GT49er
Well-known member
No, but never mind. You carry on. Have a nice evening.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] If Palace can't play in the Europa League
- Thread starter B-right-on
- Start date
GT49er
Well-known member
Nah! It's the Wolves I tell ya, it's the Wolves!
Green Cross Code Man
Wunt be druv
Well the initial comment was serious and just said by way of an example. I realise your frustration jumping in and wondering what was going on, but really a few people making innocent jokes is all it was. Quite honestly it is a bit much if people can't have a bit of fun.Probably a shame someone started the whole bullshit in the first place. Hey-ho, another close season bore-fest. Anyway, I wonder what will happen to Crystal Palace's European dream.
No problem mate, glad I could helpProbably a shame someone started the whole bullshit in the first place. Hey-ho, another close season bore-fest. Anyway, I wonder what will happen to Crystal Palace's European dream.
Kalimantan Gull
Well-known member
Of course we all know nothing will come of this, but it's so much fun watching them lose their minds over nothing. Someone now seems to be theorising that Chelsea may have fixed the results on the final day of the French League to ensure that they and not Strasbourg qualified for the Europa league (which they're not in. They're in the ECL).
Palace potentially denied entry to Europa League?
Well i went to the 'font of all knowledge' - ChatGPT: Should Crystal palace be allowwd to compete in the Europa league? ChatGPT said: Crystal Palace winning the FA Cup on May 17, 2025, officially earned them a spot in the 2025–26 Europa League group stage...forum.holmesdale.net
Whilst this theory is obviously completely sane and utterly reasonable, it does overlook that, even Chelsea aren't incompetent enough not to have realised the potential risk and taken action. They had actually been talking to Uefa since January about a blind trust model for Strasbourg that was sufficient to the requirements should it be needed.
Chelsea & Strasbourg prepare for Uefa multi-club rule changes if both qualify for same competition
Chelsea make plans to be compliant with Uefa regulations after Strasbourg's surprise challenge to qualify for the Champions League.www.bbc.co.uk
The fact that it is even talked about basically demonstrates exactly why multi-club ownership is wrong and could lead to matches being fixed...
Kalimantan Gull
Well-known member
Poor old Drogheda, they are currently 3rd in the Irish Premier league, which doesn't finish until November
Scottish FA CEO Ian Maxwell: "You speak to the guys involved in the Hearts deal and they’re very aware of what UEFA need, what they want and how that structure needs to look to make sure we don’t get ourselves those problems."
Can you imagine following a shoddy club that didn't plan and take appropriate precautions?
Can you imagine following a shoddy club that didn't plan and take appropriate precautions?
schmunk
Well-used member
At least Drogheda can rest back on the laurels of their 5 (FIVE) previous European campaigns.
Palace, though...
Palace, though...
We never forget...................CHEATS
Loving watch this Palace fan, like we've so many of them try to do, claim there is no issue at all, with Mr Rules and Regs Dale Johnson:
Last edited:
Some clarity on this element of the debate.
Hence Toby Bloom resigning as a Director of USG's holding company and selling most/all of his shares in it. Surely he wouldn't have gone to those lengths unless it was necessary. So, logically, Textor needs to do the same. However, he's missed the 1st March deadline.
The weakness in this argument is the application of logic.
Hotchilidog
Well-known member
- Jan 24, 2009
- 9,718
It does seem pretty clear
Brian Fantana
Well-known member
The thing I keep coming back to is the one shareholder, one vote scenario we keep hearing about. IF that's how they operate, and it can be demonstrated, then surely that fairly easily shows Textor only holds a c25% influence over Palace. I guess it depends whether UEFA focus on influence or actual share ownership, as both things seem to be mentioned in their rules. One is good for Palace and the other isn't.
Curious Orange
Punxsatawney Phil
May I refer you back to an earlier post...
[Football] - If Palace can't play in the Europa League
So when the capacity at Withdean was increased to 9000, you didnt fill it? Why when the new ground opened did it jump to 30000? In my opinion the new ground is just as difficult to get to as the old one. As for our own attendances, the season we had 4005 at home to Wimbledon was one of our...
www.northstandchat.com
I'll admit to not having delved into the details on it, but there is some nuance to this in that it's not always one shareholder = one vote, but for polls and written resolutions, it's one share = one vote, which would give Textor more power due to his larger shareholding.
Clever tactic there – change your name so people think it's someone else. Why hasn't Joint Texture thought of that ruse, eh?
Guy Fawkes
The voice of treason
- Sep 29, 2007
- 8,406
So by that logic, Bloom didn't need to sell any shares in USG, he just needed to find 3 people to join him in voting in the boardroom, each having an equal vote and someone else having the final say if a tie ?
Or someone could own 99% of a club, but along as they have 3 others to join them in voting at 25% each, despite owning less than 1% between them, then it would also be fine ?
As i understand it, Textor owns a majority share in Eagle holdings , which has 43% of the shares in Palace, so if he has just over half of the shares in the holding company, does he control that company and therefore has full influence over that 43% even if he only hold 55% of that 43% of shares in the holding company ? Or are they also suggesting the majority shareholder has less than 50% of the voting rights and no say if a tie when the holding company votes too?
schmunk
Well-used member
"If in doubt, kick them out"
- Aug 8, 2005
- 27,828
I keep coming back to the fact that the bloke is the largest shareholder of the business. Regardless of how they say that works day to day it is inconceivable that the largest shareholder of a business does not have influence over the business.