EFL Statement

[prowl]

20 minutes ago, Mrmason69 said:

It's no more than we deserve. Our owner has been sailing close to the wind since he arrived. It was only a matter of time before he was found out 

I expect his private jet is fuelled and ready at Robin Hood Airport 

His sort alway have an exit strategy. That's how they get Rich 

I completely disagree. People can get rich and still be honest and ethical. Even if we are found to have breached regulations there would be no reason for DC to flee the country. It's not like he personally would be banged up in jail.

 

Please let's try to keep things in proportion.

[room0035]

46 minutes ago, Flat Owl said:

So many holes in the EFL 'criteria' that a robust defence should seek to expose if the Club do not roll over...

 

Rigged competition in favour of relegated premier league clubs.

 

Potential restrictions of trade of otherwise solvent businesses.

 

Fixed amount for 3 year cycles etc. which do not reflect rising incomes within the Premier League.

 

Whilst the EFLs intention to achieve 'fairness' maybe honourable, the system is flawed and the EFL run the risk of equally being exposed to criticism.

 

I see this as a test case and perhaps the EFL need to use this process to establish a legal benchmark before they undertake a root and branch review of how they administer the competition.

The problem we have is every year all 24 football league championship clubs chairman mean to decide on the rules or any changes needed.

 

And at no points has anyone said Parachute payments need scrapping, the rules are crap they need changing. Each and every chairman agrees with them, this year Gibson spouted about us, Derby and Villa then didn't turn up for the meeting.

 

Basically we have done this too ourselves by not trying to change the EFL rules, instead we have just ignored them. 

[prowl]

1 minute ago, room0035 said:

The problem we have is every year all 24 football league championship clubs chairman mean to decide on the rules or any changes needed.

 

And at no points has anyone said Parachute payments need scrapping, the rules are crap they need changing. Each and every chairman agrees with them, this year Gibson spouted about us, Derby and Villa then didn't turn up for the meeting.

 

Basically we have done this too ourselves by not trying to change the EFL rules, instead we have just ignored them. 

Parachute payments are the business of the Premier League. Would Premier League clubs vote to cut off funding that ensures their rapid return to the promised land. I disagree with parachute payments but if we were a PL club I wouldn't want them scrapped.

[sweetsheri]

21 minutes ago, prowl said:

I completely disagree. People can get rich and still be honest and ethical. Even if we are found to have breached regulations there would be no reason for DC to flee the country. It's not like he personally would be banged up in jail.

 

Please let's try to keep things in proportion.

Unless he's intentionally included a transaction in the accounts that wasn't there. See Tesco 2014

[room0035]

25 minutes ago, prowl said:

Parachute payments are the business of the Premier League. Would Premier League clubs vote to cut off funding that ensures their rapid return to the promised land. I disagree with parachute payments but if we were a PL club I wouldn't want them scrapped.

For me there is a very simple way to sort them, Excluded them when calculating P&S losses.

 

If the club coming down can show they are being used because they have premier league cost the cannot get rid of then so be it, but if they are being used for new player transfers or the club has made no attempt to reduce their wages from relegation or reduce their wage bill from selling these players then the payments are excluded for P&S losses,

 

The playing field has to be levelled - Either the EFL grow a backbone or the EFL chairman not getting the parachute payments do. 

[Flat Owl]

I don't have a problem with parachute payment per se.

 

I do have a problem with how much and over how many years - Wolves etc. receiving them whilst in League 1 skews that competition also.

 

I have a problem with the fact that clubs coming down effectively have 3 consecutive seasons of massive advantage over others - how they use that [or not] advantage is a side issue.

 

The FFP upper limit should be set at the level parachute payments for those coming down - that could mean reducing the parachute payments to a one off 30M payment and increasing FFP limit to say 30M over any one season? As soon a total over 3 years was decided rather than a one off - pressure to either spend big initially or be cute with the financials in later years was cast - any problems have a period to fester and present themselves as a catastrophic failure later.   It is also far simpler to administer and enforce?

 

Also the ATOL type system previously mentioned is a good call to protect the integrity of the competition and all club staff in the event of failure.

 

Edited November 18, 2019 by Flat Owl

[Kanye West]

The EFL look at the issues with FFP totally wrong.

Why on earth do they think teams are willing to take a risk on promotion? Huddersfield finished rock bottom last season on 16 points, and still got a minimum guaranteed £94m. Never mind the huge parachute payments they'll get for the next few seasons.

 

The gap between the PL and Championship financially speaking is a huge gap that needs filling. 

[Guest Kameron]

47 minutes ago, SiJ said:

This is very true. 

 

This runs a lot deeper than Wednesday, Chansiri etc. 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't Boro looking to sue the EFL for failure to implement/adhere correctly to their own rules? 

 

Surely this whole fiasco only strengthens that case? 

 

Gibson and a few others will have a lot to do with this, Ricky Parry recently joining the EFL could also be a factor.

[vulva]

EFL, Parry, Gibson, SAG, SCC. 

 

Anyone else?

 

Someone draw a venn diagram and let’s see who’s in the middle. 

[Mus]

1 hour ago, room0035 said:

So lets say DC some how manages to get away with this and we don't get a points deduction and fine - does anyone think he will learn from it and chance his basic business plan that means we lose millions every season.

 

We have a 30-40,000 seater stadium that we are not allowed to use properly because it has not been updated since 1994 (for Euro 96), what needs to be done to get the SAG restrictions lifted - no one seems to know?

 

Ticket pricing that gets about 22-24,000 each game, if POTG was not such a rip off we could get another 2,0000 -4,000 a game at £30 a ticket that's another £1.38m to £2.76m a yr, sell the corporate boxes at a proper price £25k for 28 boxes that's another £700k a year, sell advertising to local business at prices they can afford for 2nd division football this could be a few million a year. Sell naming rights to the stadium and the stands again another £1-2m depending, sell the shirt sponsorship deals again another £1-2m based on other teams and how high profile we have become. Just a few measure could help to bring in another £5+m in revenue a season.

 

Then we manage the team better, Rhodes is on £40k at least a week or £2m a season we had offers in the summer for him and a fee as well, but we turn them down because of policy of not selling players. We currently have Winnall, Rhodes, Luongo, Odabajo, Baker, Bates, Wildsmith, Jones sat not playing because we continue to stock pile players just in case, but then in the same breathe don't develop or progress youth players which could offer the same cover if needed. We probably have in the region of £100k a week sat not playing or £5m a season.

 

We need a complete rethink the way our football club is run, the off the field activities need to be run as a business making money, the stadium needs to pay for itself outside of match days from corporate events, merchandising, clubs and activities. But at prices that people don't feel they are being ripped off.

 

The on the field needs running better and the first team trimming down, players not playing need to be sold or loaned out, the management of the team needs to vastly improve. We have had now for the last 3 season half of the squad out of contract, this is no way to run a football team, some are not needed so why are they still at the club and not sold to saving money and maybe even bringing in fees. But other that are key to the team, why are their contracts being allowed to get within 8 months. If everyone out of contract leaves at the end of this season we will have no strikers left at the club This is no way to run a football club but under Dc it has become the norm..

 

Excellent well thought out post.  

 

DC has, in his defence tried to put the club first but as we have said a thousand times running a business and a football club are not the same.

 

I agree what's needed is a complete re-think of how the club is run, sooner rather than later because this is a mess.

[Animis]

52 minutes ago, vulva said:

EFL, Parry, Gibson, SAG, SCC. 

 

Anyone else?

 

Someone draw a venn diagram and let’s see who’s in the middle. 

[Plymstockowl]

The EFL need to tread carefully after the Bury debacle. There would be public outrage if the EFL were responsible for putting another club out of existence so I don't see expulsion being an option.

 

This has come about because Gibson is crying but I can't imagine him getting joy from other chairman because he's had his parachute money and blown it.

 

The EFL has to "investigate" but as they signed off the accounts if there is wrong doing at the time they should have seen it. Therefore they at best look incompetent and not capable of governing the football league.

 

The EFL need a competitive division and by letting the EPL clubs just yo yo fans will not watch it, us, Leeds, Derby etc. have made it more competitive, have decent crowds and brought in characters that the TV companies like and fans like. If they start heavily punishing those clubs then the EFL loses its appeal.

 

I think we will have a robust defence and come to an agreement with some sort of suspended punishment, which shows that the EFL have "investigated" and that there has been punishment.

[danblakemore]

Another angle ?

 

Is this an opportunity ?

 

If we start talking to other clubs with similar ambitions, then talk to the EPL... maybe, just maybe this could be the start of a EPL2?

 

Stuff the EFL and leave them to it.

[WalthamOwl]

4 hours ago, torres said:

 

I'm fearing we will be made an example of.

unfortunately I think this is exactly what will happen. Think we all should be very worried what the efl will punish us with. 

[room0035]

25 minutes ago, danblakemore said:

Another angle ?

 

Is this an opportunity ?

 

If we start talking to other clubs with similar ambitions, then talk to the EPL... maybe, just maybe this could be the start of a EPL2?

 

Stuff the EFL and leave them to it.

Is not that kind of the problem it is the greed in football that has got us to this point.

 

We need a game that is sustainable for all, not just the teams in the top division and to hell with everyone else.

 

How about 50% of all of the money going to the EPL is split between the other 72 teams down the football league structure to better balance the money in the game.

[WalthamOwl]

Where has the idea of expulsion come from? Is it just people’s worries or has it been reported in the media? 

[mogbad]

2 hours ago, SiJ said:

This is very true. 

 

This runs a lot deeper than Wednesday, Chansiri etc. 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't Boro looking to sue the EFL for failure to implement/adhere correctly to their own rules? 

 

Surely this whole fiasco only strengthens that case? 

Or is this all the EFL covering their own backs.  The EFL have charged us knowing that if the independent panel exonerates SWFC/DC then the likes of Gibson/Boro have no case to sue the EFL with.

[vulva]

4 minutes ago, WalthamOwl said:

Where has the idea of expulsion come from? Is it just people’s worries or has it been reported in the media? 

If expulsion is a real possibility we need to know. I’ve got £5.52 team points on my card and had my eye on the Danny Sonner autobiography. 

[wellbeaten-the-owl]

2 minutes ago, mogbad said:

Or is this all the EFL covering their own backs.  The EFL have charged us knowing that if the independent panel exonerates SWFC/DC then the likes of Gibson/Boro have no case to sue the EFL with.

Entirely possible but unlikely think more they are looking to set an example.

 

But if we are cleared by an independent panel does stop Gibson et Al taking action against EFL... 

[matthefish2002]

40 minutes ago, WalthamOwl said:

Where has the idea of expulsion come from? Is it just people’s worries or has it been reported in the media? 

 

I think that's the biggest sanction the EFL can give a club breaking the rules we are alleged to have broken.
I would safely bet my mortgage though that it wont come to this.