UEFA delays decision to participate in Crystal Palace and Europa League Lyon

Crystal Palace will have to wait longer to find out if they will be in the Europa League next season, as the European Union delays their decision until after Lyon’s appeal against Ligue 1 relegation.

South London clubs have gained their Europa League spot by winning the FA Cup, but UEFA rules prohibit two clubs with the same ownership structure from participating in the same European competition.

The palace case complicates co-owner John Textor, who also has control over the French side.

To help the Palace’s qualifications, Textor is committed to selling his 44% stake in the club. Despite this move, UEFA held on to the last ruling, with the announcement originally expected on Monday now being postponed.

Due to the club’s financial instability, the relegation of Ligue 2 performed by the French football authorities is Lyon’s relegation.

Lyon has confirmed that it will appeal the decision and agrees to lose its status in the Europa League if the appeal is unsuccessful.

Will they?
Isn’t it?

Crystal Palace is still waiting for news about whether they can compete in next season’s Europa League.

– BBC Sport (@bbcsport) June 30, 2025

As a result, UEFA chose to await the results of the appeal process before confirming whether the palace can compete in Europe next season. The governing body said the update would be provided “appropriately”.

If cleared to participate in the competition, Crystal Palace will enter the group stage directly from September.

Meanwhile, Totchor has begun the process of selling its Palace shares to Woody Johnson, owner of the New York Jets.

Textor has resigned from the leadership position in Lyon and will stand out from the club’s daily business. The custodian still owns a 77% stake in the French side.

Lyon’s financial problems became even more obvious in October, when Textor’s Eagle Football Group revealed that the club was responsible for £422 million in debt.

After implementing the downgrade, Lyon issued a strong wording criticizing the decision, calling it “uncomprehensible” and confirming that they would appeal.