Jump to content

Clubs demand Sheffield Wednesday points deduction


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, teddybeararmy said:

Think I read that as part of the arbitration process both parties agree that the findings are final and not appealable. 

As for the efl hearing if it gets that far, does anyone know if that can be challenged 

I'd think it would be. If it gets to a hearing, supposed to be an independent panel?

 

EFL have a history of appealing their own independent panel's adjuducations, so presume we could have a go too. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, teddybeararmy said:

Your suggestion is that the efl agreed the ground sale and then went back on that agreement. 

Now, none of us are privileged to what documents were presented to the efl and so its pointless speculating on who is in the wrong. 

Can you give an opinion on if the ground sale was signed and sealed by the end of the 17-18 accounts, why did DC say we were in serious trouble with ffp/p&s in late 2018 at the fan's forum. 

 

Back dating sales is common practice in business. 

 

The club has said that we submitted our accounts to the EFL and they accepted them.

 

The EFL stated that they charged us after new documents came to light. 

 

Derby have said the same as us, that the EFL have effectively moved the goalposts after the fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Minton said:

 

Back dating sales is common practice in business. 

 

The club has said that we submitted our accounts to the EFL and they accepted them.

 

The EFL stated that they charged us after new documents came to light. 

 

Derby have said the same as us, that the EFL have effectively moved the goalposts after the fact.

Granted it may be common practice in accountancy and tax affairs, doesn't mean its allowable in the efl rules which all clubs agree on and should abide by. 

By early 2018 DC and his team already knew we had smashed the upper limit of ffp, DC then confirms we are in serious trouble at the fans forum, the account period 17-18 is then extended at the last possible moment, then the accounts are released late, even you must see we are firefighting. 

Hopefully we do win at arbitration, but it won't be because of our forward thinking chairman, it will be a technicality exposed by an expensive lawyer against a weak governing body. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, teddybeararmy said:

Granted it may be common practice in accountancy and tax affairs, doesn't mean its allowable in the efl rules which all clubs agree on and should abide by. 

By early 2018 DC and his team already knew we had smashed the upper limit of ffp, DC then confirms we are in serious trouble at the fans forum, the account period 17-18 is then extended at the last possible moment, then the accounts are released late, even you must see we are firefighting. 

Hopefully we do win at arbitration, but it won't be because of our forward thinking chairman, it will be a technicality exposed by an expensive lawyer against a weak governing body. 

 

We set our stall out well before the lawyer came in, he had no say in how our accountants did our finances

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Minton said:

 

Back dating sales is common practice in business. 

 

The club has said that we submitted our accounts to the EFL and they accepted them.

 

The EFL stated that they charged us after new documents came to light. 

 

Derby have said the same as us, that the EFL have effectively moved the goalposts after the fact.

Back dating is only allowed if there is a substantive legal basis.  Anything we come up with is speculation.  We don't know what evidence the EFL have and what arguments Wednesday have to refute their allegations.  Fingers crossed. I just want the bleeding thing sorted - although I'd rather we hadn't needed to embrace accounting shenanigans in the first place. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, teddybeararmy said:

Granted it may be common practice in accountancy and tax affairs, doesn't mean its allowable in the efl rules which all clubs agree on and should abide by. 

By early 2018 DC and his team already knew we had smashed the upper limit of ffp, DC then confirms we are in serious trouble at the fans forum, the account period 17-18 is then extended at the last possible moment, then the accounts are released late, even you must see we are firefighting. 

Hopefully we do win at arbitration, but it won't be because of our forward thinking chairman, it will be a technicality exposed by an expensive lawyer against a weak governing body. 


Back dating the stadium sale is allowable under EFL rules. It wasn't under the old FFP regulations but is allowable under the P&S rules that now exist. 

 

However to back date the stadium sale to the July 2018 accounts documents needed to be in place to show an intention to sell the ground. Those documents needed to be in place by 31st July 2018. 

 

Presumably in our discussions with the EFL last summer we've provided information indicating that the documents were in place & the stadium sale was allowed. The EFL are now saying further information has been obtained that brings the stadium sale process into doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, teddybeararmy said:

Think I read that as part of the arbitration process both parties agree that the findings are final and not appealable. 

As for the efl hearing if it gets that far, does anyone know if that can be challenged 

You are right. There are 2 types of arbitration under EFL rules - Board Disputes and Disciplinary Appeals. At the moment we are in the former. Decision of a League Arbitration Panel can't be appealed. But parties can launch an arbitration appeal against decisions of an EFL Disciplinary Commission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, teddybeararmy said:

We may have set our stall out, but all the goods on it were out of date according to the efl. Hence the need for a lawyer 

 

Except when we sold the goods to the EFL, we asked them to check our goods were in date and they accepted that they were and signed a document to that effect. Only to later come back and claim that they have changed their mind. Which from a legal standpoint is wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mogbad said:


Back dating the stadium sale is allowable under EFL rules. It wasn't under the old FFP regulations but is allowable under the P&S rules that now exist. 

 

However to back date the stadium sale to the July 2018 accounts documents needed to be in place to show an intention to sell the ground. Those documents needed to be in place by 31st July 2018. 

 

Presumably in our discussions with the EFL last summer we've provided information indicating that the documents were in place & the stadium sale was allowed. The EFL are now saying further information has been obtained that brings the stadium sale process into doubt.

Think this was discussed by our resident accountants and highly possible but if that document was in place at the time why tell the fans later in the year that we were in trouble. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Minton said:

 

Except when we sold the goods to the EFL, we asked them to check our goods were in date and they accepted that they were and signed a document to that effect. Only to later come back and claim that they have changed their mind. Which from a legal standpoint is wrong.

But what if we tippexed the date out and wrote a new date in with a sharpie. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, teddybeararmy said:

But what if we tippexed the date out and wrote a new date in with a sharpie. 

 

That would be misleading. 

 

However it is more the case that our sell by date stated August 2018. As far as we are concerned, that covers it up until the 31st. The EFL are saying that it only covers it until the 1st August. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, teddybeararmy said:

Think this was discussed by our resident accountants and highly possible but if that document was in place at the time why tell the fans later in the year that we were in trouble. 

 

If the documents were in place the club/DC didn't necessarily have to undertake the sale process & they may have been put in place as a last resort should we need to get out of a FFP/P&S hole. However the fact that it all seemed to be done as a last minute exercise is concerning & doesn't indicate to me that it was a pre-planned process. I'm personally not feeling confident on the arbitration outcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, mogbad said:

 

If the documents were in place the club/DC didn't necessarily have to undertake the sale process & they may have been put in place as a last resort should we need to get out of a FFP/P&S hole. However the fact that it all seemed to be done as a last minute exercise is concerning & doesn't indicate to me that it was a pre-planned process. I'm personally not feeling confident on the arbitration outcome.

We were in the hole by the time of the fans forum, the only way out was promotion (highly unlikely at that point) or the stadium sale. Why wasn't it mentioned to ease fans worries at the time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, teddybeararmy said:

We were in the hole by the time of the fans forum, the only way out was promotion (highly unlikely at that point) or the stadium sale. Why wasn't it mentioned to ease fans worries at the time. 

 

As I said it's very concerning & as you say he could quite easily have said "We have measures in place & FFP/P&S shouldn't be a problem".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Minton said:

 

Except when we sold the goods to the EFL, we asked them to check our goods were in date and they accepted that they were and signed a document to that effect. Only to later come back and claim that they have changed their mind. Which from a legal standpoint is wrong.

 

That's like saying if you smuggled drugs across a border, and customs gives you the OK (because they didn't find the drugs), they are no longer permitted to confiscate the drugs or punish you for smuggling them.

We have no idea what basis the club used to "get away" with their creative accounting, and on what basis the EFL said it was OK. It's quite possible the EFL aren't acting in good faith, but with what we know (i.e. bugger all), there's no way to say who's in the right here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, bobness said:

 

That's like saying if you smuggled drugs across a border, and customs gives you the OK (because they didn't find the drugs), they are no longer permitted to confiscate the drugs or punish you for smuggling them.

We have no idea what basis the club used to "get away" with their creative accounting, and on what basis the EFL said it was OK. It's quite possible the EFL aren't acting in good faith, but with what we know (i.e. bugger all), there's no way to say who's in the right here.

 

No the equivalent would be bringing drugs back through customs, declaring them, customs signing off on them and telling you it is ok to do it, but months down the line deciding that they actually aren't ok with it and trying to punish you retrospectively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, teddybeararmy said:

We were in the hole by the time of the fans forum, the only way out was promotion (highly unlikely at that point) or the stadium sale. Why wasn't it mentioned to ease fans worries at the time. 

 

It suggests DC may not have had a clue of the latter solution, and only discovered the loophole when it was already too late. Which is surprising, considering he's surrounded himself with experienced football professionals...

 

On a separate note, I think Bruce wanted out because he saw the writing on the walls. I know it's not a popular opinion on here (because we're supposed to believe Newcastle randomly approached him), but if you were Bruce and witnessed how poorly the club was being run, wouldn't you be looking for opportunities elsewhere? Especially when there's only half a year left on your contract?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Minton said:

 

No the equivalent would be bringing drugs back through customs, declaring them, customs signing off on them and telling you it is ok to do it, but months down the line deciding that they actually aren't ok with it and trying to punish you retrospectively.

 

Haven't the EFL alleged that there is "new evidence"? Which would indicate the club wasn't exactly forthcoming. Not saying it's the case, but I think that's what the EFL have said.

Edited by bobness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bobness said:

 

 

On a separate note, I think Bruce wanted out because he saw the writing on the walls. I know it's not a popular opinion on here (because we're supposed to believe Newcastle randomly approached him), but if you were Bruce and witnessed how poorly the club was being run, wouldn't you be looking for opportunities elsewhere? Especially when there's only half a year left on your contract?

 

I don't for a minute think Bruce was that naive that he didn't know the clubs situation prior to accepting the job.

He may well have got disillusioned with some other aspect of the job, but surely he would have known the financial constraints we were under.

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...