darra Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 So the EFL have had 75% of their case against Chansiri etal dismissed cant see that being the end of it. In the far East in business its all about "face" and Chansiri has had it questioned incorrectly. It wouldnt surprise me if he takes legal action against the EFL when this is over with. As for the remaining charge that is presumably about the sale of the ground and its entry into the accounts along with its valuation.If they're questioning the valuation presumably made by a quaified valuer I wish them luck with that and wish them luck in the resulting court case. It was presumably all signed off by the EFL when the accounts were published so again it was presumably their mistake? The mainly contentious thing that could be held against us is when the sale was registered. This could be a turning point for the EFL and could end badly for them time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BARMYARMY2010 Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 12 minutes ago, Royal_D said: There’s a couple of reyt sad individuals on social media genuinely hanging onto the hope the club gets found guilty of something, it’s like they can’t stand the thought of DC been innocent How monumentally sad is that Wouldn't frequent this place under a different guise by any chance,just a thought like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dorian gray Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 12 hours ago, slinger208b said: All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?.. put the scots behind a big wall? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetsheri Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 I’m not worried now in the slightest. Whenever sport starts up again I think football is going to look totally different. It has to. This is a game changer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BARMYARMY2010 Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 4 hours ago, soldierboyblue said: Buffoon Au Contraire,every "punishment" was nailed on according to the "experts" on here,red faces all round i say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animis Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 1 hour ago, Inspector Lestrade said: I've no idea of the process but you could imagine the EFL bods looking at this in its entirety and thinking our case is crumbling away. I assume you mean the case against us is crumbling away - if so, I agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChinaOwl Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 1 minute ago, darra said: So the EFL have had 75% of their case against Chansiri etal dismissed cant see that being the end of it. In the far East in business its all about "face" and Chansiri has had it questioned incorrectly. It wouldnt surprise me if he takes legal action against the EFL when this is over with. As for the remaining charge that is presumably about the sale of the ground and its entry into the accounts along with its valuation.If they're questioning the valuation presumably made by a quaified valuer I wish them luck with that and wish them luck in the resulting court case. It was presumably all signed off by the EFL when the accounts were published so again it was presumably their mistake? The mainly contentious thing that could be held against us is when the sale was registered. This could be a turning point for the EFL and could end badly for them time will tell. The idea that Chansiri should sue the EFL for bringing charges against him is crass and unimaginable. It would have legal implications for millions of cases where plaintiffs or defendants have had charges placed against them and then dropped or found not guilty. It would raise the bar in terms of what constituted a violation and, if applied in common law, would result in thousands of cases being dropped by the CPS in fear of legal implications if the case is not proven. It is already difficult enough to bring charges against some offenders without making it worse. It would also affect the "no win, no fee" concept operated by legal firms. That would impact on low income victims seeking justice. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dorian gray Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 12 hours ago, helmut_rooster said: Charges against the 3 named people for 'wrong doing' of sorts. Charges still exist for breaking rules regarding expenditure mi owd cocker and IF PERMISSION was given by the efl at the time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dorian gray Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 7 hours ago, Hitcat said: 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... BANG ON. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darra Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 (edited) 9 hours ago, pazowl55 said: As people have rightly said this just means that no charges are being brought against the three people not the club. But unfortunately that doesn't help us one bit I dont think as I believe there charges related to falsifying accounts. They have emails saying they were ok to do it. So they are rightly let off. 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. I would've thought that an independant valuer valued the stadium not us and i've already said good luck to the EFL challenging the professional integrity and comptence of a qualified vauer Edited March 21, 2020 by darra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dorian gray Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 5 minutes ago, dorian gray said: put the scots behind a big wall? i'm not sure if that was a plus for them, or us. looking at the present virus contamination rates, the north of Scotland is very attractive at this time of year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJMortimer Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 3 hours ago, Great Big Galaa said: 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? I still don't think it's as straightforward as that. The precise nature of the involvement with he who shall not be named is vague at best and the potential conflict of interest clear. Even if Chansiri has been severely chastened by the last couple of years (and even that is questionable) there's no guarantee he can change things to that extent any time soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetsheri Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 Thing is if this lasts well into the autumn then the league rules on P&S will be worthless. Clubs don’t have any revenue coming in.. we are all going to break the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trev Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 3 minutes ago, sweetsheri said: Thing is if this lasts well into the autumn then the league rules on P&S will be worthless. Clubs don’t have any revenue coming in.. we are all going to break the rules. Yup. Clean slate all round I reckon. SPENDAGEDDON!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darra Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 11 minutes ago, ChinaOwl said: The idea that Chansiri should sue the EFL for bringing charges against him is crass and unimaginable. It would have legal implications for millions of cases where plaintiffs or defendants have had charges placed against them and then dropped or found not guilty. It would raise the bar in terms of what constituted a violation and, if applied in common law, would result in thousands of cases being dropped by the CPS in fear of legal implications if the case is not proven. It is already difficult enough to bring charges against some offenders without making it worse. It would also affect the "no win, no fee" concept operated by legal firms. That would impact on low income victims seeking justice. Thank you for that. It seems that you have experience in such things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animis Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 1 minute ago, sweetsheri said: Thing is if this lasts well into the autumn then the league rules on P&S will be worthless. Clubs don’t have any revenue coming in.. we are all going to break the rules. This impact of this virus will cross two financial years, and the fixed costs (contracts); ground adjustments against the lack of revenue and tax re-calculations will be a nightmare for everyone not just football clubs. I can't see how the EFL can carry on measuring clubs on an out-of-date P&S criteria, when the world will look very different. Everyone will need to be cut some slack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 Its not the end of it but its positive at least Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChinaOwl Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 1 minute ago, darra said: Thank you for that. It seems that you have experience in such things No, I just see it as common sense (please don't take that as anything aimed at you). There is a difference between making allegations, issuing charges and stating guilt. If the EFL had stated categorically that he did it, of course there would be a case for defamation. But issuing charges pending the abitration is not. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prowl Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 Sorry I haven't had time to read all the thread, I made it to page 4 but I'm still not understanding all of this. DC was claiming the charges were illegal, I presume a all of them, meaning the ones against the individuals and the club. We now know the charges against the individuals have been dropped. Is DC still maintaining the charges against the club are illegal? Will the arbitration panel still sit to decide if the EFL has the right to bring the charges? Has DC accepted that the EFL has the right to charge the club? Is the independent panel now going to hear the charges against us? Does anyone know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barumowl Posted March 21, 2020 Share Posted March 21, 2020 "Does anyone know?" Presumably the lawyers on each side and it's simply they're not able, for legal reasons, to tell. 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