Chansiri charged - could be banned from football

[asteener1867]

Just now, sonofbert2 said:

I agree.  The journalist is based in the Midlands so there might be a clue there somewhere.

 

 

Aye..we're gonna get sent to Coventry

[Nero]

In defence of Chansiri he has kept spending an extraordinary amount of his 'own' money on my club. I mean, I moan about my £555 quid a year but Jesus this guy is burning it big time probably over £100m.

And he is trying to get his spending habit it down to a manageable £13m a year. 

He's having it it like a Thai Elton John FFS

[sweetsheri]

3 hours ago, Kameron said:

The land registry for sale of Pride Park was shown in the same financial reporting year, ours appears to have been back dated.

It can be backdated if it can prove that an agreement was in place.

[Harrysgame]

Thing is with the EFL they have a 'record of messing things up, who's to say we get found not guilty. Looks to me as these constant leaks are a trial by media before the actual hearing. Sure we will have good lawyers so just wait and see.

Would be useful to know when the hearing is is.

If we are found guilty when have the EFL ever enforced maximum penalty? Be a fine and 9 points. I guess only the club know if we have broke the rules, if so then admit it and take the 9 points for cooperating fully.

[Inspector Lestrade]

 I blame Thatcher

[HarrowbyOwl]

6 minutes ago, Big Jack said:

OK EFL ,point remains the same. I am worried  and expecting  the worst.

EFL Rule 88.1

In its absolute discretion, The League may refer any matter to a Commission appointed by The Football Association.

[Frazzlebeak]

...............................and breathe.

[wellbeaten-the-owl]

10 minutes ago, Offside_Owl said:

Two important points based on some replied in this thread. 

 

1. The fact that the EFL did nothing about Bolton and Bury only has relevance because the EFL are now taking action to clean up the way its clubs are being run. Are people suggesting the EFL should continue to treat football governance as it did with Bolton and Bury? Ignore everything? If you have been doing things wrong, you don't put things right by using past mistakes as your base level. You raise it. 

 

2. On the accounts, everything looked in order from the filed account but as we have learned the devil comes in the detail. Just because the accounts are approved does not means clubs will not be charged if issues are later found. Such as the companies which own the ground not being created until June 2019, and the money not being paid in full at the supposed completion date. They are just two of the issues which may not have been clear. Kieran Maguire raised many questions about the lack of detail in those accounts post release. 

 

 

Don't want to get too much into this again but regards point 2:

 

Mr Maguire has a lot to answer for as either  a) knowingly giving a distorted picture without making the relevant points or b) being incompetent and not giving full picture

 

To summarize:

 

Payment date = irrelevant

Land registry date = irrelevant

Completion date = not necessarily relevant

Company incorporated date = irrelevant

Comparison to west ham = not fully relevant depending on valuation method used.

 

ONLY important fact is terms  and form of purchase and sale contract, which is not in public domain. 

 

[Dick_Turpin]

11 minutes ago, Mycroft said:

 

Yeah I know all that.  Just want to know if we broke the flipping LAW!!!!!!!!! .    

Let's hope not.

 

[BingleyOwl]

It’s time for new ownership. I’m appreciate some things he’s done. I feel very negative about other things he’s done. This could get very nasty. 

[Dick_Turpin]

4 minutes ago, Harrysgame said:

Thing is with the EFL they have a 'record of messing things up, who's to say we get found not guilty. Looks to me as these constant leaks are a trial by media before the actual hearing. Sure we will have good lawyers so just wait and see.

Would be useful to know when the hearing is is.

If we are found guilty when have the EFL ever enforced maximum penalty? Be a fine and 9 points. I guess only the club know if we have broke the rules, if so then admit it and take the 9 points for cooperating fully.

And then there will be the FFP penalty on top of the misconduct. 

[asteener1867]

Just now, rickygoo said:

And then there will be the FFP penalty on top of the misconduct. 

Like the icing on a cakeball..................

[Nero]

One thing is sure, the punishment is not going to reflect the crime.

 

In 2018 we finished 15th and our wage bill was 14th in the league.

 

Our average crowd was 8th I think. Hardly pumping billions in to financially dope the league.

 

This ought to be our line of attack in my opinion. Natural justice. In rugby Saracens cheated the wage cap massively, won the league for 3 years and Europe twice. They got the equivalent of a 21 point deduction at the start of the season via an independent tribunal.

 

 

[alanharper]

13 minutes ago, Peacenocchio said:

All the wages from the 2018 players - Abdi, Hunt, Jones, Hooper, Boyd, Pudil, Hector etc. They were all on between £1m and £2m per annum. We havent't sold D Taxis yet though...

 

Those savings won't be made until this year's accounts 19/20 though, all but Hunt were all still being paid in 18/19 which will be another big loss. Think the only savings on the £35m "loss" the previous year are selling Hunt for less than £2m, loaning out Rhodes and releasing Wallace and Loovens.

[Barumowl]

In essence the club have been charged with avoiding EFL P & S rules by allegedly backdating the stadium sale in the accounts.  If that charge is found proved by the EFL tribunal it would logically follow that the directors at the time could and would be charged by the EFL  with not being fit persons to be involved with a football club.

 

If the club can show that under proper accountancy rules the sale WAS properly shown in the correct year it would follow that there was no breach of EFL P & S rules so no case for the directors to be charged with an offence.

 

Not being an accountant, like 99.99%+ of fellow Owlstallkers, I'm not competent to say in which accounts the club can recognise the stadium sale.  No doubt the club's advisors/accountants  think they can prove that accountancy standards allow the club to show the sale date as in the accounts and will so argue at the tribunal hearing.   

 

As a guess, the proven incompetence of the EFL might result in their tribunal deciding that although the club's date of the sale can be considered  to meet accountancy standards, in their view it's 'not fair or within the spirit of the EFL P & S rules' and so apply some sanction.  That would undoubtedly lead to a club appeal and further charges and counter charges. 

[Frazzlebeak]

1 minute ago, asteener1867 said:

Like the icing on a cakeball..................

Can we get a file in the Cakeball........................just a thought.

[Offside_Owl]

Just now, Peacenocchio said:

One thing is sure, the punishment is not going to reflect the crime.

 

In 2018 we finished 15th and our wage bill was 14th in the league.

 

Our average crowd was 8th I think. Hardly pumping billions in to financially dope the league.

 

This ought to be our line of attack in my opinion. Natural justice. In rugby Saracens cheated the wage cap massively, won the league for 3 years and Europe twice. They got the equivalent of a 21 point deduction at the start of the season via an independent tribunal.

 

 

 

In the Birmingham case this just meant they did not get any more points off for sporting advantage. 

[Offside_Owl]

6 minutes ago, wellbeaten-the-owl said:

Don't want to get too much into this again but regards point 2:

 

Mr Maguire has a lot to answer for as either  a) knowingly giving a distorted picture without making the relevant points or b) being incompetent and not giving full picture

 

To summarize:

 

Payment date = irrelevant

Land registry date = irrelevant

Completion date = not necessarily relevant

Company incorporated date = irrelevant

Comparison to west ham = not fully relevant depending on valuation method used.

 

ONLY important fact is terms  and form of purchase and sale contract, which is not in public domain. 

 

 

Remember these charges have come after the EFL examined all the official documents.

[wellbeaten-the-owl]

1 minute ago, BingleyOwl said:

It’s time for new ownership. I’m appreciate some things he’s done. I feel very negative about other things he’s done. This could get very nasty. 

Ok just find someone else to give him his 60m plus back?

 

Jesus, wait for result of charges before going overboard.

 

All this is a show of EFL wanting to be seen as doing something, whose to say we cannot prove that we have done nothing wrong (legally anyway, morally possibly)

 

Monk was very clear the opinion of the club that all the charges were made against issues the club had been in open communication throughout the year and had been ratified by the EFL.

 

Stinks that charge only came after new EFL chair appointment,.  Anger  should be aimed outside club until proven guilty

[vulva]

The blind faith shown by some in DC has been quite disturbing. The vast majority of people don’t doubt the guys intentions, desire and effort. But anyone not thinking this wasn’t going to end in this way must have the business acumen of a Jaffa Cake.