#SWFC News | Sheffield Wednesday: Owls confirm they are under transfer embargo

[Vic Flange]

Was this one of the things Carlos was going to tell us at the end of last season. 

Lots going on we don't know about that's why backroom staff keep leaving.

[Hookowl]

24 minutes ago, rickygoo said:

I don't see how trying to reduce the wage bill by getting rid of players   -Wallace, Loovens, Hunt, Venancio, Rhodes maybe Westwood and maybe even more - is "continuing investment at a similar level". Looks like cutting to me.  

 

TBF I don't see it as that for those players apart from Hunt and possibly Westwood if true although fitness may have had a bearing on this.

Wallace - contract ended and his age was against renewing it.

Loovens - contract ended and although he used to be brilliant player everyone had seen the decline.

Venancio - loan ended and he went back to his parent club.

Rhodes - didn't bring anything to the team, not sure why this was but still true.

[striker]

2 minutes ago, owlinexile said:

 

If the embargo came out of the blue as a surprise to Chansiri in April,   he's more clueless than we ever suspected.

As I understand EFL changed dates with no warning, hence the surprise element. 

 

The bad guys here are the EFL imposing a ridiculous arbitrary limit, we have an owner who is prepared to spend money (as he has proved) but isnt allowed to. The club are trying to do things in the right way and work with EFL to find a solution, DC wants to extend contracts and bring in new players but is being prevented by EFL.

[HarrowbyOwl]

Wonder why its temporary and what are we trying to negotiate?

 

If a club is in breach of the 3 year £39m aggregate loss limit, the EFL Executive can, under EFL Regulation 16.20:

 

1. require the club to submit, agree and adhere to a budget relating to Transfer Fees, Compensation Fees, Loan Fees, subsequent payments which become due under the terms of any transfer, players' remuneration and fees payable to Agents
2. require a club to provide any further information the Executive may want, indefinitely.
3. refuse applications to register any player or new contract of an existing player

 

Additionally the club will be referred to a Disciplinary Commission, which has wider powers, some ridiculously so (See underlined below):

A decision of the Commission may:
1.    order a party to do or refrain from doing anything;
2.    order a specific performance;
3.    make a declaration on any matter to be determined;
4.    issue a reprimand or warning as to the future conduct of a party;
5.    order the payment of compensation to The League, any Club, any other club, Player or other person;
6.    order a suspension of membership of The League;
7.    order a deduction of points;
8.    impose a financial penalty payable to The League;
9.    recommend expulsion from membership of The League;
10.    order a withdrawal or loss of benefit otherwise available to members of The League e.g. basic award or ladder payment;
11.    impose an embargo on registration of Players;
12.    order any other sanction as the Disciplinary Commission may think fit; and
13.    order that interest be payable on any sums awarded under this Regulation for such period and at such rates as the Disciplinary Commission thinks fit

 

The only negotiable bit seems to be point 1) agreeing a transfer budget that the league will monitor

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

19 minutes ago, Hillsborough Mole said:

 

No

we were investing at well OVER the limits. Irresponsibly

 

True.

 

We've pushed our luck too far, but I still don't buy the idea that the survey was some form of trick to sell season tickets. It was pretty clear that continued investment wasn't going to involve a spending spree unless we were selling a few big players first.

 

With the wages we're still paying, we're still investing heavily in the team rather than selling off our prized assets, which was about all anyone could hope reading that survey.

[@owlstalk]

12 minutes ago, HarrowbyOwl said:

Wonder why its temporary and what are we trying to negotiate?

every single embargo in the history of embargos has been temporary

[Guest Hillsborough Mole]

4 minutes ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

 

With the wages we're still paying, we're still investing heavily in the team rather than selling off our prized assets, which was about all anyone could hope reading that survey.

 

The whole point was about whether investment was being maintained - or reduced.

 

Its been reduced - by every single definition of the word

[HarrowbyOwl]

3 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

every single embargo in the history of embargos has been temporary

Indeed but what can be done to get ours (even partially) lifted in order to bring in loan signings before the end of August?

[FreshOwl]

Needed to go up 16/17 season, bottled it to Huddersfield 

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

6 minutes ago, Hillsborough Mole said:

 

The whole point was about whether investment was being maintained - or reduced.

 

Its been reduced - by every single definition of the word

 

I thought it mentioned the sale of key first team players as one option, and that's what the majority opted against.

 

Thus far, we haven't sold any key players (although I think we need to).

 

I suppose if we're still investing in the likes of Fletcher, Forestieri, Bannan, Lees, Hooper, João etc, then we are still following the same strategy of paying more then we can realistically afford under P&S rules.

 

It's misguided, but it's what the survey offered.

[kingsidney]

1 hour ago, Watson said:

 

Read my posts mate posted at the beginning of the summer that there wouldn't be any signings.  Watson's posts fact-checked 

It’s bad enough reading your posts once without having to trawl through old ones. 

[S36 OWL]

1 hour ago, Ronio said:

Absolute shambles what's happening at the club.  

 

Sadly things may very well get much much worse. 

 

I fear your right mate.

[Dick_Turpin]

3 minutes ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

I thought it mentioned the sale of key first team players as one option, and that's what the majority opted against.

 

Thus far, we haven't sold any key players (although I think we need to).

 

I suppose if we're still investing in the likes of Fletcher, Forestieri, Bannan, Lees, Hooper, João etc, then we are still following the same strategy of paying more then we can realistically afford under P&S rules.

 

It's misguided, but it's what the survey offered.

They are spending less. Full stop.

 

[Inspector Lestrade]

3 minutes ago, kingsidney said:

It’s bad enough reading your posts once without having to trawl through old ones. 

 

You try and help and thats the thanks you get. 

[Sham67]

1 hour ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

True.

 

We've pushed our luck too far, but I still don't buy the idea that the survey was some form of trick to sell season tickets. It was pretty clear that continued investment wasn't going to involve a spending spree unless we were selling a few big players first.

 

With the wages we're still paying, we're still investing heavily in the team rather than selling off our prized assets, which was about all anyone could hope reading that survey.

 

Absolutely spot on.  You'd have to thicker than treacle to honestly interpret it any other way.

[Nero]

2 hours ago, rickygoo said:

I don't see how trying to reduce the wage bill by getting rid of players   -Wallace, Loovens, Hunt, Venancio, Rhodes maybe Westwood and maybe even more - is "continuing investment at a similar level". Looks like cutting to me.  

Its continuing the Chansiri funded losses at the maximum allowed. He will still lose tje max allowed, probably about 7m of his personal fortune next season. He could sell more assets than the 7m he has to cut for FFP. That would be cutting 

[Dick_Turpin]

Just now, Peacenocchio said:

Its continuing the Chansiri funded losses at the maximum allowed. He will still lose tje max allowed, probably about 7m of his personal fortune next season. He could sell more assets than the 7m he has to cut for FFP. That would be cutting 

These are weasel words. He's reducing expenditure. Full stop. It's like dealing with ChrisfuckingGrayling.

 

[hawksmore]

4 minutes ago, Sham67 said:

 

Absolutely spot on.  You'd have to thicker than treacle to honestly interpret it any other way.

 

Literally everything in the world costs more tomorrow than it does today, including football players and their wages as well as associated fees. Now add to the fact the squad is weaker due to loans and key players being sold off. 

 

You can if you really want, continue to believe that we are undergoing 'continued investment' however, what's really happening is we have cut costs, sold key assets and continue to pay the contracts still in place as per legal obligations. 

 

This whole 'continued investment' is actually completely pointless anyway, it means nothing in the grand scheme of things, the situation is what it is and it needs addressing with positivity and a solid strategy. The cold hard facts are that there have been lies and deceit seeping out of the club, from the top down. That is of way more importance than an interpretation of words. 

 

I know staff at the club who hate this guy and detest what he has done to the club they have loved working at for years. This goes beyond bad PR, blaming fans, poor transfer policy and 'naivety' this is down to one man's character and ego. First and foremost he needs to show the paying fans that he can be humble. Nothing i'm hearing says that is ever going to happen. 

[Sham67]

1 minute ago, hawksmore said:

 

Literally everything in the world costs more tomorrow than it does today, including football players and their wages as well as associated fees. Now add to the fact the squad is weaker due to loans and key players being sold off. 

 

You can if you really want, continue to believe that we are undergoing 'continued investment' however, what's really happening is we have cut costs, sold key assets and continue to pay the contracts still in place as per legal obligations. 

 

This whole 'continued investment' is actually completely pointless anyway, it means nothing in the grand scheme of things, the situation is what it is and it needs addressing with positivity and a solid strategy. The cold hard facts are that there have been lies and deceit seeping out of the club, from the top down. That is of way more importance than an interpretation of words. 

 

I know staff at the club who hate this guy and detest what he has done to the club they have loved working at for years. This goes beyond bad PR, blaming fans, poor transfer policy and 'naivety' this is down to one man's character and ego. First and foremost he needs to show the paying fans that he can be humble. Nothing i'm hearing says that is ever going to happen. 

 

I stand by what I said.  Given our financial situation, you'd have to thick to have honestly interpreted that survey question any other way.  

[WalthamOwl]

Horrible reading it being confirmed. Terrible that DC has let us get in to this position.