Hitcat Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 Basically they can't afford a court case because they're already stumping up cash for every club during the Corona crisis... Actually, in all seriousness, if the charges have been dropped against the named 3 then how can they hold the "club" to account. Those 3 were the "club" at the time. The club isn't an independent entity that makes decisions for itself... 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian_D Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 4 hours ago, pazowl55 said: "However we still broke FFP and overvalued our stadium to try to rectify that fact. We will still be punished for this. But with what is going on and the league being suspended at the moment it will be adjourned for 12 months I think." Not sure about that bit. I think in business, if a value has been signed off by official auditors then the business cannot be held accountable for the valuation being deemed incorrect. Like many others commenting on this though, I may be wrong. I was under the impression that the case was due to the date period that the club wanted to account the sale in rather than the valuation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradowl Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 8 hours ago, Night King said: What’s this mean in regards to the FFP charges? To say sorry they've awarded us 21 points. Premier League here we come. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthndav Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 I reckon with no football being played that any points deduction will be suspended anyhow. Just keep our powder dry going forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theowlsman Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 Fingers crossed. That is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Toni Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 For the fans the issue still remains regarding the club scenario and potential points deduction or fine. All this means is the individuals can publicly walk away from this with their heads held high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soldierboyblue Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 8 hours ago, Minton said: Points deduction eh? Chansiri guilty of dodgy dealings. 21 points for sure according to some here. Bet there are a red faces now. Buffoon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kobayashi Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 A company is a separate legal entity from its owners or officers. It can own assets, owe liabilities and be liable for prosecution for example by the HSE if a worker has been injured. In such cases a prosecution of a Director as an individual may also occur but not always. The club and officers entered the arbitration process challenging the EFLs authority to bring a case against both the corporate legal entity and the individual officers. So far the merits of the case have not been the issue but rather the EFLs authority to bring the charges. It appears that an agreement has now been agreed that the EFL will drop the charges against the individuals but in return SWFC accept that the EFL has the authority to charge the club in this case - as the statement says the charges will proceed to a hearing. It is only at the hearing that the merits of the case will be heard, defended and ruled upon. As fans what happens to the officers is secondary /insignificant what matters is the club - the positive of this is that it at least moves the process on but the potential for points and financial penalties is just as real as it was before. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 8 hours ago, @owlstalk said: Definitely looks that way Although you could imagine the likes of Boro etc trying legal action if we are let off If the P&S rules aren’t looked at it won’t be long before most of the championship find themselves being strangled by the rules and if this includes Middlesbrough then it’ll be interesting to see how Mr Gibson reacts? I could see DC going to town on them if we get done and Middlesbrough find themselves with similar problems in the future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 I’ve always felt that the situation wasn’t as cut and dried as the OT High Council thought it was. I’m not defending Chansiri over the issues that have got us in this mess in the first place and of course money could’ve been spent better but we are where we are and hopefully when this is resolved, the Chairman can use this experience to use his money more wisely in the future? As for the ongoing case, once Derby were charged with similar offences and were saying the same sort of things we were when charged, I felt that we had a decent chance of beating the charges and Chansiri’s vigorous defence of the charges and last night’s statement give me a bit confidence that we’ll be fine? As for Gibson et al, I don’t have any sympathy or respect for them. With regards to Gibson as I’ve said before he had no concerns about us at the time when he sold us Reach and Rhodes? The big issue at our level is the parachute payments. Until rules are brought in that level the playing field then the current P&S rules aren’t fit for purpose but you’re not going to get the likes of Middlesbrough and Hull complaining about them because both have benefited from them in the recent past. Yes, as I pointed out earlier Chansiri has been a little reckless with our finances but arguably Middlesbrough and Hull haven’t been far behind with arguably a greater hand than we initially had when Chansiri first arrived at S6? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
handworth52 Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 club really keeping us upto date 18 weeks later. that's the problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bladeshater Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 For me I trust the chairman he's made and his still making some poor descions but nobody in my lifetime has pumped so much of his personal money in to my club trying to make this club successful and he as my full respect 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarrowbyOwl Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 8 hours ago, @owlstalk said: I think the arbitration panel is made up of three people - one of which is our representative I think that’s correct? Not quite. The arbitration panel comprises an independently appointed chairperson and one appointee from each of the 2 parties. These appointees don’t ‘represent’ the parties though. They too are meant to be impartial. The parties will then have legal counsel, De Marco in our case, to represent them before the 3 person panel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
handworth52 Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 2 minutes ago, Great Big Galaa said: I’ve always felt that the situation wasn’t as cut and dried as the OT High Council thought it was. I’m not defending Chansiri over the issues that have got us in this mess in the first place and of course money could’ve been spent better but we are where we are and hopefully when this is resolved, the Chairman can use this experience to use his money more wisely in the future? As for the ongoing case, once Derby were charged with similar offences and were saying the same sort of things we were when charged, I felt that we had a decent chance of beating the charges and Chansiri’s vigorous defence of the charges and last night’s statement give me a bit confidence that we’ll be fine? As for Gibson et al, I don’t have any sympathy or respect for them. With regards to Gibson as I’ve said before he had no concerns about us at the time when he sold us Reach and Rhodes? The big issue at our level is the parachute payments. Until rules are brought in that level the playing field then the current P&S rules aren’t fit for purpose but you’re not going to get the likes of Middlesbrough and Hull complaining about them because both have benefited from them in the recent past. Yes, as I pointed out earlier Chansiri has been a little reckless with our finances but arguably Middlesbrough and Hull haven’t been far behind with arguably a greater hand than we initially had when Chansiri first arrived at S6? love to know where hull ,m boro hudds prem money has gone. aint they supposed to get just under 200 million ,then 100 million over 3 seasons . don't know why clubs like them just bank the money and invest it into there youth system and ground , paying some nobody 100 grand a week is criminal . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrickyTrev Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 My understanding of this is that the charges were taken to arbitration as Chansiri was saying they were unlawful. The disciplinary hearing is yet to get started. As such the EFL dropping these charges is an admission that they were unlawful. In this case I hope all 3 now sue the EFL and press for damages for unlawful charges being made against them as well as full legal costs. I could of course be completely wide of the mark here, happy to be corrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarrowbyOwl Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 My guess is that dropping the misconduct charges against the individuals is also an attempt to speed up proceedings. The recent article in The Athletic said the EFL ‘.... is pressing on with a “revised timetable” that could still see the matter concluded before the last round of Championship fixtures on Saturday, May 2.’ Obviously Covid-19 has thrown all timetables into disarray but they seem committed to finishing the season and will want charges against us and Derby resolved somehow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarrowbyOwl Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 1 hour ago, kobayashi said: A company is a separate legal entity from its owners or officers. It can own assets, owe liabilities and be liable for prosecution for example by the HSE if a worker has been injured. In such cases a prosecution of a Director as an individual may also occur but not always. The club and officers entered the arbitration process challenging the EFLs authority to bring a case against both the corporate legal entity and the individual officers. So far the merits of the case have not been the issue but rather the EFLs authority to bring the charges. It appears that an agreement has now been agreed that the EFL will drop the charges against the individuals but in return SWFC accept that the EFL has the authority to charge the club in this case - as the statement says the charges will proceed to a hearing. It is only at the hearing that the merits of the case will be heard, defended and ruled upon. As fans what happens to the officers is secondary /insignificant what matters is the club - the positive of this is that it at least moves the process on but the potential for points and financial penalties is just as real as it was before. The League Arbitration Panel, where we are claimant and EFL is respondent, is only examining the EFLs authority to bring disciplinary charges. The final stage of the arbitration will be the hearing. Only if the ruling is that the EFL charges were admissible can we then be disciplined before a Disciplinary Commission. It’s the disciplinary commission that will examine the merits of the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trev Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 I'm no lawyer. But I reckon this is belting news. If they found DC innocent of deliberately trying to pull a fast one, the evidence must be there to say the EFL allowed our shenanigans. Didn't DC say we had emails stating/proving this? As the date of the sale and the amount were the shady parts. If this is resolved as ok then our books now look rosy? Don't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Striggy Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 It may be just me misunderstanding but the Statement to me does not suggest that the arbitration has been concluded, but that the EFL have written to the club dropping the charges having seem the evidence disclosed. Is the club going on to a hearing the final stages of the arbitration regarding charges against the club only now that individual charges have been withdrawn. Really not sure? "nobody told me there would be days like these!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East coast owl Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 Chansiri should sue the efl for defamation of character. Tainting his family name. Must be worth a few million towards clearing his name and the others that were publicly named Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now