Jump to content

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, danblakemore said:

Personally Id' be worried if we aren't handed a fine in January.

 

My thinking being = Fine in January would probably be a low to mid one (9 - 12 points)

 

Anything larger, that has a baring on our season as a whole, eg. relegation they'll surely hold off until end or near end of the season. I mean, if they deducted us 30-40 points now, we'd not play a game for the rest of this season in protest.

I can't see them relegating us tbh. 

 

Would make a complete mockery of the competition. 

 

Though, this is the EFL, so who knows. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, danblakemore said:

Personally Id' be worried if we aren't handed a fine in January.

 

My thinking being = Fine in January would probably be a low to mid one (9 - 12 points)

 

Anything larger, that has a baring on our season as a whole, eg. relegation they'll surely hold off until end or near end of the season. I mean, if they deducted us 30-40 points now, we'd not play a game for the rest of this season in protest.

 

If they decided to relegate / deduct so many points it made relegation likely, but didn't actually make their decision public and apply the sanction until it suited them then fans would have a real reason to accuse the EFL of mis-selling a product: anyone buying a ticket for an important game of football when there had already been a decision to effectively invalidate the efforts of one of the teams would be rightfully p1ssed off. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, HarrowbyOwl said:

Under old FFP rules profits from ground sales couldn't be included in the FFP calculation.  With the introduction of P&S they were allowed for the first time in the 2017-18 season  

 

Yes and when l**ds sold their ground back in 1982 were there any rules that forbade the selling or buying back of the ground to reduce debts? No, because fair play rules governing spending were not in force back then and club's debts, profits and losses were governed by business law, not EFL rules, as they are today. It is a difficult one, because expenditure on the ground and other parts of a club's infrastructure is separate from spending on the ground and so on, but legally, if a club does make a huge profit by selling their ground, surely they can then invest that money in new players or the paying of higher wages etc?

 

The arguments and loopholes in these cases are ridiculously difficult to make stick, unless they are clearly black and white and not counteracted by any prevailing LAWS. Laws are surely more powerful than rules and with DC and his advisers invoking the laws of the land, we all know that delays in getting to court can take years. Also the fact that we were apparently taking advice and instruction from the EFL and toeing the line as far as spending was concerned does back up our case and give the lawyers something to consider.

 

I wrote to the EFL and argued the case that the FA, the EFL, the government and fans groups have argued successfully in the past that football clubs are part of the local community and have emotional and association investments from the fans and other people that are affected by the club, which far outweigh any capitol investments that many owners, especially foreign owners, many of whom, our own DC included, knew or cared very little about football whatsoever before becoming the single person with enough money to buy the club. One of the reasons that the Premier league gave to the rest of the premier clubs (and their fans), was that it was unfair to the fans of West Ham United to dock points from them that may see them relegated, for the actions of a small number of the club's representatives. Their decision did not take into account the feelings of any of the other clubs, except of course Sheffield United's which it obviously deemed were not as important as those of West Ham's, so fair dos to them! 

 

I personally believe that DC should be fined heavily (personally) and made to open up ownership of the club to the fans, so that he, as a none footballing person, at least has a group of people involved with the club that has the long term interests of the club and the surrounding community at heart and are not just in it for some short term personal gain, be that ego, pride, stigma etc, or some kind of financial gain (as if!).

 

The sad thing is that despite having a play off final and a couple of first round games in the play offs the season after, our club has turned from being a club that was at least respected and/or liked, or loved by many people who were not even Sheffielders to a club that has pretty much lost it's soul and become a very expensive place to go with very average facilities at best, which still carries the stigma for what happened during the Hillsborough disaster, but now has very little sympathy outside the club, because of the way that the club now conducts itself. Our owner seems to have an uncanny knack for being able to shoot himself in the foot then hop off back to wherever he goes when he is not at Hillsborough, while the fans are left to feel the pain and apologise for the mess!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Ante's Bubbly said:

 

I didn't say that, I was simply pointing out that change of ownership can be brought about legally and without having to reveal who the actual owners actually are. Ask Ken Bates. Or by selling shares to another party, or by selling up altogether, to a relative, or a friend, or a total stranger, but if we do not get a points deduction that does not have to happen anyway. I am more than a little bit disappointed that DC has not given the fans a shareholding in the club. You never know, the EFL may take such a move as a forward step by him. 

Not going to happen that was the issue we had last time with no being able to buy the club.

 

I under to have shares in the club only a few thousand and when Milan came along I gave them up so he could save the club. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Ante's Bubbly said:

 

Yes and when l**ds sold their ground back in 1982 were there any rules that forbade the selling or buying back of the ground to reduce debts? No, because fair play rules governing spending were not in force back then and club's debts, profits and losses were governed by business law, not EFL rules, as they are today. It is a difficult one, because expenditure on the ground and other parts of a club's infrastructure is separate from spending on the ground and so on, but legally, if a club does make a huge profit by selling their ground, surely they can then invest that money in new players or the paying of higher wages etc?

 

The arguments and loopholes in these cases are ridiculously difficult to make stick, unless they are clearly black and white and not counteracted by any prevailing LAWS. Laws are surely more powerful than rules and with DC and his advisers invoking the laws of the land, we all know that delays in getting to court can take years. Also the fact that we were apparently taking advice and instruction from the EFL and toeing the line as far as spending was concerned does back up our case and give the lawyers something to consider.

 

I wrote to the EFL and argued the case that the FA, the EFL, the government and fans groups have argued successfully in the past that football clubs are part of the local community and have emotional and association investments from the fans and other people that are affected by the club, which far outweigh any capitol investments that many owners, especially foreign owners, many of whom, our own DC included, knew or cared very little about football whatsoever before becoming the single person with enough money to buy the club. One of the reasons that the Premier league gave to the rest of the premier clubs (and their fans), was that it was unfair to the fans of West Ham United to dock points from them that may see them relegated, for the actions of a small number of the club's representatives. Their decision did not take into account the feelings of any of the other clubs, except of course Sheffield United's which it obviously deemed were not as important as those of West Ham's, so fair dos to them! 

 

I personally believe that DC should be fined heavily (personally) and made to open up ownership of the club to the fans, so that he, as a none footballing person, at least has a group of people involved with the club that has the long term interests of the club and the surrounding community at heart and are not just in it for some short term personal gain, be that ego, pride, stigma etc, or some kind of financial gain (as if!).

 

The sad thing is that despite having a play off final and a couple of first round games in the play offs the season after, our club has turned from being a club that was at least respected and/or liked, or loved by many people who were not even Sheffielders to a club that has pretty much lost it's soul and become a very expensive place to go with very average facilities at best, which still carries the stigma for what happened during the Hillsborough disaster, but now has very little sympathy outside the club, because of the way that the club now conducts itself. Our owner seems to have an uncanny knack for being able to shoot himself in the foot then hop off back to wherever he goes when he is not at Hillsborough, while the fans are left to feel the pain and apologise for the mess!


sorry but I don’t think you have a clue what you are talking about you express personal opinions as though you have some sort of insight into the workings of the EFL which clearly you haven’t!

  • Agree 7
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Bet all you lot on this thread go looking for your hidden Christmas pressies before the 25th..

It's the surprise of not knowing what's exciting!!!

lol

 

The only Christmas pressies I get are letters from the Baliff. 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, SiJ said:

I can't see them relegating us tbh. 

 

Would make a complete mockery of the competition. 

 

Though, this is the EFL, so who knows. 

My personal view if we get a point deduction it will be enough to make sure we don't make the play offs.

 

Edited by room0035
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

giphy.gif

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Rhubarb n Custard said:

I don't think they're in any position to dish out points in that timescale.

Big opportunity for the team to redouble efforts for a playoff place at least, maybe more if our local competitors continue to implode.

If we do manage promotion they can't touch us ( if found guilty ) until we drop back to the championship.

Game on. :ph34r:

 

The EFL can block promotion.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mattitheowl said:

 

The EFL can block promotion.

Is there any precedent of this ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Rhubarb n Custard said:

Is there any precedent of this ?

 

Yes, it's in their rules.  There was a good article in The Athletic about it.

  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Rhubarb n Custard said:

Is there any precedent of this ?

 

 

Not yet

 

its a new ruling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ANDY said:

 

 

Not yet

 

its a new ruling

It's about time they created a new rule that allows wealthy owners to invest in the team and bankroll promotion campaigns if they want to. Provided the clubs finances are not endangered in the process.

ie they can gift x amount per year.

The system is broken and far too heavily weighted in favour of the relegated teams getting back up.

Getting up 'organically' automatically is a colossal task given the financial handicap perennial Championship teams face.

What our neighbours did last season was something exceptional and not something you'll see very often because of the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, keepitsteel89 said:

I think its almost certain we will get a deduction of some kind but its difficult to set a precedent on something with loose ends on the EFL's side as much as ours, the club are choosing to play it up where the EFL would probably wish to play it down, 6 point deduction probably best case scenario where ELF avoid the media scrutiny that would come from some landmark ruling


I don’t think anything is almost certain. If we believe the club’s statements then the EFL were very much aware what we were doing and they also lifted the soft embargo we were under. If this is true then the EFL will have to explain all of this at arbitration.

Share this post


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

personally believe that DC should be fined heavily (personally) and made to open up ownership of the club to the fans,

So he is 'made' to give his own property to 'fans'.

lol

I don't think you've thought this through bud.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rhubarb n Custard said:

Is there any precedent of this ?

Swindon Town in 1990 were denied their promotion to the old Div 1 because of financial irregularities.

Share this post


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

 

The EFL can block promotion.

Interesting situation, DC would probably sue them for loss of revenue which would be well over 100 million. 

If this is the case why didn't EFL block QPR from play-offs and eventual promotion a few years back?

Share this post


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


sorry but I don’t think you have a clue what you are talking about you express personal opinions as though you have some sort of insight into the workings of the EFL which clearly you haven’t!

Check the EFL rules yourself mate, thats the only insight you need. What's your interpretation? This is a forum and I am expressing my opinion on the rules as I have read them. I am quite happy to be put right, or consider other opinions, but surely the EFL would have acted before now if their case was sound. The dates of the transactions must be straightforward after all. I can see that delaying judgement could be more complicated, but the EFL rules appear to be straightforward. They just do not appear to be explicit enough, if they want clubs to file their accounts in a way that does not have the same flexibility as normal business accounts. Haven't people questioned  our accounts on these forums before? 

  • Haha 1

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...