Jump to content
RichieB

Clubs demand Sheffield Wednesday points deduction

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, bobness said:

 

Good point. Might've played a big role. Which only begs the question: what happened to that budget after he foooked off to Newcastle? If we had a monster budget for a manager, why did it take so long to replace him, and with a manager who's probably on substantially less...

 

I suspect not everyone wants to come here:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, mogbad said:


It could depend on whether there were any conditions attached to the permission given by the EFL.  They might have said "based on the information supplied we accept the accounts inclusive of the stadium sale, however should any further information come to light that casts doubt on the accuracy of the information supplied we reserve the right to investigate & instigate disciplinary proceedings where we see fit".


Yes they could say that but they must have told us what the new information is as part of the charge and it seems that in spite of this "new" information coming to light we have still refuted the allegations.

It would be a bit illogical to do this if we thought the new information was irrefutably .incriminating

Edited by the mighty wednesday

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, nevthelodgemoorowl said:

 

Come on 100% of deals are signed off at the very last minute. You just cant sign off a deal at any other time lol


Not sure what your point is. I thought my post inferred he delayed signing off the ground sale until the latest possible time when it became totally necessary to do so. We even delayed the published accounts to include it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, OhForAnotherShez said:

 

I suspect not everyone wants to come here:rolleyes:

 

Gary Rowett, an established and available Championship manager at the time, made it clear he wanted the job prior to the start of the season.

Share this post


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

 

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?

 

But been approached by Newcastle is just as believable.  If not more so in that people who were involved mentioned it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Inspector Lestrade said:

 

But been approached by Newcastle is just as believable.  If not more so in that people who were involved mentioned it.

 

It seemed like an odd move, to replace Benitez with a slightly washed up Championship manager. At least that's how it looked. To me, it seemed like Bruce (or his agent) lobbied Ashley for the gig.

 

But even if Bruce did get in touch with Newcastle first, it still doesn't mean he was displeased with how this club was being run. He could genuinely have been wanting to fulfill his childhood dream, or simply chasing a bigger pay day (if he kept them up). But when confirmation bias kicks in, I can't help but think that the way our club was being run had to have been a contributing factor. Again, all 100% made up.

Edited by bobness

Share this post


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

 

It seemed like an odd move, to replace Benitez with a slightly washed up Championship manager. At least that's how it looked. To me, it seemed like Bruce (or his agent) lobbied Ashley for the gig.

 

But even if Bruce did get in touch with Newcastle first, it still doesn't mean he was displeased with how this club was being run. He could genuinely have been wanting to fulfill his childhood dream, or simply chasing a bigger pay day (if he kept them up). But when confirmation bias kicks in, I can't help but think that the way our club was being run had to have been a contributing factor. Again, all 100% made up.

 

Having the last chance to manage your childhood club would be a big factor plus the extra money and status.   

 

He knew the limitations of the club when he joined.  I agree that having his hands tied at Hillsborough and fill your boots at Tyneside would  be a no brainer.

Share this post


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


Yes, the basis of the EFL'S charge is that they are in possession of further evidence. We don't know whether the new evidence is from the club or a 3rd party.

 

Fome the club, apparently.

An EFL spokesman said it would "clearly be inappropriate" to comment specifically on matters linked to their "comprehensive investigation. Other than to reiterate that, following the review of a large number of documents provided by the club - some of those seen for the first time - evidence came to light to justify multiple charges of misconduct."

 

Make of that what you will.

Does it mean that the club submitted the documents late, or the EFL were in possession of them all along and didn't examine them during their "comprehensive investigation"?

As the arbitration seems to be being conducted under strict confidentiality, to the extent of our QC taking down his involvement from Blackstone Chambers' web site, we'll probably never know.

Edited by HarrowbyOwl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Westfield Owl said:

 

Gary Rowett, an established and available Championship manager at the time, made it clear he wanted the job prior to the start of the season.

 

Obviously Rowett is doing well now (he has my full respect), but having spent £50M at Stoke (Wikipedia) with no decent return he hardly set the world alight.

 

My point is that some people think finding a new manager is like picking something up at Tesco, or maybe Aldi :laugh:

 

Whenever the time comes clubs need to find a new manager before sacking the existing one, or we go through the cycle of media suggestions > fans don't want > managers won't come > no bugger left.

 

Been there before nearly every time!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even a 12 point deduction would be hideous at the moment looking at the table 

Share this post


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

 

Obviously Rowett is doing well now (he has my full respect), but having spent £50M at Stoke (Wikipedia) with no decent return he hardly set the world alight.

 

My point is that some people think finding a new manager is like picking something up at Tesco, or maybe Aldi :laugh:

 

Whenever the time comes clubs need to find a new manager before sacking the existing one, or we go through the cycle of media suggestions > fans don't want > managers won't come > no bugger left.

 

Been there before nearly every time!

 

Or in DC's case, picking one up at the arcade

 

giphy.gif

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Inspector Lestrade said:

 

Having the last chance to manage your childhood club would be a big factor plus the extra money and status.   

 

He knew the limitations of the club when he joined.  I agree that having his hands tied at Hillsborough and fill your boots at Tyneside would  be a no brainer.

According to some media reports at the time, Ashley approached 11 other managers before asking Bruce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If as Alan Nixon suggests today, the club made decision to do what we did AFTER talking to the EFL i don’t know how they explain that in court ??    Understand there under huge pressure to act but what a tangle this is,  Biggs also saying arbitration is still on going aswell 

 

Reyt Tangle 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Royal_D said:

If as Alan Nixon suggests today, the club made decision to do what we did AFTER talking to the EFL i don’t know how they explain that in court ??    Understand there under huge pressure to act but what a tangle this is,  Biggs also saying arbitration is still on going aswell 

 

Reyt Tangle 

 

 

 

I think no one really knows the details of the dispute apart form a handful of lawyers who are properly stringing it out as long as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would seem Boro want to take us down with them if they’re the instigators of this. Final day shoot out after our points deduction & we win? Ooh the pain Mr Gibson. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Royal_D said:

If as Alan Nixon suggests today, the club made decision to do what we did AFTER talking to the EFL i don’t know how they explain that in court ??    Understand there under huge pressure to act but what a tangle this is,  Biggs also saying arbitration is still on going aswell 

 

Reyt Tangle 

 

 

The whole thing is a can of worms. 

 

If new evidence has come to light that we were not entirely forthcoming with all the facts regarding the stadium transaction then it is fair enough. 

 

If that isn't the case, then it further reaffirms the view that the EFL are simply not fit for purpose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Royal_D said:

If as Alan Nixon suggests today, the club made decision to do what we did AFTER talking to the EFL i don’t know how they explain that in court ??    Understand there under huge pressure to act but what a tangle this is,  Biggs also saying arbitration is still on going aswell 

 

Reyt Tangle 

 

 


Often if there’s been a loop hole you close it and say that’s not allowed anymore, and the ones who have come before get away with it.  You’d think that’s what the EFL should do 

 

In F1 cars will exploit loop holes whenever they can, and when the FIA close the loop hole they don’t then strip the previous champion of their trophy.  That creates a right mess, and it feels like that’s what EFL are trying to do with us 

Share this post


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

The whole thing is a can of worms. 

 

If new evidence has come to light that we were not entirely forthcoming with all the facts regarding the stadium transaction then it is fair enough. 

 

If that isn't the case, then it further reaffirms the view that the EFL are simply not fit for purpose. 


The EFL has to look at their process when issuing these charges aswell. They shouldn’t be able to charge a club in November and then just leave it hanging for months through the season.

 

At least when UEFA charged City they said immediately what the punishment was. City will appeal it (and probably get off) but we know what they’re appealing against 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Owls-Fan said:


Often if there’s been a loop hole you close it and say that’s not allowed anymore, and the ones who have come before get away with it.  You’d think that’s what the EFL should do 

 

In F1 cars will exploit loop holes whenever they can, and when the FIA close the loop hole they don’t then strip the previous champion of their trophy.  That creates a right mess, and it feels like that’s what EFL are trying to do with us 


Good points there, it’s as if there under pressure to put right there wrongs in allowing the loophole to be exposed to the extent it has , were they expecting such a strong legal challenge from us ? Suspect not 

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...