Jump to content

THE EFL HEARING THREAD


Recommended Posts

I don't know whether what we have supposed to have done is actually that bad. I haven't seen the exact case that the EFL are making.

 

To me it seems like we have chosen to interpret the rules one way and the EFL are saying the rules are something different.

 

If they were to win, they will be able to punish us for breaching FFP but can they make out that we have been naughty and have aggravated the the misconduct?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sheff74 said:

 

Would that be the posts where I dared to suggest that they have some decent players?

 

Well stone me dead, who'd have thought that might be true after 2 promotions in 3 years and doing well in the top flight..?

Lost 3 games on the bounce and you're still tòssing them off...

Edited by markowl
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OxonOwl said:

I don't know whether what we have supposed to have done is actually that bad. I haven't seen the exact case that the EFL are making.

 

To me it seems like we have chosen to interpret the rules one way and the EFL are saying the rules are something different.

 

If they were to win, they will be able to punish us for breaching FFP but can they make out that we have been naughty and have aggravated the the misconduct?

 

 

 

Basically, they are accusing us of fiddling our accounts to get round FFP. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, markowl said:

What's it got to do with other clubs?

 

My understanding is it's an independent panel. If we get a points deduction fair enough, if we don't, other clubs will have to suck it up.

 

Because any club who gets relegated might feel they have a case, if our punishment isn't harsh.  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, OxonOwl said:

To me it seems like we have chosen to interpret the rules one way and the EFL are saying the rules are something different.

 

Obviously I'm not aware of the finer points of the evidence, but that seems a bit of a daytime TV interpretation of the charges.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, S36 OWL said:

 

Basically, they are accusing us of fiddling our accounts to get round FFP. 

 

The way I see our position is that we have pulled a fast one with the accounts which seems like it is ok with HMRC and now we are expecting the EFL to judge FFP based on these accounts.

 

The EFL are taking the stance that we have pulled a fast one and should be judged on what they think the accounts should be.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Losing 6 would be ok considering we've just gained 4 since the restart imo. 

 

Does that reset our ability to spend again? Or are we still in the sht with the rolling 3 years? 

 

Haven't the EFL deferred P&S for a year with the virus? 

 

What a fkng circus this is. Just let clubs in the Championship spend up to what a relegated PL team can spend ffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the fact media are logged in - is normal surely blimey it's where a lot of local journos get info on henfleet etc

 

it's not news that there is going to be a decision good or bad it's when 

 

my quotes     

 

FFS the EFL have had it in for us for years, this is an outrage pandering to clubs who've squandered their parachute cash 

 

or 

 

At last common sense from the independent panel having considered the facts found nothing to worry about 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, OxonOwl said:

I don't know whether what we have supposed to have done is actually that bad. I haven't seen the exact case that the EFL are making.

 

To me it seems like we have chosen to interpret the rules one way and the EFL are saying the rules are something different.

 

If they were to win, they will be able to punish us for breaching FFP but can they make out that we have been naughty and have aggravated the the misconduct?

 

 

There were no rules preventing stadium sales. The only way we've broken a 'rule' is if the EFL successfully argue that all or part of the revenue from the stadium sale is disregarded for P&S purposes.

 

That being a transaction EFL were consulted about beforehand, agreed to and signed off on when the accounts were initially ratified and embargo lifted. 

 

Suspect their biggest issue is timing of the sale and payment terms. While lawful and HMRC compliant, EFL may try to argue not applicable for that years accounts, seeing it as backdated. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, @owlstalk said:


 

A load of media outlets followed Owlstalk twitter in the last day so they must know something is imminent. am expecting something today 

 

If Wednesday win the case the Press won't be interested; it'll get half a sentence in a monthly round-up of obligatory 'lower-league news' and never be mentioned again.

 

If the EFL win the case the Press will be looking for the most outrageous meltdown quotes from on here; so you know what to do lads and lasses....

 

 

Pin all of the blame on our former Chairman Feswick Montgomery-Puddlewick and his cronies on the Board for getting us into this mess! 

 

 

lol

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, nbupperthongowl said:

Not sure what you can take from the fact that our QC has been tweeting about soy sauce this morning....

 

He was tweeting about frangipanes last week.  Seems remarkably chilled, which should be a good thing.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Sheff74 said:

 

Because any club who gets relegated might feel they have a case, if our punishment isn't harsh.  


I think we should just let Gibson decide the punishment then he will probably be happy 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...