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

[GT49er]

You mean....Hearts will never qualify for Europe?

No. They will qualify for Europe more often than we will, due to the league they are playing in. TB has purchased the exact amount of shares below where it would matter.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

No. They will qualify for Europe more often than we will, due to the league they are playing in. TB has purchased the exact amount of shares below where it would matter.

Come on the Jam Tarts.
And that's not a euphemism.

 

[Eeyore]

Anyone know if Brighton have made representation to EUFA to have them slung out and replace them?

Is the a Eufamism ?

 

[Eeyore]

If the situations were reversed then they would be kicking off so I think we should do so

I rather hope not. It wouldn't be a good look doing that to a fellow Premier League team.

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

Apologies if fixtures but “a decision is expected in the next 10 days” https://www.theguardian.com/football/2025/jun/04/john-textor-crystal-palace-lyons-uefa-european-ban

I don't particularly want to piss on the laughing at palace parade but in this article the following paragraph seems quite pertinent:

Possible workarounds include placing one or more of the clubs involved into a blind trust, as the Manchester United co-owner Jim Ratcliffe did last year with his Ligue 1 club, Nice, when both clubs qualified for the Europa League. Palace, who qualified for the Europa League through their shock FA Cup final win over Manchester City, had not met the Uefa deadline of 1 March for proving they had separate ownership structures.



To me that reads as the 1st March deadline was to prove that the ownership was separate but it's not a deadline for the blind trust thing(I don't actually know what a blind trust is). If that's the correct reading then they'll just do that, no?

I'm going to enjoy the next few days of palace fans panicking at the thought they might not be allowed in to Europe but I fully suspect based off of the above article that they will be given their place.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

I don't particularly want to piss on the laughing at palace parade but in this article the following paragraph seems quite pertinent:

Possible workarounds include placing one or more of the clubs involved into a blind trust, as the Manchester United co-owner Jim Ratcliffe did last year with his Ligue 1 club, Nice, when both clubs qualified for the Europa League. Palace, who qualified for the Europa League through their shock FA Cup final win over Manchester City, had not met the Uefa deadline of 1 March for proving they had separate ownership structures.



To me that reads as the 1st March deadline was to prove that the ownership was separate but it's not a deadline for the blind trust thing(I don't actually know what a blind trust is). If that's the correct reading then they'll just do that, no?

I'm going to enjoy the next few days of palace fans panicking at the thought they might not be allowed in to Europe but I fully suspect based off of the above article that they will be given their place.

A blind trust is basically keeping ownership of the shares but appointing a trustee to run the business. The person putting the shares into the blind trust has no further say in the running of the business. The trustees are free to run things however they want including how they make investments etc without informing the original owner.

The problem Palace have is that it’s the blind trust that would prove they had separate ownership so this would have needed to be done before the deadline and hasn’t been.

In Palaces case things may be complicated by how their shares are split between the 4 owners and the voting rights each owner has. A trustee would only have the voting rights that Textor has, the other 3 owners would still carry on as normal.

 

[Justice]

We all know deep down they will wriggle out of it.

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

A blind trust is basically keeping ownership of the shares but appointing a trustee to run the business. The person putting the shares into the blind trust has no further say in the running of the business. The trustees are free to run things however they want including how they make investments etc without informing the original owner.

The problem Palace have is that it’s the blind trust that would prove they had separate ownership so this would have needed to be done before the deadline and hasn’t been.

In Palaces case things may be complicated by how their shares are split between the 4 owners and the voting rights each owner has. A trustee would only have the voting rights that Textor has, the other 3 owners would still carry on as normal.

So the blind trust is not a work around? That would have to have been done by the deadline?

It comes down to a question of whether the important factor is his voting rights(25%) against his ownership(43%)?

 

[trueblue]

I really don't understand why a deadline of 1st March was set to sort out control issues of clubs in the same competition.

It's ridiculous to insist that setting up blind trusts, share sales etc have to take place before a club either qualify or know if there may be a conflict.

If a politician is appointed as a minister it is at that point external financial conflicts have to be sorted.

Still, "rules are rules", even if they are crazy ones.

For exactly this scenario I suppose. The next European season will start very quickly. If all clubs made a standing start in late May/June on changing their ownership structures, it’d surely be nigh on impossible to complete the deals and have them scrutinised properly. If clubs are excluded, the replacements need to know as soon as possible so they can adjust their training, pre-season schedules, even transfer plans. If a team aspires to play in Europe through whatever route, it’d be sensible to ensure their structure complies with the regulations. UEFA didn’t make up the rules on February 28th.

 

[Gwylan]

We all know deep down they will wriggle out of it.

... as they should.

But it's been very entertaining watching the blind panic over the past couple of weeks

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

So the blind trust is not a work around? That would have to have been done by the deadline?

It comes down to a question of whether the important factor is his voting rights(25%) against his ownership(43%)?

It all depends on UEFA now. Under the rules yes the blind trust should have been in place before the deadline.

That said Forests wasn’t in place until after the deadline. I think the changes in directors (including the removal of the owner as a director) wasn’t logged with Companies House until late April. However Forest could have informed UEFA of their intention to put the club into a blind trust before the deadline and it was just the lawyers sorting everything out that took them longer.

Other clubs will watch what UEFA do with this situation quite closely. If they allow Palace to put the club into a blind trust now and enter the Europa League it’s going to make enforcing the deadline in the future almost impossible. It could also come down to if UEFA believe Palaces argument that their voting structure means Textor doesn’t have significant control.

If any club is going to weasel their way out of it, it will be Palace and that beaky twats smoke and mirrors.

 

[nicko31]

It all depends on UEFA now. Under the rules yes the blind trust should have been in place before the deadline.

That said Forests wasn’t in place until after the deadline. I think the changes in directors (including the removal of the owner as a director) wasn’t logged with Companies House until late April. However Forest could have informed UEFA of their intention to put the club into a blind trust before the deadline and it was just the lawyers sorting everything out that took them longer.

Other clubs will watch what UEFA do with this situation quite closely. If they allow Palace to put the club into a blind trust now and enter the Europa League it’s going to make enforcing the deadline in the future almost impossible. It could also come down to if UEFA believe Palaces argument that their voting structure means Textor doesn’t have significant control.

If any club is going to weasel their way out of it, it will be Palace and that beaky twats smoke and mirrors.

Palace are either going to be cheats or cheats that got away with it.

The cast is set whatever happens from here....

 

[Mackenzie]

The sort of small club that UEFA might make an example of.

 

[nicko31]

The sort of small club that UEFA might make an example of.

Smaller clubs in chaos are easier to deal with, take Everton as an example. It remains to be seen if the big boys ever get properly dealt with

 

[RandyWanger]

Palace will 'get away with it' but the rules will be clarified after to stop this happening again.

 

[Hotchilidog]

We all know deep down they will wriggle out of it.

I am not sure they are clever enough to do it. Looks Textor is scrambling around for a buyer which seems pretty desperate to me. He is trying to sell a lot of shares whilst still leaving Beaky in control. Tough sell

 

[Creaky]

For exactly this scenario I suppose. The next European season will start very quickly. If all clubs made a standing start in late May/June on changing their ownership structures, it’d surely be nigh on impossible to complete the deals and have them scrutinised properly. If clubs are excluded, the replacements need to know as soon as possible so they can adjust their training, pre-season schedules, even transfer plans. If a team aspires to play in Europe through whatever route, it’d be sensible to ensure their structure complies with the regulations. UEFA didn’t make up the rules on February 28th.

On the face of it a reasonable argument but the "blind trust" regulation is still ludicrous.

What does putting shares into a trust achieve? The shares are still "owned" and other than being able to trade them there is no difference The owner still has exactly the same influence within the club as previously.

Imagine if TB, instead of reducing his holdings in a potentially conflicting club, put all his BHAFC shares into a trust. Would PB ignore him, would he no longer have a say in transfers or any other club matters? Of course he would.

What is wrong is the whole concept of multi-club ownership.

 

[origigull]

I'm not sure if this has been highlighted but The Club Leon, a mexican club was recently kicked out of the FIFA club world tournament for multi owners with another mexican (?) club in the same tournament. if FIFA can do this, UEFA must also do this with palarse - hopefully.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

On the face of it a reasonable argument but the "blind trust" regulation is still ludicrous.

What does putting shares into a trust achieve? The shares are still "owned" and other than being able to trade them there is no difference The owner still has exactly the same influence within the club as previously.

Imagine if TB, instead of reducing his holdings in a potentially conflicting club, put all his BHAFC shares into a trust. Would PB ignore him, would he no longer have a say in transfers or any other club matters? Of course he would.

What is wrong is the whole concept of multi-club ownership.

Legally the owner has no say in how a company in a blind trust is run. They are no longer a director and the trustees are also legally bound to not inform the owner of any decisions made. The trustee(s) run the company of their own free will.

If an owner put a company into a blind trust and then still tried to exert control and influence how it was run then both the owner, the trustee(s) and other directors would be at risk of being charged with fraud.

 

[nickbrighton]

What is wrong is the whole concept of multi-club ownership.

The problem is that it puts a conflict of interest in to the equation. it could mean that one club could benefit by the other clubs performance, an opportunity to manipulate league positions, and if the two clubs were to meet, basically have the result decided by the owner, not the match. There is also the possibility of loans and transfers at beneficial prices to enable clubs to get players they wouldn't normally have

Didnt Wolves have a huge number of players on loan from a Portuguese club belonging to the same owner?