Jump to content
addedtime

Chansiri charged - could be banned from football

Recommended Posts

On 02/12/2019 at 22:42, Belfast Owl 2 said:

wtf does banned from football mean

 

lol

ha can't play anymore.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 02/12/2019 at 22:47, ChapSmurf said:

 

His son owns the club I believe, so we maybe just get a new Chairman.

IF it belongs to his son, he may have to sit on the nawty step.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m pleased the club have spoken out on this and they’ve stated that a lot of the things were documented to the EFL without any queries by the EFL and they are in turn going to take on the EFL about the accusations. I’m started to get the feeling this is a witch-hunt and the EFL are making a big mistake and are going to end up looking like the fools they are.

  • Disagree 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rickygoo said:

So if it's all about when rather than how much you would think there wouldn't be a case to answer.  But the EFL clearly feel differently  - I don't see why they would bring a totally spurious case,

Err nope, the cost of the ground is a distraction...they are are really into when the ground was bought / paid for and stamp duty was paid..

The price we sold for, has fooook all to do with the efl...like Derby are not under investigation for 'overvaluing'

It is not totally spurious regards when the ground was sold, the sale price is not a worry.

Though i'm sure it won't go down well with other efl chairmen...the ones who get a vote on 'things'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, bigdan2003 said:

 

I'm not disputing that the transfer committee was disbanded far too quickly, and since then our transfer strategy hasn't been very good. 

 

What you said though was: 

 

There are many criticisms to have with him, but i don't think this one is a fair - that transfer committee that you refer to was under him, it was in his era, the players we signed that season was within the Chansiri era. So to suggest that our best players were already here, is disingenuous.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So what happened to the committee who oversaw these signings? Why did they all leave?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pussface said:

 

So what happened to the committee who oversaw these signings? Why did they all leave?

No idea. Might be worth asking Adam Pearson, Paul Aldridge, Joe Palmer, Katrien Meire, Glenn Roeder. SWFC is the opposite of Hotel California. 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, HarrowbyOwl said:

 

P&S rules state:

2.3 The Executive shall determine whether consideration included in the Club’s Earnings Before Tax arising from a Related Party Transaction is recorded in the Club’s Annual Accounts at a Fair Market Value. If it is not, the Executive shall restate it to Fair Market Value.

Funnily enough that’s also a requirement for the auditors (the transaction at fair value). Take it from someone who actually knows what they’re talking about. 
 

I’m sure you will have seen the article on the BBC tonight. As I predicted in an earlier post Wednesday are going to sue the EFL for an unlawful charge. 
 

I will repeat again. The EFL cannot make Sheffield Wednesday restate their accounts. They must take them at face value. They’ve bitten off more than they can chew here and have picked the wrong guy to have a fight with.

  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, rickygoo said:

Looking at the accounts presumably the auditor satisfied themselves as to the timing of the transfer of Hillsborough. It's such a fundamental transaction that for them to get it wrong they would have to be duped rather than be mistaken. 

 

However, where does the value come from? Another company albeit a related one agreed to pay £60m for Hillsborough and a contract would be drawn up for the auditors to inspect. So in respect of the audit of Wednesday does it matter what the "real" value is. If it was overvalued, as long as the other company agrees to pay the said amount then does that matter in terms of this audit of these accounts?

 

I used to be an auditor, in fact an accountant, many moons ago so I have a basic grasp of accounts etc but I've lost track of it all. Have Wednesday said where the £60m value came from? There's no specific note in the accounts on the stadium sale. 

 

 

 

The value is Depreciated Replacement Cost. SWFC would have employed a chartered valuer to undertake this, and there's a standard and prescribed method. What I can't work out the uplift in value from 2014/15 which was shown @ circa £24m fixed asset value, in the then accounts. That valuation was undertaken by Lambert Smith Hampton, who are one of the biggest firms. Not sure if they did the current valuation, and what the variables were.  I'm sure all this gets sent to the EFL, and their 'experts' check and then sign it off.

 

Again, I'm not sure it's this that the EFL are looking at; rather the timings issue, which if SWFC's press is correct, means they informed the EFL and they then, 'gave authorisation to the transaction'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, pussface said:

 

So what happened to the committee who oversaw these signings? Why did they all leave?


Because Chansiri disbanded the committee...

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Bigger Guns said:

Funnily enough that’s also a requirement for the auditors (the transaction at fair value). Take it from someone who actually knows what they’re talking about. 
 

I’m sure you will have seen the article on the BBC tonight. As I predicted in an earlier post Wednesday are going to sue the EFL for an unlawful charge. 
 

I will repeat again. The EFL cannot make Sheffield Wednesday restate their accounts. They must take them at face value. They’ve bitten off more than they can chew here and have picked the wrong guy to have a fight with.

Again in terms of the EFL you are incorrect.  We sign up to a membership (EFL) and agree to be bound by the terms and conditions as agreed by it's members, the EFL are ensuring the rules are adhered to and punished where not.  

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Steelman said:

 

1st Paragraph - No we aren't, we're a bang average Championship side with an ageing squad. Most of whom came here for a final pay day and are out of contract at the end of the season. We have zero talent coming through the ranks and how many of our current squad are worth even a modest transfer fee?. As for our "attendances",  were you at the Birmingham game last week? Do you really think we are actually getting that many through the gates? Season ticket holders are staying away in their droves because the club is dying on its 'arris.

 

As for "embarassing" how about our 150th anniversay celebrations, or not having a kit ready for the first team and then none for sale in the megastore till after Christmas, signing players that never play for us, the rest of our recruitment (Van Acken, Butterfield, Fox), having a long list of shysters involved with the club. How about alienating all our casual support by pricing them out of the matchday along with any potential new fans. Not signing commentary deals and Radio Sheffield being banned from the ground. Then there's the grief we're getting from SAG with the North Stand and Leppings Lane. ELEV8, D Taxis and it all culminates with the ballsed up sale of our own ground that could see us put into the bottom three. The buck stops with one man, and one man alone.

 

I could argue that it's the "fans" like you that are happy because we had a day out a Wembley a few years back and that clapped Carlos the Conman that are embarassing. Your desperation has caused you to accept mediocrity and incompetence as success. The likes of you who are happy to lap it up make me sick. Fortunately, there are plenty of fans who can still see what's going on and are prepared to ask questions and not just blindly accept our club being driven off a cliff.

 

As for your last statement, why should I? Why should anyone that's not happy with how our club is being run? Now people that say that really are pathetic, I might disagree with a fellow fan but I's never tell them to take their support elsewhere. The team and players have my unconditional support, I go home and away every week, don't boo them or get on their backs. But my blind faith stops there. I'm going nowhere, and I hope you don't either. 


We have an aging squad - but in fairness

 

Fletch and Bannan have both been quality this year

 

Back Four isn’t aging And is certainly solid

 

Reach, Harris, Luongo all mid 20’s - two out of three have been quality 

 

Lee, Hutch - Hutchinson still turns out a good game and Lee is getting form back (will never be as good as he was mostly due to injury) 

 

Nuhui - some will always criticise, but mostly when he’s been called upon this year he’s been decent 

 

Aging? Yes, in areas. Bang average? No. 
 

We’ve a competitive side that needs a touch of new blood and we have a shot this year, the league is that poor

 

 

Edited by TodwickOwl
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Kameron said:

Again in terms of the EFL you are incorrect.  We sign up to a membership (EFL) and agree to be bound by the terms and conditions as agreed by it's members, the EFL are ensuring the rules are adhered to and punished where not.  

Not necessarily the EFL also have a duty to act fairly to the clubs and public law principles apply to them just like any other sports governing body.

 

If EFL signed off on the deal and later backtracked then looks a valid argument that the charges are unlawful.  

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Kameron said:

Again in terms of the EFL you are incorrect.  We sign up to a membership (EFL) and agree to be bound by the terms and conditions as agreed by it's members, the EFL are ensuring the rules are adhered to and punished where not.  

Yes but the EFLs terms and conditions are based on audited pre tax profit. I don’t know what’s so difficult to understand for you. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bigger Guns said:

Yes but the EFLs terms and conditions are based on audited pre tax profit. I don’t know what’s so difficult to understand for you. 

EFL T&C's state accounts can be adjusted for fair values. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Kameron said:

EFL T&C's state accounts can be adjusted for fair values. 

And FRS 102 says the sale should be included at fair value

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Bigger Guns said:

Funnily enough that’s also a requirement for the auditors (the transaction at fair value). Take it from someone who actually knows what they’re talking about. 
 

I’m sure you will have seen the article on the BBC tonight. As I predicted in an earlier post Wednesday are going to sue the EFL for an unlawful charge. 
 

I will repeat again. The EFL cannot make Sheffield Wednesday restate their accounts. They must take them at face value. They’ve bitten off more than they can chew here and have picked the wrong guy to have a fight with.

On the face of it the rules seem to say the EFL can restate fair value if they consider the accounts don't. I'm not an accountant so I'm way out of my depth on all this.

But Rick Parry, the new EFL Chairman, is a qualified accountant and until recently also sat on the investigatory panel of Uefa's financial control body for enforcing FFP. Add to that the fact the EFL appointed QC’s from Blackstone Chambers working on the ground sale investigations and I think we're in for a tough fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bigger Guns said:

And FRS 102 says the sale should be included at fair value

 

Taking from what I read on  another forum that has various qualified accountants posting, I think we've still got problems, if it was any normal business I'd agree with you, if the sale had gone through and posted in the same financial year they'd be little the EFL could do as was the case with Derby.  I know each case is different but I'm struggling to find a club that has taken on the league and WON, there have been many cases over the years and despite numerous court cases the FA/EFL still end up imposing sanctions one way or the other.  As someone has just posted unfortunately Parry knows this side of things inside out and had he not been appointed it's a fair bet Chansiri would have pulled this off. 

Edited by Kameron
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Kameron said:

... had he not been appointed it's a fair bet Chansiri would have pulled this off. 

The fact that he was CEO of Liverpool between 1997 and 2009 and is a lifelong fan can't but make you doubt that he has warm feelings towards us either

Share this post


Link to post
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...