Crystal Palace had never secured a major trophy nor participated in European competitions. The exuberant celebrations following their 1-0 victory over Manchester City at Wembley marked one of the most memorable football stories of 2025.
They believed they earned a spot in the Europa League for the upcoming season. According to informed sources, factions within UEFA shared this opinion. However, less than two months later, the aftermath has been marred by disputes, rivalries, and ultimately, UEFA's regulations on multi-club ownership.
As a result, Palace has been excluded from the Europa League, with Nottingham Forest taking their place. Palace will now compete in the Conference League, where both the prize money and prestige are considerably lower.
Palace is expected to escalate the matter to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
Why did this occur? What does it reveal about football ownership? What transpired between Palace and Forest? Could this ignite a deeper rivalry between the clubs?
Palace and the Missed March Deadline
Two critical aspects explain how Palace lost their Europa League spot. Firstly, Palace argues that John Textor, who owns stakes in both Palace and Lyon, does not exert decisive control at Selhurst Park. Despite Eagle Football Holdings owning a 43% stake, Palace insists Textor has no significant influence.
In conversations with Talksport, Textor stated, "I don't have decisive influence. I don't and I didn't."
Textor's involvement is central to the case. UEFA determined that Lyon and Palace cannot both participate in next season's Europa League due to his partial ownership. Consequently, as Lyon finished higher in their league, they secured the spot.
The second issue is that Palace missed UEFA's March 1 deadline to modify their ownership structure to comply with multi-club ownership rules.
In essence, this is why the South London club faces this predicament.
Forest also missed the deadline but demonstrated to UEFA that they were working towards compliance. Evangelos Marinakis, who also owns Olympiakos, placed his Forest stake into a blind trust, ceasing to be a "person with significant control." Ultimately, Olympiakos qualified, but Forest did not.
Had Palace convinced UEFA that Textor lacked decisive control, the deadline would have been irrelevant. However, UEFA rejected Palace's argument, making the missed deadline their downfall.
Forest Lobbied for Palace's Demotion
Forest stands to benefit significantly from Palace's disqualification. Questions linger at Palace regarding Forest's involvement in the recent events.
BBC Sport discovered a letter from Forest to UEFA, raising concerns about Palace's Europa League eligibility.
Forest contends they adhered to the rules when Palace did not, thus deserving their Europa League spot. It's a compelling argument.
Marinakis didn't want to place his ownership in a blind trust, but he did, aware of the potential consequences.
Could this mark the beginning of one of English football's most unexpected rivalries?
The Move to Sell Textor's Palace Stake
Textor distanced himself further from Palace late last month by agreeing to sell his stake to fellow American businessman Woody Johnson for nearly £190 million.
The deal bolstered Palace's claim that there was never any collusion with Lyon.
At the time, this appeared to be a significant step towards maintaining their Europa League position.
However, there was an understanding at Palace that while UEFA might view Textor's exit favorably, it wouldn't suffice on its own.
Their hopes rested on UEFA concluding that Textor did not hold significant control at the club.
Palace's concerns grew with every passing day, believing that if UEFA agreed with their argument, they would have been informed by now.
Their pessimism proved justified.
The Lyon Complication That Did Not Save Palace
Palace's hopes were briefly revived when Lyon faced relegation from Ligue 1 in late June due to financial difficulties.
If upheld, this demotion would have meant Lyon lost their license to compete in the Europa League, offering an opportunity for Palace.
However, Lyon appealed the decision with France's football authority, dampening Palace's optimism.
Palace feared the worst amid skepticism about whether France would forcibly remove one of their prestigious clubs from the top flight, given uncertainties over television revenue.
Reports in May indicated that sports broadcaster DAZN terminated its five-year domestic broadcast contract with France's Professional Football League (LFP) for Ligue 1 after just one season.
DAZN reportedly paid 400 million euros for the domestic rights over five years. In contrast, the Premier League secured £6.7 billion for a four-year contract starting next season, allowing Sky and TNT to broadcast up to 270 live games annually.
Concerns arose that relegating Lyon would jeopardize Ligue 1's appeal.
Metadata:
xml