Nottingham Forest’s wait to find out which UEFA competition they will play in is nearly at its end, with Crystal Palace’s appeal to be heard at CAS on the 8th of August.
After the Conference League play-off round was drawn, the battle between Forest, Palace and UEFA began to feel more real, with the Reds due to face Fredrikstad or Midtjylland should Palace win their appeal.
Strangely, Palace posted about the Conference League draw on social media before quickly deleting the post, emphasising the confusion surrounding the situation as both clubs attempt to avoid competing in the third-tier tournament.
It’s Palace that can alter the situation, though, as a successful appeal at CAS will see them take back their Europa League spot, but football governance expert Stefan Borson isn’t sure their argument will be enough.
Evangelos Marinakis attends Nottingham Forest vs Arsenal
Photo by Alex Dodd – CameraSport via Getty Images
Stefan Borson doubts Crystal Palace’s UEFA argument
It seems as if Palace have moved away from trying to prove that John Textor didn’t have decisive influence over the club, focusing more now on how UEFA supposedly treat other clubs more favourably, including Forest.
Palace are believed to have documents that show that Forest were able to extend the deadline to comply with UEFA rules on multi-club ownership, but Borson doesn’t believe this argument necessarily leaves Forest in the wrong.
BREAKING: CAS to hear Palace's Europa League appeal next Friday.
Crystal Palace's appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) over which European competition they will play in next season will be heard on August 8, with the verdict expected on August 11. pic.twitter.com/shUbfLqmeH
— Sky Sports News (@SkySportsNews) July 30, 2025
View Tweet
Speaking on talkSPORT, he said: “According to those documents, Nottingham Forest did nothing wrong.
MORE FOREST STORIES
“Those documents suggest that Nottingham Forest were able to extend the time period from the 1st of March to the 29th of April with the consent of UEFA, so what have Nottingham Forest done wrong in that scenario?
“[…]The point is that there’s nothing to say that the approach taken with Nottingham Forest wouldn’t have been available to Crystal Palace; they just didn’t ask for it because, according to them, they weren’t aware of it. So I just don’t know where the point goes.”
Borson’s assessment seems to reach the crux of the issue as if Palace can’t prove that Forest’s extension wasn’t something they couldn’t also have benefited from, it seems unlikely that CAS would rule against UEFA purely because Palace didn’t know to ask.
Nottingham Forest’s role in Crystal Palace’s CAS hearing
Clearly, Palace’s arguments heavily focus on a perceived double standard for clubs like Forest, meaning that the Reds are set to be represented at the appeal.
Speaking to the Daily Mail, a spokesperson for Forest said: “Nottingham Forest has been formally named as a respondent in Crystal Palace’s appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) concerning a UEFA decision.
“As such, the club is required to participate in the proceedings and has instructed legal counsel accordingly.”
From Palace’s argument, it appears that most of Forest’s potential involvement will simply involve confirming UEFA’s stance on the deadline for complying with the multi-club rules, but it remains to be seen whether The Eagles have anything else up their sleeves.