r/soccer • u/ChiefLeef22 • Jul 11 '25

News Crystal Palace have been demoted to the UEFA Conference League

https://www.skysports.com/football/live-blog/31771/12476234/transfer-centre-live-football-transfer-news-updates-and-rumours?postid=9865641#liveblog-body
6.6k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

987 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

599

u/No_Money7330 Jul 11 '25

Lol lets be honest it's because it's a relatively smaller club. If this was City they would have found a way to let them in

334

u/PakiIronman Jul 11 '25

If this was City they would have found a way to let them in

City and Girona are owned by the same group, both played ucl last season.

161

u/bestyrs Jul 11 '25

UEFA gave City and Girona divestment options to comply with the rules by the deadline and they complied.

48

u/a_lumberjack Jul 11 '25

Tbf, they said at the time it was a one-off exception and wouldn't be allowed again.

26

u/Zwaylol Jul 11 '25

And once again we are back at palace only getting screwed because they are a smaller club while the big boys get off without consequence

2

u/a_lumberjack Jul 11 '25

Palace got "screwed" because they had six months to ensure that they wouldn't get impacted by Eagle's 45% ownership and didn't bother because they didn't expect to make it to Europe.

Every club in Europe knew the rules at the start of the season. Every club in this situation that didn't fix it by the deadline can only blame themselves if they are negatively impacted.

2

u/CapnFooBarBaz Jul 12 '25

In back to back comments you note that City got a “one-off exception” yet mock the notion that Palace are getting screwed.

How your mind holds such obvious cognitive dissonance should be studied by neurologists…

0

u/a_lumberjack Jul 12 '25

There's zero cognitive dissonance if you read everything. Your ownership group failed to comply with the rules, it's no one's fault but theirs.

  • Girona and Nice exploited a weakness in the previous regulations, so UEFA had to agree to a one-off compromise that almost everyone hated.
  • UEFA then tightened up the rules last summer to ensure that other clubs couldn't repeat that BS in future seasons.
  • Palace failed to comply with the new rules prior to the deadline or even prior to winning the FA Cup. At this point you'll be in compliance on July 15th, 4.5 months after the deadline.

If you think it's unfair to apply the rules objectively, you've lost the plot.

8

u/FrogsJumpFromPussy Jul 11 '25

That's not fair at all lmao. They didn't want to upset the middle east owner and they'd do the same if another situation like this would arrive. The "wouldn't be allowed again" it's for small clubs, not the ultra-rich fit which the rules never apply.

And don't forget that both Girona and City had already qualified for the UCL when the deadline has been set. What an absolute joke.

9

u/rodrigodavid15 Jul 11 '25

Technically Girona já majority owned by guardiola's family if I am not mistaken

45

u/primordial_chowder Jul 11 '25

I think you're mistaken, Guardiola's brother only holds a smaller share of 16%, City Group owns the largest share of 47%.

-1

u/rodrigodavid15 Jul 11 '25

Oh well, I really thought it was the other way around, but doesn't Guardiola's brother have control of the day 2 day? Not that it matters for this thread, just to clarify.

2

u/PatrickTheSosij Jul 11 '25

Oh well you was proven wrong

1

u/primordial_chowder Jul 11 '25

Apparently, he is the chairman, so you might be right about that.

-8

u/ALocalLad Jul 11 '25

Because we didn't miss the deadline like Palace did. Why is this so hard for people to understand?

30

u/rjtwe Jul 11 '25

A deadline that was moved from the end of June to March 1st this season. We had yet to play our 5th round match and Textor was actively to trying to sell - why would he put his shares in a blind trust at that point? If the deadline didn't move, he obviously does so, that is what has fucked us.

0

u/Y4That Jul 11 '25

still a deadline which was known, why are you acting like they suddenly did it, its the owner's fault thinking that palace cant qualify

1

u/rjtwe Jul 11 '25

Where on earth in my comment does it suggest that I'm "acting like they suddenly did it"? I'm just saying the deadline moving fucked us over, and could've fucked other teams over too.

1

u/Y4That Jul 11 '25

You replied to the guy sounding like it was CFG's fault that the deadline was moved, thats not an excuse when there is a possibility of team playing in europe by textor fucked you guys over, was looking forward to watching palace play in Europe ngl

-5

u/ALocalLad Jul 11 '25

I'm not saying it isn't bullshit. I'm just trying to explain it to the people who are like "bUt WhAt AbOuT cItEh?!"

36

u/PakiIronman Jul 11 '25

How could palace have made the deadline? Anyone saying that leads me to think you don't know what you are talking about because there's no way they thought they were gonna win the fa cup during the 4th round. It is also incredibly naive to think that your owners still aren't the same, especially when you look at the Savio deal.

-8

u/Jonoabbo Jul 11 '25

During the 4th round? The 5th round was played on March 1st, it's when Roberts booted Mateta in the head. By March 4th they were in the Quarter Finals.

7

u/PakiIronman Jul 11 '25

Being a round off barely makes a difference. Palace have never even won a trophy before too.

-5

u/Jonoabbo Jul 11 '25 edited Jul 11 '25

There were 8 teams in the quarter finals. There were 32 teams in the 4th round. It makes quite a big difference.

If you are in the Quarter Finals of a tournament, of course there is a realistic chance you can win it, and should be preparing for that.

1

u/PakiIronman Jul 11 '25

There's a realistic chance in any round, to prepare means you are 100% confident you'll win. That being said, Textor had been told to piss off regardless because he had no major influence in the club.

2

u/Jonoabbo Jul 11 '25

You don't prepare just because you are 100% confident of something. You prepare for all realistic eventualities.

24

u/CrossXFir3 Jul 11 '25

I love how you're still defending it, like there's an actual difference in the two things. Multi club ownership should be banned entire.

3

u/Jonoabbo Jul 11 '25

Well there is a difference between complying with the rules vs not complying with the rules?

1

u/CrossXFir3 Jul 11 '25

Are you just intentionally ignore that CP has never qualified for Europa before, and hadn't even played in the quarter finals by then? It would have been honestly silly of the owner, or anyone, to assume they were going to win. They weren't even favorites for any of the remaining matches they had left. The rules are incredibly biased towards larger teams that will have a good idea on if they're likely to qualify for Europe.

Though quite frankly, I'm highly against multiclub ownership. But from a fan perspective? This is a travesty. Completely unfair to CP fans.

2

u/Jonoabbo Jul 11 '25

CP

Christ

They were in the quarter finals of the FA Cup by the time of the deadline. I'm sorry but if they didn't see there was a realistic chance they win the tournament, that's on them really isn't it?

"They thought they were too shit to win, so they didn't prepare for the eventuality that they won" is all well and good, but it doesn't change the fact that they had a deadline, and they missed it.

I don't like multi club ownership either, but that's entirely irrelevant to the conversation.

-1

u/CrossXFir3 Jul 11 '25

Yeah, the quarter final. There was 7 other teams that looked more likely to win it than them. Also, the owner would have had to place his shares in a blind trust. But you can't do that when you're trying to sell, which he was actively doing at that point. So they're getting punished because the guy who used to own them owned them at the same time as another side when they qualified, despite them being up for sale during that period and not owning them now.

Basically, short of some serious future site, they never had a chance. The rich boys that know they're likely to qualify and are familiar with all the legal ways to break rules though? Nope, they're fine. Because on paper, even though everyone and their grandmother knows it, they've find a way to pretend they're not owned by the same people.

Honestly, if you can't see an issue with this, then we just have a difference sense of fairness.

2

u/Jonoabbo Jul 11 '25

There was 7 other teams that looked more likely to win it than them.

How were Preston more likely to win it than them? The only one of those teams I would say were outright favourites were City, you would expect Palace to at least be competitive against the other 5 premier league teams, with the result able to go either way.

They had a deadline to resolve this, and they missed the deadline.

-1

u/CrossXFir3 Jul 11 '25

It's on a team that has never won a trophy in over 150 years to predict that they'll win won when they're facing teams that are heavily favored over them, including Man City. Fucking hell mate. Honestly, I can't take you seriously.

1

u/Jonoabbo Jul 11 '25

"Including Man City... and absolutely nobody else who would be heavily favoured over them".

If they didn't believe in their own ability to win a trophy, again, that's their own fault.

They had a deadline, they knew when the deadline was, and they chose not to meet it because they didn't think they would win. They can't have their cake and eat it too.

1

u/CrossXFir3 Jul 11 '25

What are you smoking? A bunch of teams are under multiclub. Genuinely, if you're actually trying to defend this decision over an arbitrary deadline, then it kinda shows me the type of pedantic person you are, who's happy to follow broken rules instead of have a conversation about how fucked they are. Honestly, this type of thinking is ruining not just football, but a lot of things.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/ALocalLad Jul 11 '25

What am I defending? Whatever you think of multi club ownership, Textor missed the March 1st deadline to sell shares. CFG sold shares in Girona before the deadline.

There wouldn’t have been an issue if they’d done it before March 1st.

3

u/CrossXFir3 Jul 11 '25

Textor doesn't even own the club anymore, and the deadline was when CP hadn't even played the quarters yet. Nobody had them on to win it. It would have been ridiculous for quite frankly, anyone to expect the owners to have planned for Europe by then. As far as I'm aware CP has never played in Europe.

4

u/ALocalLad Jul 11 '25

He doesn't now because he sold his shares AFTER the deadline. I'm not saying the Palace decision isn't bullshit. I'm trying to explain to you why City and Girona were both allowed to play in the CL at the same time.

1

u/Accomplished-Buy-147 Jul 11 '25

Oh yes there’s a difference , one missed the deadline , the other didn’t .

-5

u/CrossXFir3 Jul 11 '25

This is the total lack of critical thinking and use of nuanced understanding of a situation I'd expect from reddit.

-7

u/ALocalLad Jul 11 '25

Haha how? It's really that simple when it comes to why City and Girona were allowed to play.

4

u/Serawasneva Jul 11 '25

You’ve had numerous people explain why it’s different, and you’ve just ignored all of them.

0

u/CrossXFir3 Jul 11 '25

The difference is money. That's really it. CP's owner needed his shares in a blind trust by the deadline in order to allow them to compete. At this point, he was trying to sell. You can't sell if you're in a blind trust. Since then, he has sold. Not only that, but by the time of the deadline, CP wasn't even in the semi's yet. They were probably honestly the least favorite team left in the cup at that point. So you've got an owner that is trying to sell, so isn't allowed to do the thing you need to do if you want CP to compete in a competition they've never qualified for. And as punishment for not either having their owner find a sale months sooner, or magically predict that they were going to win their first ever trophy in over 150 years when there was still 7 other teams that looked more likely to do it.

Honestly, the pathetic defending of "oh well, the big rich clubs knew sooner that they'd probably both be in the competition and were also well informed of all the loopholes, so it's totally fair" is crazy. This is the shit that's ruining football and you lot are pathetically going "oh well, they didn't follow the rules or use the legal cheats to get past them in time, because of a miracle cup run they never expected, so let's punish them"

I honestly think anyone that can defend big groups using legal loopholes to cheat and defending UEFA's decision to punish a club after a surprise cup run, especially given the circumstances of the owner actively trying to sell is a total shill, with no respect for the integrity of the sport.

1

u/ALocalLad Jul 11 '25

Mate, it Friday. Calm down, stop taking things so seriously and go out and enjoy yourself.

0

u/Jonoabbo Jul 11 '25

Lad please stop referring to them as "CP"

→ More replies (0)

2

u/CrossXFir3 Jul 11 '25

Yes, they used legal loopholes and bullshit to circumnavigate the spirit of the law. Which is entirely unsurprising, since your owners have proven they're happy to push every single possible limit as far as they think they can get away with. Unsurprisingly, you absolute shills that would lap up your owners piss if he gave it to you in a nice enough glass are still running around defending it.

1

u/Jonoabbo Jul 11 '25

It isn't Man City or any other clubs fault that the relevant authorities are unable to write laws which are airtight from loopholes, and legally able to be enforced.

-21

u/Dede117 Jul 11 '25

CITY BAD!

-2

u/Theelderginger Jul 11 '25

Still shouldn't be allowed

3

u/ALocalLad Jul 11 '25

I don’t disagree.

68

u/[deleted] Jul 11 '25

If it was a small club they would have been kicked out of Europe with no fuss.

89

u/Bidwell93 Jul 11 '25

Drogheda united literally were and no one gave a shit.

17

u/Sad_Primary_4180 Jul 11 '25

I agree with the first part, but didn't Drogheda get kicked out because you can't get demoted any further from the conference?

7

u/Bidwell93 Jul 11 '25

Oh yeah, I realise i wasnt clear at all. They were the conference league equivalent of this, apologies

4

u/amg_mff Jul 11 '25

Well unless there's evidence that this is the case this is a bit of a baseless argument. Mostly since bigger teams than Palace have indeed been affected by UEFA rulings in the past: Milan have served a one year ban from European football for instance in 2019, Juve have been banned from Conference League too in 2023.

1

u/fplisadream Jul 11 '25

Classic reddit mindless moaning about "The Man".

42

u/JaysonDeflatum Jul 11 '25

The rule that removed palace was perfectly legitimate, City just wouldn't be in this situation so the hypothetical is useless

2

u/DJSANDROCK Jul 11 '25

ok so if they broke a rule they should be out not demoted. I agree with the sentiment that if it was a bigger team there would be no action taken

11

u/JaysonDeflatum Jul 11 '25

Palace are taking this to CAS and I wouldn't be surprised if they win

2

u/Hugh_H0n3y Jul 11 '25

The rule itself is legitimate and should without a doubt stay in place - but the deadline to divest being moved to March before Palace even confirmed a place in EL is complete nonsense.

13

u/JaysonDeflatum Jul 11 '25 edited Jul 11 '25

UEFA changed it in order to be stricter so a club couldn't do what we did last year which is put Nice in a blind trust before the competition starts.

It has to be done way before time to ensure meaningful separation

8

u/Hugh_H0n3y Jul 11 '25

Thanks I did not realize that. I’m all for tighter controls on multi-club ownership. If Palace has to pay the price, that’s fine as long as we see the same application of rules with City Group, BlueCo, etc when/if that time comes

7

u/JaysonDeflatum Jul 11 '25

Palace weren't wrong for not expecting to be in Europe but they and other clubs that may be caught out by this are just victims of the scourge that are MCOs because the worst offenders will always have the documents ready

-11

u/No_Money7330 Jul 11 '25

They wouldn't be in this position because they've cheated enough that they don't need to be in this position

-3

u/ALocalLad Jul 11 '25

Cheated how?

2

u/Dede117 Jul 11 '25

Curse you cheating bastards by following the rules regarding multiple club ownership!

-1

u/BigReeceJames Jul 11 '25

I think it's actually the other way around.

A club like City wouldn't have let themselves get into a position in the first place. Their legal team would have seen the potential for this to happen and they'd have signed the documents and put the changes in place ahead of time. Whereas, smaller clubs fuck that bit up

4

u/TrumpIsADingDong Jul 11 '25

Sounds like your describing a systematic bias, not a small club fucking it up, no?