casbahowl Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 6 minutes ago, nilsson said: Complying with the league’s rules would be a start Like everyone else does? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asteener1867 Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 Hopefully Katrienne will come back and sort it....why did she leave so suddenly anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casbahowl Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 Just now, ka58 said: expect complete radio silence from the club to allow for mass fan speculation over next few months as well. standard. Apart from the statement they’ve already issued? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellbeaten-the-owl Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 6 minutes ago, nilsson said: Complying with the league’s rules would be a start As much as they think they control every thing the EFL do not create the rules regarding accounting treatment, the accounts are prepared and audited under the FRC rules/standard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwellOwl Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 53 minutes ago, SiJ said: That would be my first questions to the EFL: Why did you approve the accounts in the first place? I think it looks stupid on their part to approve and then challenge. Unfortunately, they will just use us as an example now. Surely Derby and Reading are next to be charged? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casbahowl Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 17 minutes ago, asteener1867 said: We can all probably agree that its unfair to stop Chansiri spending money if he wants to..Like its some sort of restriction of trade...But the sad fact is.. The laws of the governing body of the Sport we signed up to...Don't allow it. On top of that, We had several warnings that we were on the edge of it...We apparently ignored it. I can have a car capable of 150mph...It can do it....Sadly the speed limot is 70.... I spend 2 years roaring up the M1 at 90...I get warned...."its 70" The next year...I career up the m1 doing 100....even tyhogh I know they have me reg....and I know the Cameras are on me...But I still think 120 mph is fair enough.... I get done.. Who's fault is it? That’s fine if the same rules apply to all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiJ Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 Regarding the club statement... It is exactly what it needs to be at this time. Those expecting more detail are not operating in the real world. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asteener1867 Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 Just now, casbahowl said: That’s fine if the same rules apply to all Or if you do 120mph when theres no speed cameras Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OWLERTON GHOST Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 16 minutes ago, asteener1867 said: Thought it was "What the f.ook was that bang!" "Fùck me looks like we dodged a reyt bullet just then"... Mayor of Kyoto ...... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellbeaten-the-owl Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 2 minutes ago, SwellOwl said: I think it looks stupid on their part to approve and then challenge. Unfortunately, they will just use us as an example now. Surely Derby and Reading are next to be charged? Only doing this because of Boro guy wanting to sue. This will run and run and could end up in courts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ka58 Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 3 minutes ago, casbahowl said: Apart from the statement they’ve already issued? the official one that says nothing. don’t expect anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspector Lestrade Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 13 minutes ago, nilsson said: Complying with the league’s rules would be a start So we haven't complied? Thought that still had to be decided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevtheowl Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 DJMortimer, another one jumping on the condemned wagon !!! Until we are proven otherwise let’s keep an open mind and support the team. UTO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAL Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 19 minutes ago, asteener1867 said: We can all probably agree that its unfair to stop Chansiri spending money if he wants to..Like its some sort of restriction of trade...But the sad fact is.. The laws of the governing body of the Sport we signed up to...Don't allow it. On top of that, We had several warnings that we were on the edge of it...We apparently ignored it. I can have a car capable of 150mph...It can do it....Sadly the speed limot is 70.... I spend 2 years roaring up the M1 at 90...I get warned...."its 70" The next year...I career up the m1 doing 100....even tyhogh I know they have me reg....and I know the Cameras are on me...But I still think 120 mph is fair enough.... I get done.. Who's fault is it? Just depends how rich you are, and whether you can afford a top class legal team. Then it will be a leak of fumes from the petrol tank, and you thought you were only going 60 anyway 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pat blondeau Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 4 minutes ago, casbahowl said: Like everyone else does? I think most do. Leeds as an example have sold Chris Wood, Ronaldo Viera, Pontus Jansson and Kemar Roofe in the last 3 years to ensure they comply with FFP. And at least Derby got their ground sale in the right financial year. We couldn’t even do that. Name any other clubs that have just ignored FFP? You defend him over everything whether it’s ticket prices or his failed transfer strategy and overspending Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casbahowl Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 5 minutes ago, ka58 said: the official one that says nothing. don’t expect anything else. So there hasn’t been complete radio silence then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agentwalker Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 32 minutes ago, blueandwhitematt said: Pretty obvious they’re looking for to try and make an example of someone - they need a big enough name to make an impact, and it looks like we’ve potentially given them just enough rope to have a bit of a go. Will end up in court, and I don’t think there will be a shortage of lawyers lining up for a run at the whole FFP system. It will end up going places the EFL don’t want it to, strap in. Strap in?? OR strap on? Because if things follow the recent trend We're about to be shafted. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspector Lestrade Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 16 minutes ago, edwinowl said: Just this. ^^^ brilliant. Sadly never happen. And has never happened in the past either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 I go out for a few hours, look at the news and it's like WTF. A lot of the technical shizzle was discussed when the accounts were published back in the summer. My concern here is that the disciplinary charge has come after a review of the documents supplied by the Club. My hope was that those documents would have adequately covered the technical points To clarify a set of accounts is based on the substance of a transaction not the legal form. So the fact this was not recorded at Land Registry even at the time the accounts were signed off is not pivotal. If you can show there was a binding contract for sale at the year end date then this may be adequate for accounts purposes. The auditor does not determine this btw, the auditor makes a similar judgement to the one the EFL is apparently doing. Given it appears you have professional opinions now potentially being questioned by the EFL this could get interesting. The FA might get away with this lower burden of proof on disciplinary cases, be a lot more legal papers going round here Maguire saying the stadium has not been paid for being an issue is total bjollocks. Clearly he has never seen asset transfers between group companies before where the balance is left outstanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawrie’s Left Peg Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 17 minutes ago, asteener1867 said: Honourable or not Lawrie...He is the boss..theres no board of directors...If the club has f.ooked up with the laws..Who else do we blame? Did the same fans who bought Jordan Rhodes give him accountancy advice as well? Nah..He wants to run the club , lock stock and barrel...He takes the blame Agree 100% but you want to hang , draw and quarter the prisoner before any crime is committed. As I say, wait and see the findings and the outcome, balance them against the potential outcome of no action and if you still want to blame the chairman then that’s your right. I’ll join you with my burning pitchfork if he has been negligent. For now I’ll bet he hasn’t Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now