Deadbat_DB
Vital Squad Member
2019/20 SUFC SEAON REVIEW / SCHOOL REPORT
Rest of week will be posted as below
Wednesday – Part 3 Goalkeepers
Thursday – Part 4 Defence
Friday – Part 5 Midfield
Saturday – Part 6 Attack
Sunday – Part 7 Final awards / Conclusions
Staff report
Board / Club
When I wrote this article last year; the court case was about to get under way over the summer months and the effective control of Sheffield United would be decided in a court room in London. Billed as Kevin McCabe Sheffield United Ltd (SUL) versus Prince HRH Prince Abdullah bin Mosaad bin Abdulaziz Al Saud and his UTB group. It had become increasingly obvious that McCabe had tried to manipulate the situation some time before it came to solicitors and the court room being required. In affect he called Abdullah’s bluff in terms of trying to wrest back full control but Abdullah would not be lowballed and served a counter offer for the club. This meant it went to court to see who would gain control with no prospect of these men every working together. As Justice Fancourt stated, Kevin McCabe ‘accordingly took the risk that UTB would serve a counternotice, but he undoubtedly believed that if it did so SUL would be paid £5 million for its shares and the Scarborough Group would be entitled to receive another £40 million or so within a year for the property assets’
I had said before the case started in my notes last year that:
‘’We will wait to see what happens in the court hearing in May – my concern reading between the lines is that HRH may enough to force through a verdict to get control from the bits and pieces I have seen and understand. I am sure McCabe then may appeal and on it goes.’’
It seems I may have right….I digress and go back to last summer before we come to where we are now.
Over the dates of 13-17 May, 20-24 May, 4, 5, 7, 10-13, 18, 19 June 2019; United’s dirty washing was once again aired in public. There was evidence given from both sides, McCabe’s ‘ways’ in doing business did not come out very positively at all and as the case went on. Justice Fancourt stated of McCabe in his findings that; ‘he gave every impression of there being little in the way of truth or objective fact that differed from his own understanding or opinion.’
There was talk of Bin Laden family loans being used by the other side (to be honest the size of the Bin Laden family and any kind of research into them made this a non story but it did get some traction in the tabloids of course). Some seemed to give better account than others with one of McCabe’s aids, Jeremy Tutton, giving to quote Justice Fancourt, ‘an extraordinary performance in the witness box. He was extremely nervous and uncertain in much of the evidence that he gave, and eager to blame others for things that had gone wrong and absolve himself from responsibility. I regret to say that I consider that some of the evidence that he gave in his witness statements, particularly in relation to the Charwell loan, was a fabrication.
No-one seemed to know which side the courts would come down as it seemed both sides had been given a going over but it seemed McCabe and his side had maybe not helped themselves in how they presented at all, alongside the evidence they were scrutinising also.
Eventually on the 16th September the court returned to deliver its findings and Mr Justice Fancourt ruled Mr McCabe must now sell his stake to Prince Abdullah for £5m. The judge ruled the contract of sale and purchase of Sheffield United Ltd's shares could not be set aside. The judge said UTB LLC would also have to buy the club's property assets from Sheffield United Ltd. This includes the Bramall Lane stadium and the Sheffield United hotel. In a statement issued after the ruling, a spokesman for Mr McCabe said: "He has supported Sheffield United through thick and thin going back to the 1950s and wishes nothing more than success for the club, its supporters and the many staff employed by it.
"Mr McCabe sincerely hopes that he is proved wrong in relation to his deep misgivings about the suitability of Prince Abdullah as an appropriate custodian of Sheffield United."
"No owner, director, coach or player is bigger than the club but together with the fans, we all share the common desire to make the club ever greater," he said.
Sheffield United released a statement saying the judgement "brings an end to the uncertainty over Sheffield United's future ownership and allows us to focus our full attention on the season ahead".
The website now says even to this day: Sheffield United Football Club Ltd is directly owned by Blades Leisure Limited. Blades Leisure Ltd is owned by UTB LLC, and UTB 2018 LLC, companies who are 100% owned by H.R.H. Prince Abdullah bin Mosaad bin Abdulaziz Al Saud of Riyadh.
The operations of Blades Leisure Ltd are focused on professional footballing activities and the operation of sports stadium. Other interests within the group include stewarding services and commercial gym operations.
----
If you have a spare week (once you have wasted days reading my stuff) then go to below for the full court case notes…138 pages but some good stuff in there amongst the court/financial jargon and some interesting characterisation of some of the leading characters involved in the case/dispute.
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content...-09-16_Sheffield-United_Approved-Judgment.pdf
----
Rest of week will be posted as below
Wednesday – Part 3 Goalkeepers
Thursday – Part 4 Defence
Friday – Part 5 Midfield
Saturday – Part 6 Attack
Sunday – Part 7 Final awards / Conclusions
Staff report
Board / Club
When I wrote this article last year; the court case was about to get under way over the summer months and the effective control of Sheffield United would be decided in a court room in London. Billed as Kevin McCabe Sheffield United Ltd (SUL) versus Prince HRH Prince Abdullah bin Mosaad bin Abdulaziz Al Saud and his UTB group. It had become increasingly obvious that McCabe had tried to manipulate the situation some time before it came to solicitors and the court room being required. In affect he called Abdullah’s bluff in terms of trying to wrest back full control but Abdullah would not be lowballed and served a counter offer for the club. This meant it went to court to see who would gain control with no prospect of these men every working together. As Justice Fancourt stated, Kevin McCabe ‘accordingly took the risk that UTB would serve a counternotice, but he undoubtedly believed that if it did so SUL would be paid £5 million for its shares and the Scarborough Group would be entitled to receive another £40 million or so within a year for the property assets’
I had said before the case started in my notes last year that:
‘’We will wait to see what happens in the court hearing in May – my concern reading between the lines is that HRH may enough to force through a verdict to get control from the bits and pieces I have seen and understand. I am sure McCabe then may appeal and on it goes.’’
It seems I may have right….I digress and go back to last summer before we come to where we are now.
Over the dates of 13-17 May, 20-24 May, 4, 5, 7, 10-13, 18, 19 June 2019; United’s dirty washing was once again aired in public. There was evidence given from both sides, McCabe’s ‘ways’ in doing business did not come out very positively at all and as the case went on. Justice Fancourt stated of McCabe in his findings that; ‘he gave every impression of there being little in the way of truth or objective fact that differed from his own understanding or opinion.’
There was talk of Bin Laden family loans being used by the other side (to be honest the size of the Bin Laden family and any kind of research into them made this a non story but it did get some traction in the tabloids of course). Some seemed to give better account than others with one of McCabe’s aids, Jeremy Tutton, giving to quote Justice Fancourt, ‘an extraordinary performance in the witness box. He was extremely nervous and uncertain in much of the evidence that he gave, and eager to blame others for things that had gone wrong and absolve himself from responsibility. I regret to say that I consider that some of the evidence that he gave in his witness statements, particularly in relation to the Charwell loan, was a fabrication.
No-one seemed to know which side the courts would come down as it seemed both sides had been given a going over but it seemed McCabe and his side had maybe not helped themselves in how they presented at all, alongside the evidence they were scrutinising also.
Eventually on the 16th September the court returned to deliver its findings and Mr Justice Fancourt ruled Mr McCabe must now sell his stake to Prince Abdullah for £5m. The judge ruled the contract of sale and purchase of Sheffield United Ltd's shares could not be set aside. The judge said UTB LLC would also have to buy the club's property assets from Sheffield United Ltd. This includes the Bramall Lane stadium and the Sheffield United hotel. In a statement issued after the ruling, a spokesman for Mr McCabe said: "He has supported Sheffield United through thick and thin going back to the 1950s and wishes nothing more than success for the club, its supporters and the many staff employed by it.
"Mr McCabe sincerely hopes that he is proved wrong in relation to his deep misgivings about the suitability of Prince Abdullah as an appropriate custodian of Sheffield United."
"No owner, director, coach or player is bigger than the club but together with the fans, we all share the common desire to make the club ever greater," he said.
Sheffield United released a statement saying the judgement "brings an end to the uncertainty over Sheffield United's future ownership and allows us to focus our full attention on the season ahead".
The website now says even to this day: Sheffield United Football Club Ltd is directly owned by Blades Leisure Limited. Blades Leisure Ltd is owned by UTB LLC, and UTB 2018 LLC, companies who are 100% owned by H.R.H. Prince Abdullah bin Mosaad bin Abdulaziz Al Saud of Riyadh.
The operations of Blades Leisure Ltd are focused on professional footballing activities and the operation of sports stadium. Other interests within the group include stewarding services and commercial gym operations.
----
If you have a spare week (once you have wasted days reading my stuff) then go to below for the full court case notes…138 pages but some good stuff in there amongst the court/financial jargon and some interesting characterisation of some of the leading characters involved in the case/dispute.
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content...-09-16_Sheffield-United_Approved-Judgment.pdf
----