The London club qualified for the Europa League by winning the FA Cup last season but was "relegated" to the Conference League, swapped with Nuno Espírito Santo's Nottingham Forest, due to UEFA's multi-club ownership rules. Palace has already filed an appeal.
Embed from Getty Images
Steve Parish, chairman and co-owner of Crystal Palace, has strongly suggested that Nottingham Forest, under the management of Portuguese coach Nuno Espírito Santo, is directly responsible for Palace’s controversial “relegation” from the Europa League to the UEFA Conference League a development that has sparked frustration and debate among fans and pundits alike.
This twist comes despite Palace having legitimately secured a Europa League spot by winning last season’s FA Cup, their first major trophy in the club’s history.
At the heart of the controversy lies UEFA’s enforcement of its multi-club ownership regulations. The governing body’s financial control panel determined that both Lyon and Crystal Palace, previously under the umbrella of American businessman John Textor, breached the rules laid out in Article 5.01 of the UEFA Club Competitions Regulations. These stipulate that two clubs owned by the same individual or consortium cannot compete in the same European competition to avoid conflicts of interest. As of March 1, 2025, UEFA concluded that despite recent moves to alter ownership structures including Textor selling his stake in Palace and stepping back from involvement in Lyon the connections between the two clubs were still deemed problematic.
Consequently, UEFA’s ruling allowed Lyon, now managed by Paulo Fonseca, to retain their Europa League place, while Crystal Palace was demoted to the Conference League. The club that benefited directly from this decision was Nottingham Forest, who finished just behind Palace in the Premier League standings and were thus elevated to the Europa League sparking outrage in South London.
Speaking on the widely-followed podcast “The Rest is Football,” hosted by former England international Gary Lineker alongside fellow ex-professionals Alan Shearer and Micah Richards, Parish did not mince his words. He referred to widespread reports in the British press suggesting that it was Nottingham Forest who submitted the formal complaint to UEFA, triggering the investigation and the subsequent punitive decision against Palace.
Parish, visibly frustrated, confirmed that the club has already lodged an appeal with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), seeking to overturn UEFA’s decision. The outcome of that appeal is expected by the end of the month, and the club remains hopeful of being reinstated to the Europa League, although time is running short with European competitions soon to begin their qualifying rounds.
“Yes, that’s what we’ve been told, and I believe it’s now public knowledge,” Parish stated during the podcast. “These moves seem to have become public rather quickly, and there doesn’t appear to be much confidentiality when it comes to certain organizations. But from what we understand, that was the issue someone actively wanted to claim our spot in the Europa League, and they made sure UEFA acted on it.”
Parish went on to reflect on the broader implications of the incident, highlighting the cutthroat nature of football politics, especially when European places are on the line. “If there hadn’t been someone waiting in the wings to benefit from our misfortune, I doubt this would have even been raised. People naturally look after their own interests, and while some may think that’s fair play, others see it as opportunism. I can’t control how others behave, I can only control the arguments and evidence we’ve presented to UEFA and now to CAS.”
The Palace chairman also criticized the timing and transparency of UEFA’s process, implying that the club was given little opportunity to rectify the situation before sanctions were imposed. “We’ve done everything we could to distance ourselves from any perceived conflicts of interest. John Textor divested from Palace, he took clear steps regarding Lyon, yet we’re still being penalized. It’s frustrating for the players, the staff, and especially for our supporters who celebrated the FA Cup win only to now face uncertainty about which European competition we’ll be playing in.”
This saga has stirred significant debate in English football, with many observers questioning whether Nottingham Forest’s alleged role in the complaint was a fair exercise of their rights or a tactical exploitation of the rules for competitive gain. Some argue that if the rules exist, they should be enforced strictly, while others see this as a maneuver that undermines sporting merit given that Palace won their Europa League place on the field.
Meanwhile, Nottingham Forest has refrained from commenting publicly on the allegations, but the club is said to be preparing for the Europa League campaign in full confidence that UEFA’s ruling will stand. For their manager, Nuno Espírito Santo, and the Forest board, the situation presents a significant opportunity to boost the club’s European ambitions, particularly with the financial and prestige benefits that come with competing in the Europa League rather than the Conference League.
For Palace, the appeal to CAS represents the last chance to reclaim what they believe is rightfully theirs. The decision, whichever way it falls, could set a precedent for how UEFA handles similar multi-club ownership cases in the future an increasingly pertinent issue as more investors spread their influence across multiple teams in different leagues.
As things stand, both clubs wait anxiously for the ruling. For Crystal Palace and their supporters, the hope remains that justice will be served and that the club’s hard-earned place in the Europa League will be restored.
Updated: 03:35, 17 Jul 2025
