Bob!
Coffee Buyer
- Jul 5, 2003
- 11,723
I guess it's a Bank Holiday in Belgium tomorrow?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] Union Saint-Gilloise
- Thread starter Change at Barnham
- Start date
I guess it's a Bank Holiday in Belgium tomorrow?
And most of Europe, well lots of Europe at least judging by the availability of some of my European colleagues this week!
Ooh it’s a corner
Well-known member
I thought the first goal was very much like the goal Alireza scored v Chelsea.
I posted on the match day thread that I met a RUSG STH at Everton - he was very effusive about Mitoma and Adingra and how they’d been on loan. He is enjoying the Europa League too and was at Anfield.
I posted on the match day thread that I met a RUSG STH at Everton - he was very effusive about Mitoma and Adingra and how they’d been on loan. He is enjoying the Europa League too and was at Anfield.
Mackenzie
Old Brightonian
Does Tony Bloom still have an interest in USG?
Ooh it’s a corner
Well-known member
Yes but a reduced one due to UEFA? rules about ownership conflict as we’re both in Europa League - meanwhile other clubs with links to Saudi et al ……..
ElectricNaz
Well-known member
...is fine because Saudi aren't part of UEFA (yet).
Will be interesting to see the absolute zero action on ownership that takes place once Saudi clubs
The name UEFA will go, it will soon become the Soccer Union of Europe + the Middle East, or SUE-ME
GingerBeerMan
3-0
- Dec 29, 2011
- 8,216
He means the multiple clubs owned by Saudi interests. I.e Sheffield United and Newcastle
Genuine question - have UEFA been as tough on Red Bull as they were when Brighton managed to get a place in Europe?
Nobby Cybergoat
Well-known member
- Jul 19, 2021
- 8,754
I mean, if you can call a competition the Champions League, when you can get in it for finishing 5th having never got near winning anything ever I reckon you can extend the fiction that Saudi is in Europe. Especially as they already have Azerbaijan, Israel etc in the confederation
Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo
I believe in Joe Hendry
- Oct 4, 2003
- 12,217
It has nothing to do with where the owners are based, it's because the clubs they own are UEFA affiliated.
Aston Villa's owners are American and Egyptian and they had to reduce their shares in Portuguese club Vitoria de Guimaraes so both could play in the Conference League this season (although Vitoria got knocked out in the 2nd Qualifying Round).
I'm not sure what other clubs the Saudi Public Investment Fund have a stake in but it will be interesting to see what happens should Newcastle and another club they've invested in both get into European competition in the future and what UEFA will do. They'd surely have to apply the same rules applied to us, USG, Villa etc or face legal action from those owners. The same applies to Man City who's owners have majority shareholdings in 4 other European clubs but none have qualified for European competition since being taken over as far as I can tell.
They investigated the ownership of both Red Bull clubs and decieded the structures and shareholdings meant there was no conflict of interest.
German clubs won't appeal after Uefa clear RB Leipzig and FC Salzburg for Champions League
Uefa came to the decision after 'several important governance and structural changes' had been made at both clubs
www.independent.co.uk
Last edited:
Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo
I believe in Joe Hendry
- Oct 4, 2003
- 12,217
Hmmm ....................!
But thanks for answering.
I've added a link to the post that does qualify several structural changes were made before UEFA allowed both to compete in the Champions League. So they were treated in a similar way to how Tony Bloom was in regards to his USG ownership.
I originally thought that UEFA gave the ok without any structural changes I didn't realise some where made during UEFA's investigation into the two clubs to make sure they complied with the rules.
Good job you were quick enough to do it within the new time limit!
Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo
I believe in Joe Hendry
- Oct 4, 2003
- 12,217
It’s just been reported on Sky News Sports that Premier League clubs are going to vote on banning loan moves between clubs within the same ownership structure.
It appears in the first instance the ban will just cover this coming January window, so it won’t affect us and USG as we’ve already got a ban in place for this season. But they are looking at a long term solution so we may have seen the last of players joining USG to get their work permit points.
It appears in the first instance the ban will just cover this coming January window, so it won’t affect us and USG as we’ve already got a ban in place for this season. But they are looking at a long term solution so we may have seen the last of players joining USG to get their work permit points.
GingerBeerMan
3-0
- Dec 29, 2011
- 8,216
Annoying, but in the grand scheme of things probably good for the integrity of football.
From what I’ve read in The Guardian it seems to be primarily designed to stop Newcastle getting loans from the four Saudi clubs that are also owned by PIF.
If so, it’s a good thing (although yet another reason to despise what the Saudis are doing with football).
Using Saudi clubs to buy up talent then loan them to Newcastle is obviously one very simple reason NUFC get round FFP rules. It seems the rest of the EPL have sussed that out.
Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo
I believe in Joe Hendry
- Oct 4, 2003
- 12,217
Definitely right to do that in that respect but it’s a ball ache for clubs like us who are using it as part of a genuine player development strategy (not that aren’t a host of other clubs wanting our players) as well as for the work permit points. Although the changes coming to the work permit rules may mean we are less reliant on loan moves for that work permit points in the future.