Toonpack 9400 Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 6 hours ago, ewerk said: Aye, Chelsea are owned by a man who was literally banned from entering the country, City are owned by a state with countless human rights issues, Wolves are owned by a Chinese company which puts them directly under the control of the Chinese government, Sheffield United are owned by a Saudi Prince, Spurs owned by a tax exile, Man Utd owned by a family who forced the club to repay their debt but suddenly when we're to be bought over that's where they draw the line? Do they think that MBS is going to instruct the first team squad to go on a preseason bombing tour of Yemen? It's a fucking joke. I worked with someone who was doing some work in Russia at the time he was making his moolah. Let's just say Marlon Brando or Al Pacino would not be bad casting if they made a bio-pic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burb 28 Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 7 hours ago, Isegrim said: I am still convinced that the PL are mostly frightened of the Qataris, because bein is the most valuable holder of tv rights outside of the UK. If it wasn't for them fearing to lose money they would have no objection at all. They probably know it is hard for them to legally reject the takeover but do also know that the Qataris will make a major fuss because of the relationship between them and the Saudis. Totally agree, it just seems like the PL are trying to build a case, not for court, or even specifically for the outcome of this O&D test, but because they foresee this big bust up with beIN coming and they need powerful arguments to minimise the outrage of the Qataris as you say, essentially "we drove a really hard bargain, in the end the Saudis' legal entity argument was just too clear cut". Out of curiosity Isegrim, if the Premier League did go down the path that some seem to suggest - indefinitely stalling their decision, allowing the Saudis' exclusivity to lapse, Ashley then negotiating with a rival bidder and the Premier League approving that rival bidder (either because they can conduct two O&D tests concurrently or because Ashley withdraws the Saudis' bid) - would the Saudis have any means of legal recourse against the Premier League, or is the no timeframe for the O&D test essentially a catchall loophole for the Premier League to exploit in this situation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 35079 Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 I think there would be a legal challenge were that the case. I.e. they are self-imposed rules regarding the PL and the process rather than something based on UK or EU law. Although that’s pure speculation as I don’t have a fucking clue really. But that never stopped Luke Edwards et al 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 9775 Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 32 minutes ago, Burb said: Totally agree, it just seems like the PL are trying to build a case, not for court, or even specifically for the outcome of this O&D test, but because they foresee this big bust up with beIN coming and they need powerful arguments to minimise the outrage of the Qataris as you say, essentially "we drove a really hard bargain, in the end the Saudis' legal entity argument was just too clear cut". Out of curiosity Isegrim, if the Premier League did go down the path that some seem to suggest - indefinitely stalling their decision, allowing the Saudis' exclusivity to lapse, Ashley then negotiating with a rival bidder and the Premier League approving that rival bidder (either because they can conduct two O&D tests concurrently or because Ashley withdraws the Saudis' bid) - would the Saudis have any means of legal recourse against the Premier League, or is the no timeframe for the O&D test essentially a catchall loophole for the Premier League to exploit in this situation? Difficult to answer because a lot will depend on how it is set out in the contracts. But I doubt that it does cover the unlikely scenario of the PL not coming to a decision. There will probably a lot of issues for the PL to be aware of. Maybe that does explain their angst of coming to a decision. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burb 28 Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 1 hour ago, Isegrim said: Difficult to answer because a lot will depend on how it is set out in the contracts. But I doubt that it does cover the unlikely scenario of the PL not coming to a decision. There will probably a lot of issues for the PL to be aware of. Maybe that does explain their angst of coming to a decision. Indeed thanks. Personally my mind keeps coming back to beIN Sports having submitted a QC's report to the Premier League detailing why they believe there is a legal case for rejecting the Saudi bid: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/lawyers-report-urges-premier-league-to-block-newcastle-takeover-h5mv83jq3 I would bet anything that the Premier League are using this as a road map in order to approve the takeover in an entirely legally watertight manner, knowing that they are likely to have to head off the points raised by beIN within the report afterwards, in as transient a fashion as possible. Therefore, whilst the distinction between the PIF and the ruling government may be a possibly, even probably legally watertight assertion - and they certainly cannot reject the takeover based on this - it is also not an unchallengeably definitely legally watertight assertion, and so the Premier League need the Saudis to help them out by making it such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 20139 Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 Don't beIN have to prove that the Saudis allowed piracy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14011 Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 Honestly man wouldn’t it be easier just to exchange a few missiles? This is pathetic. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 20139 Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 It's fucking shambolic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14011 Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 Too much grassing to the teacher. They need to get the big guns out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burb 28 Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 41 minutes ago, wykikitoon said: Don't beIN have to prove that the Saudis allowed piracy? Everything feels very grey. The Qataris don't have to prove anything to cause damage to the Premier League - -They could stop broadcasting Premier League matches in MENA until 2022 and hurt the product's popularity -They could withhold due payments (justified as "compensation" through a dodgy Qatari court ruling) -They could utilise their bottomless moneypit to take the Premier League through an expensive and tedious court case in the UK (regardless of whether they actually won it or not) -Even simply refusing to bid for future media rights would lose the Premier League a very valuable customer, and potentially even make them a very influential enemy It doesn't matter that the Saudis probably deserve to pass the O&D test far more than they deserve to fail it, the Premier League want their hands to be completely tied in front of beIN in approving this deal. If the approval can be interpreted in any way by the Qataris as a subjective decision for Saudi Arabia against them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 20139 Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 https://twitter.com/Thefenz1987/status/1287872249278525440?s=19 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30609 Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 1 hour ago, Burb said: Everything feels very grey. The Qataris don't have to prove anything to cause damage to the Premier League - -They could stop broadcasting Premier League matches in MENA until 2022 and hurt the product's popularity -They could withhold due payments (justified as "compensation" through a dodgy Qatari court ruling) -They could utilise their bottomless moneypit to take the Premier League through an expensive and tedious court case in the UK (regardless of whether they actually won it or not) -Even simply refusing to bid for future media rights would lose the Premier League a very valuable customer, and potentially even make them a very influential enemy - It will be in the contract that they have to broadcast the matches. Having the rights and sitting on them wouldn’t be an option - Any court action would take place in the U.K. rather than Qatar - The Premier League has an annual turnover of £5bn. The cost of a court case won’t be a concern. - There are other bidders out there for the MENA rights including Saudi Arabia. The entire league can’t be beholden to one broadcaster, it’s ridiculous. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobinRobin 11268 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 5 hours ago, wykikitoon said: https://twitter.com/Thefenz1987/status/1287872249278525440?s=19 He's looking well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobinRobin 11268 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 14 hours ago, wykikitoon said: Wasn't Masters part of the sales team of the PL previously? How the fuck has that cunt got the top gig? Didn't have any ferries? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl 175 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 The Qataries have upset the whole of the MENA region, IMO the whole deal is hung up on the rights for the next TV deal, the Saudis are bidding for loads of sport deals and it looks like the UAE, Bahrain and others will follow them and totally annex Qatar and Bein, the premier league dont want to lose next seasons Bein money so Newcastle are left in limbo until this is sorted. I think the model that was used for the Joshua fight in Saudi will be used in the meantime, but the deal will definitely go through, theres just to much money involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammynb 3355 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 This is interesting and you have to ask why the club would want to get involved: Quote The judgment reveals that on 9 March this year, nine other Premier League clubs wrote to Cas opposing any attempt by City to seek a “stay of execution” allowing them to play in Europe next season if the appeal hearing was delayed. The clubs were Arsenal, Burnley, Chelsea, Leicester, Liverpool, Manchester United, Newcastle, Tottenham and Wolves. But three weeks later City told Cas it had not requested a stay of execution. Cas agreed with City that the clubs’ claim was therefore “moot”. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/jul/28/uefa-claim-against-manchester-city-over-sponsor-money-time-barred-cas-rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30609 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 Clearly expecting that late season push for fifth place, which we narrowly missed out on by only 18 points. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14011 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 Us and Burnley are definitely the blokes at the back of the scuffle who suddenly stop advancing when somebody stops holding us back. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammynb 3355 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 2 minutes ago, Tom said: Us and Burnley are definitely the blokes at the back of the scuffle who suddenly stop advancing when somebody stops holding us back. You have to think that if the club is petty enough to get involved in something that we clearly have no skin in the game of, then it's no wonder other clubs would be in the PL's face about us becoming the richest club in the world. Daft cunts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howay 12496 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 I do find it interesting that a lot of the journalists now piggy backing off the Telegraph story are quite keen to frame it as the Saudi Arabians being at fault, or unclear regarding the ownership structure. Would be interesting to see where the leak came from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14011 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 Sasquatch! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30609 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 (edited) . Edited July 29, 2020 by ewerk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14011 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 What’s weird about that is he’s clearly shaved his hands for a lot of his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonatine 11376 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 37 minutes ago, Tom said: What’s weird about that is he’s clearly shaved his hands for a lot of his career. His body hair soon grows back though 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14011 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 My uncle used to work down the pit with a bloke like that. He’d have a clean shave for drinks after graft on Saturday afternoon & come in on Monday morning with a beard REAL MEN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now