Outside Lausanne’s Palais de Beaulieu there is a plaque commemorating the life of Marcel Imsand, who was the exhibition centre’s official photographer for 30 years.
According to Swiss daily Le Temps self-taught Imsand, who once took portraits of Nina Simone and Miles Davis, was known for delivering pictures which were ‘full of love, tenderness and emotion’.
Two of those three qualities were in short supply on his old stomping ground today as Crystal Palace faced off with UEFA, Nottingham Forest and Lyon at the Court of Arbitration for Sport, which sits in the same, grand old building.
Over close to 10 hours, Palace went to legal war in a bid to overturn the demotion for breaches of the governing body’s rules on multi-club ownership (MCO) that has dropped them from the Europa League to the Conference League (and which could cost them up to £20million).
Multiple shots were fired – but a clear picture will only develop on Monday, when CAS delivers its verdict.
The Eagles landed early. At 8.17am local time, chairman Steve Parish and a team of seven arrived in two black Mercedes people carriers carrying three boxes’ worth of files, so much evidence that some of it had to be wheeled in.
Crystal Palace chairman Steve Parish celebrates winning the FA Cup last May – but now the fruits of that victory have been soured
Parish arrives at the court in Switzerland on Friday morning to represent his club
Parish, in a blue suit, pale blue shirt and blue tie, appeared relaxed. He joked with the two reporters present that it was ‘a nice day for it’ and stopped briefly for a chat. The Palace chairman said he ‘hoped’ for a fair trial and believed that Palace had a ‘strong case’ before heading through the glass doors.
UEFA, Forest and Lyon’s representatives were less visible and could not be spotted before the hearing started. There is a more discreet entrance at the back of the building behind gates, where cars head down a ramp to a shuttered underground car park.
Media were not permitted inside to a separate room until battle had commenced, which happened on the dot at 9am on the third-floor auditorium, which features a long, oval-shaped table and translation booths.
A three-person panel sat at the top, with Palace and UEFA on opposite sides. Introductions took place first, before those present got down to what was described as ‘civilised’ discussion.
At one point, during what was a baking morning, backing for the Eagles arrived outside in the shape of Carl Turland, a lifelong, exiled Palace fan from Kingston who moved to Lausanne nine years ago.
The 45-year-old, a computer sciences lecturer at an international school, felt he had to do his bit. ‘I was fortunate enough to be able to walk 30 minutes to get here,’ he explained. ‘I just wanted to come and visibly show my support. Hopefully the case will go in our favour.’
Turland, wearing a red and blue Palace shirt, added: ‘I think every Palace fan would accept the Conference League but it is a disappointment. The idea of being able to play against teams like Roma would be incredible, and it’s what we deserve. We won the trophy against all odds. We’re not a multi-club ownership group, it’s just a legal formality they have caught us on. It’s crazy we are the one being punished.’
Inside, Parish and his group were making not-too dissimilar points to a panel which consisted of a Dutch striker-turned-lawyer who has previous with an English club, a Swiss former fencer who competed in the 1984 Olympics and an Italian professor.
Outside the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne, Switzerland
Manfred P Nan once scored three times in a row in the Netherlands ‘Fishermen derby’ between Telstar and FC Volendam and was president of the CAS panel which turned down Manchester City’s attempt to halt UEFA’s investigation into possible breaches of Financial Fair Play rules in 2019.
He was joined by Olivier Carrard, attorney at law, who represented his country at the Los Angeles Olympics. The panel’s president was Professor Luigi Fumagalli, who is based at the University of Milan and who specialises in international trade, EU law and sport law.
They heard Palace’s case that UEFA were wrong to rule that John Textor, the US businessman whose company held a 43 per cent stake in the club and whose ownership of French side Lyon is the reason they were here, did not have a say in decision-making at the club.
Textor, having since sold that share, was not present, and that may have worked in Palace’s favour. By all accounts, during their earlier hearing further down Lake Geneva at UEFA HQ in Nyon, the American failed to convince that panel that he was not in a position of power.
Palace are understood to have again pointed out that Textor’s stake only afforded him 25 per cent of the voting rights and that Parish, along with silent partners Josh Harris and David Blitzer, called the shots with their 75 per cent.
Their delegation is also believed to have claimed that double standards were in play, pointing out that sides in the European Club Association (ECA) were told that those with potential MCO issues could go beyond the March 1 deadline to submit their paperwork.
Indeed, they were due to point out that Forest, who had their own legal counsel in the room along with Lyon, had not made the necessary adjustments to comply until April 29, when documents on Companies House show owner Evangelos Marinakis effectively put the club into a blind trust.
That was at a time when there was the prospect that Forest and Olympiakos, who Marinakis also owns, could both qualify for the Champions League. Palace had earlier failed with an attempt to force UEFA to disclose correspondence between themselves and those at the City Ground.
Because they are not a member of the ECA, the claim they did not get the memo – and that that in itself was unfair. There is also the now infamous detail that a reminder to Palace was sent to the club’s generic email address and subsequently not picked up.
In Palace’s world, CAS should overturn UEFA’s decision and to instead throw out either Forest or Lyon instead, to accommodate their return. The FA Cup winners should, as the rules state, compete in the Europa League.
But there are two sides to the story and, with the Alps visible from the building’s upper floor windows, they would appear to have a mountain to climb.
The panel heard UEFA’s defence, in which they are understood to have pointed out that there is a precedent that should be adhered to, and that it was delivered here (albeit via video conference) less than two months ago.
On June 16, League of Ireland side Drogheda United appealed against their removal from the Conference League due to non-compliance with UEFA’s rules on MCO. The Irish side and fellow qualifiers Silkeborg IF are owned by the same group.
Drogheda had argued that the March 1 date for submissions, brought forward for a season by UEFA from the original June 1 deadline, had not been communicated properly. It was a similar argument to one of the elements of Palace’s case – in that the only information they had from UEFA was delivered to a generic email address and not an actual person.
That claim, and the appeal itself, was swiftly rejected, as was a further allegation of unequal treatment, which again echoed of large parts of Palace’s argument.
Forest have remained tight-lipped throughout the process. However, they are likely to have made the point that they are effectively bystanders, unwitting recipients of a promotion. Indeed, the fact they ended the season in seventh, and thus did not qualify for the Champions League, could render their role in the situation meaningless given that any of their administrative actions did not come into play.
Palace’s players still do not know which UEFA competition they will be playing in next season
Palace’s case was, clearly, not rejected out of hand. The hearing was due to finish at 4.30pm, but did not conclude until long afterwards. At lunch, all parties remained in the building and retired to breakout rooms where they were served with a buffet.
Parish eventually made a hasty exit at 4.50pm, having given his evidence and thanks to the birth of a grandson. He described to Daily Mail Sport ‘a long day, very involved’, before condemning the fact that Palace are here.
‘Given where we are it’s hard to be confident because it seems dystopian to even be in this situation,’ he said. ‘Hopefully good sense will prevail and well get to the right answer.’
When asked if his club would boycott the competition should they remain demoted, he gave what may have been a telling answer before departing in a black Mercedes saloon to see the new arrival.
‘No,’ he said. ‘It’s been a difficult summer following an amazing triumph,’ he said. ‘We’ve got the Community Shield on Sunday and whatever happens well be playing in Europe for the first time in our history – that’s what important. It will be good to get all this behind us and focus on the future.’
It is a future in which Palace will be unlikely to learn their fate before they return to Wembley to face Liverpool. But by the time they play their first Premier League home match on August 24, however, that will not be the case.
Their opponents at Selhurst Park that afternoon? Nottingham Forest.
