Jump to content

Chansiri charged - could be banned from football


Guest addedtime

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, ReadingOwl said:


So the ban would be ineffective?
 

Creative accountancy (directorship).

 

What’s the point in that case?
 

(Not disagreeing BTW).

 

It's symbolic - the EFL and most of football world struggles to keep up with the international ownership of UK football clubs. The Chansari family is probably extensive and has a plethora of companies. Any one of these could act as a vehicle of ownership, and DC simply stays in the background with a new UK-based team running the club. It could actually turn out to be a silver lining - obviously discounting any points deduction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, wakefieldinleed1 said:

Leeds fan in peace

 

looking as an outsider.

 

it looks pretty obvious what’s happened

 

1 you failed P&L and got an embargo 

 

2 the owner was trying all sorts of creative accounting with all these silly schemes, ie plaques etc etc didnt work

 

3 you again went way ten limit of £39m

 

4 you were going to get another embargo and maybe points

 

5 the chairmen the see derby and villa selling the ground.

 

6 tries back dating it, basically  cheating with the sale date.

 

7 FL have seen through this and be very surprised if you didn’t get points.

 

youve over spent and then tried to get away with it.

 

The Auditors have behaved badly, not illegally but I’d question there take on the accounts ( certainly the timing)

 

it’s not accounting rules you are getting done for, but the football league rules.

 

youve broken them and will be penalties.

 

shame because the owner isn’t a bad guy. Just can’t run a business    

 

 

Much of this is unfortunately right but the highlighted bits are open for conjecture. The football league rules are based on annual accounts and if annual accounting rules have not been broken as per why the auditors signed off the accounts, then pr say football league rules will not have been broken. This will all be dependent on the legitimacy of the sale date and the regulations of how this can be accounted for.

 

Even if rules have been broken we are yet to stoop as far as leaving a debt to a charitable ambulance service unpaid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/07/27/queens-park-rangers-handed-transfer-ban-reach-42million-settlement/amp/
 

read that lads. Very much what you have done (they wrote off loan to try to pass ffp, you pretended to sell ground)

 

they couldn’t get them points because they were in the prem. think they will go down this route with you instead of massive fine 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, wakefieldinleed1 said:

QPR got away with a 42 million pound fine
————————

 

accepted a £17m fine.

 

 


Football is absolutely crackers.

 

Absolutely.

 

No wonder I can’t even be bothered to watch Match of the Day anymore.

 

Clubs relegated from the Premier League get £100’s of millions of pounds of parachute payments. 
 

And yet, we still have these moral guardians enduring its a level playing field.

 

Although I don’t agree with the Chairman - I actually feel quite sorry for him in this circumstance.

 

You can gain an unfair advantage - but not this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Kameron
8 minutes ago, wakefieldinleed1 said:

QPR got away with a 42 million pound fine
————————

 

accepted a £17m fine.

 

 

It will cost QPR a total of 42 million, the fine was 17 million but the overall settlement is 42.

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/queens-park-rangers-accept-transfer-ban-hp9mpmjt7

Edited by Kameron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolute worst case for us isn't the fine or points deduction IMO. It's that DC is too proud to walk away and at the same time refuses to do anything other than maintain us. Think Venky's and Blackburn. Like a living hell........although even limbo may be better than backwards!! lol

 

Edited by Morepork
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hitcat said:

It's not the value of the stadium that's in question, it's the fact that the sale was shoehorned into last season's accounts rather than this.

 

Yes, I've seen that part, but there's also articles stating the EFL previously had approved of those accounts, and all of a sudden this appears. Fudging the accounts of last year like that, isn't that forgery or some kind of criminal act, that you would charge the individual who did it, rather than the club?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though we may have complied with accounting norms and professional auditors signed off the accounts, the EFL will want to make an example of us. They are clueless but can’t do much about that. 

 

This season is a write off. Get ready for 12-15 point deduction. 
 

Monk will have to avoid relegation but he will get time to prepare for next season, off load more deadwood/high earners, hopefully bring in 3-4 of his own players and have a really go at it next season.

 

You need patience in bucket loads as a Wednesday fan unfortunately. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Kameron said:

It will cost QPR a total of 42 million, the fine was 17 million but the overall settlement is 42.

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/queens-park-rangers-accept-transfer-ban-hp9mpmjt7


The EFL exec and board consists of a chairman that is from Liverpool, worked for Liverpool and supports Liverpool

 

With Championship reps that work directly for Play off rivals Derby and Bristol

 

There’s more chance of me having an orgy with Megan Fox and Michelle Keegan under the tree on Christmas morning than us just getting a fine based on a settlement 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Kameron said:

It will cost QPR a total of 42 million, the fine was 17 million but the overall settlement is 42.

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/queens-park-rangers-accept-transfer-ban-hp9mpmjt7

 

So, if you're in breach of FFP for posting a 39 mill deficit over 3 years, and you get charged and fined over using a loophole (or not) for any reason EFL finds sufficient, they will fine you a further 42 million... just to make sure you're even further down in the mud?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can’t disagree with with the sequence of events what wakefieldinleeds1 describes in the above post. However given how Leeds have mismanaged in an unprecedented scale under ridsdale as well as going into administration and wrecking local businesses to boot, his comments do make me smile a little.
 

Notwithstanding, how the current owners of Leeds have the run the club recently should be a blueprint on how to do it at championship level. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, wakefieldinleed1 said:

Leeds fan in peace

 

looking as an outsider.

 

it looks pretty obvious what’s happened

 

1 you failed P&L and got an embargo 

 

2 the owner was trying all sorts of creative accounting with all these silly schemes, ie plaques etc etc didnt work

 

3 you again went way ten limit of £39m

 

4 you were going to get another embargo and maybe points

 

5 the chairmen the see derby and villa selling the ground.

 

6 tries back dating it, basically  cheating with the sale date.

 

7 FL have seen through this and be very surprised if you didn’t get points.

 

youve over spent and then tried to get away with it.

 

The Auditors have behaved badly, not illegally but I’d question there take on the accounts ( certainly the timing)

 

it’s not accounting rules you are getting done for, but the football league rules.

 

youve broken them and will be penalties.

 

shame because the owner isn’t a bad guy. Just can’t run a business    

Not saying some of this is not true but getting into dangerous territory now,  there is ZERO evedence in public domain to say auditors have acted badly here. And the timeline / take is wrong.

 

More likely: 

 

At 31.5.18 realised we were busting FFP and looking for solution

 

Then heard what derby / villa had done.

 

Extended accounting period 2 months to 31.7.18

 

In period 1 June 2018 to 31 July 2018 arranged a binding sale and purchase agreement for the sale to allow accounting for it by 31.7.18

 

Recognised sale in extended 14 month set of accounts.

 

None of the above is illegal or incorrect from an auditing or accounting perspective.

 

please note nothing in the above remotely means backdating a transaction after the even so this is incorrect.

 

The take from the Leeds fan is fully understandable because the issues aroun this have not been reported correctly in the media.

 

However, EFL may really dislike the extended accounting period to put the sale in those two months.  This is questionable as I don't know if he EFL rules around this, but this is not wrong legally and has no bearing on the behaviour of the respected firm of auditors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...