ReadingOwl

She’s been charged too - according to the original article cited in the OP. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2019/12/02/exclusive-sheffield-wednesday-chairman-could-banned-football/

Football is absolutely crackers. Absolutely. No wonder I can’t even be bothered to watch Match of the Day anymore. Clubs relegated from the Premier League get £100’s of millions of pounds of parachute payments. And yet, we still have these moral guardians enduring its a level playing field. Although I don’t agree with the Chairman - I actually feel quite sorry for him in this circumstance. You can gain an unfair advantage - but not this time.

So the ban would be ineffective? Creative accountancy (directorship). What’s the point in that case? (Not disagreeing BTW).

Cellino’s ban was never effective whilst he owned the Club. It was originally for 18 months.

Look, football is rotten to the core. How are the authorities going to fix it? But trying to be fair, I don’t see why Chansiri should suddenly be made an example. I don’t even think his misdemeanour is that great, on the scale of things.

The latter was former. But Cellino was current, albeit that he appealed and eventually his ban was upheld, but only when he’d finally sold the Club. So, neither ban was effective whilst either had day to day control of their respective Clubs. So we have no evidence as to how the Clubs survived whilst their Chairman were banned. But point taken. (Am I right? - I’m willing to be told otherwise).

“Former”? Banned during their actual tenure? And were those for football or outside indiscretions? (I have no idea BTW - genuine question).

Aye, or Chelsea. After Bury and Bolton the EFL are trying to flex it’s muscles. Boltoning the stable door after the horse has bolted. Notwithstanding other irregularities from others like Villa and Derby. If I were the Chairman, I’d be getting very proactive. I wouldn’t put up with it. And, I’m no fan of his either.

If he’s banned - who would direct and fund the day to day running of the Club? The EFL? Otherwise, how would it survive? And, thereafter, after litigation, if the EFL were found to have acted disproportionately, having banned the Chairman and ruined his investment, who would compensate him - the EFL? The supposed journalistic possibility - is a complete nonsense IMO. On, so many levels.

I agree - but the buck stops here, supposedly? Suddenly, the EFL develops a moral compass? The fans have to suffer the sins of the Chairman? You have to laugh - no wonder Wednesday fans have a persecution complex. You couldn’t make it up.

I agree. Regardless of the Chairman’s naivety, the EFL aren’t covering themselves in glory. A Club like Wednesday, with its history, local culture and national status, effectively closed down because its current Chairman is banned? That would be a big call by the EFL. Not a chance.

I’m no lover of Chansiri, but the article smacks of sensationalism. Some creative accounting, gone wrong. A ban? Restrict the bloke from plying his trade? Effectively, deny him from keeping his investment and goods. And, if banned, who will compensate him and take over the running of the Club? The EFL? Will they deal with the Administration - and leave them selves open to litigation, from the Chairman, for his losses? Personally, I can’t see any way he will be banned, it has too many legal implications. Notwithstanding that the original transaction must have been vetted and signed by people with professional “chartered” qualifications. I think it’s bull, personally.

He has a soft spot for us. He used to watch his cousin Nigel Worthington, at Hillsborough. There are plenty of references attached to him where he comments on being an Owls fan. His Wiki page for instance. https://www.readingchronicle.co.uk/sport/13389065.rodgers-was-a-big-owls-fan/

He should have passed to Forestieri.

That’s made me laugh. Unfortunate timing. (mention someone else)