 2025, that being UEFA's deadline day. If Palace are allowed to compete he will profit by breaking the rules.

This is why UEFA must enforce their rules, otherwise they face multiple legal challenges, rather than just one challenge from Palace.

His trusted right hand man has TB’s shares in Union, I’m quite sure he isn’t losing out.

 

[SeagullinExile]

Yes, listening to that at the moment. Just watched SSN's expert (can't remember his name) explaining the rules - but he's actually passionately supporting Palarse - it would be outrageous if they were denied the place they've earned and deserved, and all that! Some independent expert analysis, that!
Genuine question to somebody who knows more than I do - why is it only Palace who are facing possible expulsion. How come Lille's place isn't in jeopardy?

Lyon? Because they finished higher in League 1 than Palace did the Prem.

 

[MTSeagulls]

This reply is only to congratulate you on reciting a gem from The Young Ones.

If you're going to be that sycophantic, why don't you go round there now and stick your tongue straight down the back of his trousers?

 

[ditchy]

The flip side to that argument is that Textor will find it harder to sell the shares due to an inflated value because of a one off cup win. He couldn't get a buyer at pre Cup win value. Delicious irony. Love it.

Market economics would dictate that the value would not ideally go up as the value was inflated in the first place . The shares are only valued at what people are prepared to pay for them

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

Genuine question to somebody who knows more than I do - why is it only Palace who are facing possible expulsion. How come Lille's place isn't in jeopardy?

It’s Lyon not Lille.

If there is a breach of the MCO rules then the place will be given to the club that finishes higher in their domestic league. So it is Palace who are at risk. As Lyon finished 6th in Ligue 1.

The same rules would then prevent Palace from dropping into the Conference as two of their other owners have a majority share in Brondby and the Danish side finished 3rd in their league meaning they’d get the place too.

 

[GT49er]

It’s Lyon not Lille.

Mis-heard it - now edited!

If there is a breach of the MCO rules then the place will be given to the club that finishes higher in their domestic league. So it is Palace who are at risk. As Lyon finished 6th in Ligue 1.

The same rules would then prevent Palace from dropping into the Conference as two of their other owners have a majority share in Brondby and the Danish side finished 3rd in their league meaning they’d get the place too.

Cheers.

 

[A1X]

So what happens if they get kicked out?

 

[Berty23]

The special pleading of “but but but palace deserve it” is epic. For goodness sake. These are adults. Successful business people who should understand rules of governance and such things. This is not children who have done something unexpected.

Their aim at the start of the season would have been to have a solid performance in the league and win a cup. They have literally achieved their aim for the season. But now they are saying “but we didn’t know we would actually achieve it”

Grow up. Ffs.

 

[Berty23]

So what happens if they get kicked out?

View attachment 203909

We all pi55 ourselves laughing, I expect.

 

[nicko31]

Yes, listening to that at the moment. Just watched SSN's expert (can't remember his name) explaining the rules - but he's actually passionately supporting Palarse - it would be outrageous if they were denied the place they've earned and deserved, and all that! Watch from about 8.00 onwards -

Some independent expert analysis, that!
Genuine question to somebody who knows more than I do - why is it only Palace who are facing possible expulsion. How come Lyon's place isn't in jeopardy?

FFS, common sense?

Where's the common sense in having rules if they're not enforced?

 

[Washie]

I'm sure it's been pointed out elsewhere

But how do Redbull get around it?

When Leeds have the league wrapped up by Christmas, will they have issues?

I'm assuming they get around it by saying it's sponsorship ?

They restructured the ownership, so Redbull technically no longer own Salzburg, they now heavily sponsor.

 

[Insel affe]

The special pleading of “but but but palace deserve it” is epic. For goodness sake. These are adults. Successful business people who should understand rules of governance and such things. This is not children who have done something unexpected.

Their aim at the start of the season would have been to have a solid performance in the league and win a cup. They have literally achieved their aim for the season. But now they are saying “but we didn’t know we would actually achieve it”

Grow up. Ffs.

Imagine how infuriated you would be at the boards incompetence if god forbid you were a Palace fan.

It is enough to make you want to burn your own town down.....

 

[peterward]

So what happens if they get kicked out?

View attachment 203909

Whiny little bitches scream of injustice that they couldn't cheat the system, and Dunelm Croydon sells out of bed sheets for the latest lame Holmesdale UEFA banners.

Meanwhile down the M23, all menswear retailers in Brighton sell out of underpants, as Albion fans piss all their pairs.

 

[Stato]

Yes, listening to that at the moment. Just watched SSN's expert (can't remember his name) explaining the rules - but he's actually passionately supporting Palarse - it would be outrageous if they were denied the place they've earned and deserved, and all that! Watch from about 8.00 onwards -

Some independent expert analysis, that!
Genuine question to somebody who knows more than I do - why is it only Palace who are facing possible expulsion. How come Lyon's place isn't in jeopardy?

Strange muddle headed stuff from Sky. Why are they stressing that not being part of an ownership group is key? It absolutely isn't. Presumably the whole point of not having two clubs with the same owners in one competition is to avoid any accusation of collaboration or favouritism. If Palace and Lyon are in the same group and Palace are already out, but playing a match against Lyon, who need a result for a qualifying spot, other teams could ask whether Textor's team are going to take it easy to help Textor's other team. That's a potential risk whether they are part of a group or not.

Also Textor's claims that he couldn't have known it was going to happen on 1 March are fairly nonsensical. Okay the FA Cup hadn't got very far, but Lyon were 6th in the French League and although in their traditional twelfth place, Palace were only seven points off a European spot. The previous season they had stormed the end of the season and jumped from 15th to 10th in the last six games. This article was written on 4th March:

Will race for Europe be the closest EVER?

Tom Hancock analyses what is required to win the thrilling battle to claim a European spot next season

www.premierleague.com

"Even the sides currently placed 11th and 12th, Brentford and Crystal Palace, are still just about in contention to grab a European spot for 2025/26."

The chance was so good that Brentford still had that chance on the final day of the season. Even if you argue that Palace's chance was an outside one, surely one of the reasons that Palace pays Parish seven figures a year as a director is to make adequate preparation to deal with future risks and opportunities. He failed to.

 

[essbee1]

FFS, common sense?

Where's the common sense in having rules if they're not enforced?

Seems to me like Palace are hinging their case on two fronts. First, they didn't see this happening. Second,
the ties between Lyon and Palace are tenuous at best. Neither argument is really that compelling.

My take: The elephant in the room of course is that Palace still broke the rules, technically. UEFA are in a really tricky spot
of their own making. If they give Palace the nod, then they are ignoring their own rules and overlooking those
rules. There will then be x court cases brought by a, b and c. If they say 'no' then Palace will be in court appealing.

Whichever way - it's going to get very messy.

 

[Washie]

Seems to me like Palace are hinging their case on two fronts. First, they didn't see this happening. Second,
the ties between Lyon and Palace are tenuous at best. Neither argument is really that compelling.

My take: The elephant in the room of course is that Palace still broke the rules, technically. UEFA are in a really tricky spot
of their own making. If they give Palace the nod, then they are ignoring their own rules and overlooking those
rules. There will then be x court cases brought by a, b and c. If they say 'no' then Palace will be in court appealing.

Whichever way - it's going to get very messy.

If Palace before the final had contacted Uefa regarding a potential issue, I think they would have been fine. But because they just rocked up expecting it all to go well might have irked them. Forest sending that letter will now tell UEFA a lot of clubs are watching this. Could other owners get angry at UEFA for following the rules and sue themselves.

 

[peterward]

Seems to me like Palace are hinging their case on two fronts. First, they didn't see this happening. Second,
the ties between Lyon and Palace are tenuous at best. Neither argument is really that compelling.

My take: The elephant in the room of course is that Palace still broke the rules, technically. UEFA are in a really tricky spot
of their own making. If they give Palace the nod, then they are ignoring their own rules and overlooking those
rules. There will then be x court cases brought by a, b and c. If they say 'no' then Palace will be in court appealing.

Whichever way - it's going to get very messy.

Agree, but still you'd think its less problematic for UEFA to deal with Palace objections, once competitions have already started without them, and using rules that they have violated as justification...... than to open Pandorras box of precedent for all other clubs and numerous challenges because of precedent granted to the serial rule breakers and piss takers of SE25