Crystal Palace officially lodged an objection to his exclusion from the Europa League at the International Sports Court CAS. The case shows that Multi-Club ownership can still provide many conflicts.
The CAS confirmed on Tuesday that Palace reclaims his starting law in the Europa League. A decision should be made before August 11th. For Crystal Palace, UEFA and many football fans, a number of questions remain open to the current case and for the future:
Why can’t Crystal Palace play in the Europa League?
Crystal Palace and Olympique Lyon both qualified for the Europa League, but both the same investor: John Textor with his investment company Eagle Football Holdings.
For such cases, UEFA keeps the possibility of parking shares in trust accounts so that two clubs are not under the control of the same owner. However, the deadline has been changed: the situation has to be clarified since this season on March 1st and not as before on June 3. Textor sold his shares at Palace to an American investor, but the step came too late.
John Textor, previous co -owner of Crystal Palace
“Multi-Club Ownership”
“Multi-Club Ownership” is the possession or participation of an owner in several clubs. The possible advantages for the owners and risks for competition go far beyond suspicion of agreed games. Transfer within a network of clubs of multiple participation could be made at prices that meet the needs of investors – and not the actual market values. The time can also be selected. In this way, taxes can be avoided or financial fair play rules can be observed at least on paper. Clubs can be degraded into farm teams that serve the tip of their pyramid. The identity of your clubs can be lost for fans.
Why is Lyon preferred to Palace?
In the regulations of the Europa League, the national cup winners are often given preference to those clubs that have qualified through the league. Not so when asked about violations of the rule at Multi-Club Ownership.
Crystal Palace had qualified for the Europa League with the winning of the FA Cup in England, but was only twelfth in the Premier League. Olympique Lyon moved up in France as the sixth in the table because Paris Saint-Germain won the double. The rules of the UEFA state that the club is preferred for conflicts in relation to Multi-Club Ownership, which took the better place in his league. Therefore, Crystal Palace had to go to Conference League and not Olympique Lyon.
The trophy of the Europa League
Textor had almost 45 percent on Palace – where is the problem?
The UEFA rules state that nobody can have “control” or a “decisive influence” for more than one club. The percentage majority of a club is not absolutely necessary.
According to information from the sports show, internal requirements of the UEFA in the assessment of such conditions state that a “decisive influence” of 30 percent of the shares is accepted. Even 10 percent can be too much if the investor is the largest shareholder. For example, if, for example, if a donor is more than 30 percent of the club’s income, this is also regarded as a “decisive influence” at UEFA.
A logo in the UEFA headquarters in Nyon
The UEFA saw this relationship with Crystal Palace and Olympique Lyon on March 1st. That’s why one of the clubs had to get out of the Europa League, namely Crystal Palace.
The gradation into the Conference League even led to a follow -up question: Can Palace and Bröndby IF from Denmark play at the Conference League at the same time? The investor David Blitzer has invested in both clubs, here the financial inspectors of the UEFA apparently saw no conflict.
What chances do Palace have at CAS?
Drogheda United from Ireland also failed and lost his place in the Conference League because Silkeborg IF from Sweden was also owned by the “Trivela Group”. The FK DAC in 1904 from Dunajská Streda in Slovakia flew from the Conference League because the Györi ETO FC from Hungary is also checked by Slovakian businessman Oszkár Világi.
The FK DAC complained of the pre -laying deadline at CAS – and lost. That could reduce the chances of Crystal Palace. According to CAS, the club demands three things: the cancellation of the decision of the UEFA financial control chamber, the downgrading to the Europa League, to the disadvantage of Nottingham Forest or alternatively from Olympique Lyon.
The International Sports Court CAS in Lausanne
How does the UEFA deal with Multi-Club Ownership?
In 2017, UEFA decided that both Red Bull Salzburg and Rasenballsport (RB) Leipzig can take part in the UEFA competitions. The financial control chamber certified both clubs, not at the same time under the control of Red Bull after “significant changes” in management and the structure.
View of the Red Bull Arena in Leipzig
Drive only recorded the topic again during the summer breaks 2023 and 2024. Before the 2024/25 season, the conditions between Manchester City and FC Girona had to be clarified in the Champions League, both of which were directed by the City Football Group from Abu Dhabi. There was also a similar case with Manchester United and OGC Nice in the Europa League. The shares in Girona and Nice were parked in a trust account that is under the supervision of the UEFA financial control chamber. This enabled all four clubs to start at the same time. There were also other requirements, such as a temporary transfer ban between the clubs.
Manchester Citys Erling Haaland (right) in a friendly against sister club FC Girona in December 2022.
Multi -Club Ownership – How is it going?
The “Multi-Club Ownership” phenomenon has been growing for years. The Danish initiative “Play the Game” recently produced a number of 236 clubs in Europe that are part of such networks. Most teams from Germany are largely protected from a complete takeover by the 50+1 rule. However, clubs such as the 1. FC Kaiserslautern, FC Augsburg or Hertha BSC have become part of such structures through share sales. RB Leipzig is also the largest player in the Red Bull network.
This summer led to the first time to exclude clubs from the competitions. The topic can provide even more controversy if larger clubs are involved in UEFA examinations. Because then the question is in the room whether the association consistently enforces the rules if those big clubs are in question that ensure the attention and income of the Champions League.