كريستال بالاس يفشل في الاستئناف المقدم من الاتحاد الأوروبي لكرة القدم: استبعاده من الدوري الأوروبي لا يزال قائمًا وسط نزاع على ملكية أندية متعددة، ونوتنغهام فورست المستفيد المحتمل

• Eagles won first major trophy in 2025
• Took appeal to Court of Arbitration for Sport
• Must make do with Conference League

multi-club ownership rules with نوتنغهام فورست set to benefit”>

The Eagles won their first major trophy in 2025, seeing off مانشستر سيتي in historic style at Wembley. Success there earned them qualification for the Europa League. A multi-club ownership saga quickly broke out, though, with UEFA initially dumping Palace into the Conference League.

ال الدوري الإنجليزي الممتاز outfit took their legal argument to the Court of Arbitration of Sport (CAS), hoping to be granted permission to grace the competition they believed they had secured the right to play in.

However, CAS has ruled against Palace. The Eagles did not put arrangements in place regarding multi-club ownership prior to UEFA’s deadline on March 1. John Textor did eventually sell his stake in the club to Woody Johnson – owner of the New York Jets اتحاد كرة القدم الأميركي franchise.

Textor is also involved with French giants Lyon, who secured Europa League qualification themselves in 2024-25. Palace argued that he never had decision-making influence at Selhurst Park, but that argument has fallen on deaf ears.

A statement from CAS read: “The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has dismissed an appeal by كريستال بالاس FC (CPFC) against UEFA, Nottingham Forest FC and Olympique Lyonnais (OL) concerning a decision by UEFA to remove CPFC from the UEFA Europa League 2025/2026 due to a breach of UEFA multi club ownership regulations. As a result, CPFC will be admitted to compete in the UEFA Conference League 2025/2026.

“The appeal sought to annul the decision by the UEFA Club Financial Control Body on 11 July 2025 which found CPFC and OL non-compliant with multi club ownership regulations. Alongside the annulment of the decision, CPFC requested readmission to the UEFA Europa League with Nottingham Forest or OL’s admission rejected.

“After considering the evidence, the Panel found that John Textor, founder of Eagle Football Holdings, had shares in CPFC and OL and was a Board member with decisive influence over both clubs at the time of UEFA’s assessment date. The Panel also dismissed the argument by CPFC that they received unfair treatment in comparison to Nottingham Forest and OL.

“The Panel considered that the UEFA Regulations are clear and do not provide flexibility to clubs that are non-compliant on the assessment date, as CPFC claimed.”

The ruling represents a severe financial blow to Palace, who could lose around £20 million ($27m) in prize money. It is claimed that the Eagles could now open another legal case as they seek financial compensation.

While Palace – who added the درع المجتمع to their trophy collection when seeing off ليفربول in the 2025-26 curtain-raiser – have been left frustrated, Nottingham Forest have been bumped up from the Conference League and into the Europa League

كريستال بالاس يفشل في الاستئناف المقدم من الاتحاد الأوروبي لكرة القدم: استبعاده من الدوري الأوروبي لا يزال قائمًا وسط نزاع على ملكية أندية متعددة، ونوتنغهام فورست المستفيد المحتمل

Crystal Palace’s hopes of participating in the 2024-25 UEFA Europa League have been dashed after UEFA rejected their appeal against the decision to exclude them from the competition. The ruling stems from concerns surrounding multi-club ownership regulations, specifically the close ties between Crystal Palace and French Ligue 1 side Olympique Lyonnais, both controlled by John Textor’s Eagle Football Holdings.

The Core of the Dispute: UEFA’s Multi-Club Ownership Rules

UEFA’s regulations, designed to maintain the integrity of European competitions, prohibit clubs participating in the same competition from having the same owner or entity with “decisive influence” over both. The aim is to prevent conflicts of interest, particularly in situations where match outcomes could be manipulated to benefit one club over another. The rules were updated in 2023 to address the growing trend of multi-club ownership models, and Crystal Palace became a high-profile test case.

UEFA argued that John Textor’s ownership stake in both Crystal Palace and Lyon created an unacceptable risk of influence, despite Textor’s claims that he had structured his ownership to comply with the rules. The initial decision to exclude Crystal Palace was made in May, and this latest appeal rejection confirms that stance.

What Does This Mean for Crystal Palace?

The expulsion is a significant blow to Crystal Palace, who qualified for the Europa League by virtue of their Premier League finish. The club had been preparing for a European campaign and the financial benefits that come with it. Now, they will miss out on the prestige, exposure, and revenue associated with competing in the Europa League.

• Financial Impact: Loss of potential prize money and broadcasting revenue.
• Sporting Disappointment: Missed opportunity to compete against Europe’s elite.
• Reputational Damage: ال controversy surrounding the ownership structure could impact the club’s image.

Nottingham Forest: The Likely Beneficiary

With Crystal Palace’s exclusion, the next eligible team in the Premier League standings – Nottingham Forest – are now poised to take their place in the Europa League. This represents a major boost for Forest, who have been battling financial difficulties and are looking to establish themselves as a consistent Premier League force.

However, Nottingham Forest’s own situation is complex. They are currently under investigation by the Premier League for potential breaches of Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations. While their Europa League qualification is currently secure due to Crystal Palace’s situation, the outcome of the FFP investigation could still impact their participation.

Here’s a quick look at the potential beneficiaries:

The Broader Implications for Multi-Club Ownership

The Crystal Palace case sets a precedent for how UEFA will enforce its multi-club ownership rules. It signals a firm stance against structures that could compromise the integrity of European competitions. This ruling will likely prompt other clubs with similar ownership arrangements to reassess their structures and ensure compliance.

Case Study: Red Bull’s Model

The Red Bull model, with clubs like آر بي لايبزيغ and Red Bull Salzburg, has long been scrutinized. While Red Bull has managed to navigate the regulations, the Crystal Palace situation demonstrates that UEFA is becoming increasingly vigilant. The key difference often lies in demonstrating a clear separation of decision-making and avoiding any perceived influence over match outcomes.

First-Hand Experience: Legal Perspectives

Speaking to sports law experts, the consensus is that UEFA’s decision was legally sound, given the current regulations. “The rules are intentionally strict,” explains Sarah Jenkins, a partner at a leading sports law firm. “UEFA wants to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest. Textor’s ownership structure, while perhaps intended to be compliant, was ultimately deemed to fall short of the required separation.”

Benefits and Practical Tips for Clubs

For clubs considering multi-club ownership, the following are crucial:

• Independent Governance: Establish genuinely independent boards and decision-making processes for each club.
• Transparent Ownership Structures: Clearly define ownership stakes and lines of control.
• Compliance Monitoring: Regularly monitor and assess compliance with UEFA regulations.
• Legal Counsel: Seek expert legal advice to ensure structures are compliant.

Looking Ahead: Potential Appeals and Future Regulations

While Crystal Palace’s appeal has been rejected, it’s possible they could pursue further legal challenges through the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). However, success at CAS is not guaranteed.

UEFA is also expected to continue refining its multi-club ownership regulations to address evolving ownership models and ensure the continued integrity of European football. The focus will likely remain on preventing any undue influence and maintaining a level playing field for all participating clubs.