Jump to content


Sheffield Wednesday Fan
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

54 Excellent

1 Follower

About teddybeararmy

  • Rank
    Sheffield Wednesday Reserves

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. In Birmingham's case they had already exceeded in two years and with the forecast for 17-18 the EFL already knew they would break the limit hence the arrangement of the hearing, however Birmingham and published their 17-18 accounts by the time of the hearing so they were punished as per the 3 year accounting period.
  2. According to transfer market both deals were done early July, doesn't this mean that they are outside the accounting period of 17-18
  3. If the above is correct how did we go from being 10m over p&s as stated by our chairman at the forum to being under We now know Derby have sold their ground. Villa have something going on surrounding the training ground and HS2 cutting through it As for us, either we have gone down the Derby route or our chairman has swapped abdi for some magic beans.
  4. How do you know we have passed the 3year accounting period.
  5. Sorry Minton I think you are wrong, it's really confusing when we talk about seasons,accounts periods,soft and hard embargo and punishments.this is how I see it feel free to contradict and correct. Points deduction this season, you are correct, think the EFL gave a cut off march 28th. The EFL said only Birmingham had exceeded the 3 year limit of 39m.you are correct however the big but is that 3 teams had not submitted the final years accounts for this period of which we are one . When the 17-18 accounts are published or the equivalent accounts which the EFL should already have, are processed, if we have exceeded the 39m then a hearing will be arranged asap.its possible that we could start next season with a deduction. As for embargoes it depends on the last two sets of accounts and forcast for next season.depending on what jiggery-pokery has been done it's possible for us not to be in an embargo.
  6. Agreed, give the lad a break. In and out of the side,court case hanging over him, we cannot expect him to be firing on all cylinders. As for reach,the most over rated player in the team, been awful for weeks.
  7. None of the ifollow games are working on mine
  8. Quite right, by the looks of it delaying tactics on Birmingham's part, maybe they hoped to get past the march cut off date for deduction imposed this season
  9. That's correct. I don't think anyone on this thread has suggested we would be. When the accounts are published we will know why we haven't breached and if we will in the coming season.hopefull not.
  10. The statement suggested that for breaking the 39 m the punishment scale was in place and applied in Birmingham's case.it doesn't show a full breakdown but mentioned 15 m over the limit as -12 points and in Birmingham's case the 8-10 m over the limit the punishment would be -7 points
  11. I searched bcfc EFL statement,then on the page is a click here which takes you to the pdf.
  12. The EFL did plan to punish them regarding the player purchase,but some legal wrangle over a verbal and email confirmation of the embargo rules prevented them.
  • Create New...