Although individuals within the Premier League continue to leak information to Miguel Delaney of The Independent (who is rather becoming an anti-Saudi Arabia campaigner than a football journalist) as per this article (click here) in which he quotes sources from within the PL clearly opposed to it and Sean Ingle of The Guardian (previously referred to) there is other information which suggests objections to the takeover may be difficult to block on the basis of law. 

Despite noise around human rights abuses (a slippery slope to prevent a takeover of a football club in a country that sells that same country £Bns in weaponry) as we know the main objections are as a result of alleged TV piracy. 

The enclosed report refers to previously failed actions in France as well as drilling down into the requirements of the Owners & Directors Test.

You can find out more about Thomas Lawton, the barrister who drafted the report enclosed – just click here  He appears to carry significant legal qualification and experience. The same might not be said for Delaney or indeed Richard Keys. I understand Keys has now progressed onto the Rainbow books. 

The enclosed article is very dry reading. It is worth persisting with because it does set out the full reasoning behind the full proposition that the stricture and personnel named within the Saudi Arabia Public Investment Fund should not fall foul of the PL Owners & Directors Test. To get at the full piece just click here 

At the risk of being proven spectacularly wrong, it is my belief (on nothing other than a strong belief the PL is doing everything it can to find a reason to block the deal, including briefing anti-Saudi journalists) the takeover will not be signed off this side of the World Trade Organisation’s (WTO) non-legally binding findings published some time this month. After that? Who knows – certainly not a wannabe ITK-merchant on social media craving attention. 

Those #CANS can go back in the fridge if my call is proven right. 

MICHAEL MARTIN