Newcastle confirm arbitration is broader than the separation issue alone & that they are also challenging the “lawfulness” of the EPL’s approach (or “conduct” as previously reported).
The delay in a resolution is party down to the club challenging the panel chair for “bias”.
The delay in a resolution is party down to the club challenging the panel chair for “bias”.
https://twitter.com/nufc/status/1367799710401110017
The Judgment, to try & remove the panel chair, has been made public allowing #NUFC to explain their position. My sense is this is just another opportunity to attack EPL/cast doubt over integrity of arbitration. It’s a very bullish approach showing club clearly feel hard done by.
However... of all the hurdles club/consortium face, separation is hardest to tie to a lack of integrity in process. They are arguing an entity with a .gov website & MBS as chair (& with autonomy) has no gov. influence. Yet PIF’s own portfolio summary argues otherwise... 
The direct reference to beIN still suggests #NUFC allege outside influence & that piracy was a far bigger factor than Amanda Staveley admits. Clearly if EPL think Saudi gov. backed beoutQ & are part of PIF there is a problem. They worry they are selling a club to rights thieves.
The update is welcome since fans deserve any information they can get... but the fact #NUFC are taking/losing legal challenges to question a panel chair seems like time wasted if their separation “proof”/argument is so strong.
Newcastle may argue they have no choice, but it doesn’t exactly get arbitration off to the best start when you are publicly calling a still appointed panel chair biased.
It seems like the club now will try and call out a lack of due process/integrity in O&D Test, which they are fully entitled to do, and at same time question the semantics of the Director definition.
The good news, though, is if the club win there is clearly going to be more of a pathway for PIF to return.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
