Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, matt68owls said:

 

surely if it was us, Chansiri would have furloughed the players. Did any championship club do this?


Or extended Wickham and Windass who are on a fair few quid

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, TrickyTrev said:

If it were any other club in the Championship who’d been unable to pay their players in full this month and had just been forced to release a lot of high earners, we’d be saying it could be them.

 

If I had to guess I’d say Charlton but it COULD be us.

 

That's a very important word in that statement.

 

Do we know we were unable?

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, matt68owls said:

 

surely if it was us, Chansiri would have furloughed the players. Did any championship club do this?

Blackburn 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, matt68owls said:

 

surely if it was us, Chansiri would have furloughed the players. Did any championship club do this?

Do you honestly think you can just furolough players without them agreeing to it?

The maximum the government will fund is £2,500 per employee per MONTH, do you think any championship players woulld agree to be paid this? Then when they returned for training they would not be eligible for furlough as they are working

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it time the EFL made a statement as to a date when the decision has to be made. Whether it is this week, next week, next month or whenever. A date when a decision HAS to be made should be included in the details of the investigation. 

We need a 100 page thread when the decision is made. 

If it turns out to be a Not Guilty charge then a 1 pager will do and everybody especially the club can get on with what has to be done. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

With Wigan in admin, another club rumoured to be going into admin imminently, and with them trying to shaft us, I think the EFL have got themselves into a right mess and havnt got a clue how to sort this all out. At this rate all three relegation places will be decided OFF the pitch, which is a damming reflection on the EFL. 

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, S36 OWL said:

With Wigan in admin, another club rumoured to be going into admin imminently, and with them trying to shaft us, I think the EFL have got themselves into a right mess and havnt got a clue how to sort this all out. At this rate all three relegation places will be decided OFF the pitch, which is a damming reflection on the EFL. 

I think it's a coronavirus issue really.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, mattitheowl said:

 

That's a very important word in that statement.

 

Do we know we were unable?

I don’t know and I doubt anyone on here does.


All I’d say however is if we were able why didn’t we? Hopefully just an error but who knows.

 

All I’m saying is it doesn’t look good and if this story about non payment of wages had come out about any other club, there’d be a lot on here saying it could be them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Makes you wonder if the EFL is a little shell shocked...rumours of up to 10 clubs in trouble...If true...whats left of the EFL?

especially if it includes relatively large clubs.

Say for instance they relegate us....then two more go into admin in  the ame league that were below us?...They end up with a right old dogs breakfast

 

Edited by asteener1867
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone keeps blaming the EFL, forgetting the fact loads of foreign owners have chased the Premier League money by overpaying bang average footballers ludicrous salaries. 
 

Football as a business is a complete joke and the chickens are coming home to roost. 
 

All the EFL have tried to do is control it, and like with us, any intervention ends up in court. 
 

It’s like blaming the highways authority for your speeding fine. 
 

The EFL should just tell everyone to do what they want. And then we’d have 40 clubs out of business within the year. 

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I see it, the EFL have tried to control it but made a mistake by allowing parachute payments to skew everything. There should have been a way for owners to be allowed to spend their own money up to the value of these failure payments. I'm not sure how it would have worked, maybe it was impossible, but the reason clubs overspend is to compete with others who are gaining a massive advantage cos they've been in the prem recently. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, latemodelchild said:

The way I see it, the EFL have tried to control it but made a mistake by allowing parachute payments to skew everything. There should have been a way for owners to be allowed to spend their own money up to the value of these failure payments. I'm not sure how it would have worked, maybe it was impossible, but the reason clubs overspend is to compete with others who are gaining a massive advantage cos they've been in the prem recently. 

 

The damage caused by parachute payments is ignored for some reason

 

Why don't clubs fight this unreasonable disadvantage that is thrust onto them and push for a level playing field

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, happy bunny said:

 

The damage caused by parachute payments is ignored for some reason

 

Why don't clubs fight this unreasonable disadvantage that is thrust onto them and push for a level playing field


Great point to be fair 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, oldishowl said:

Can you imagine if it’s us 
12 + 12 = 24

 

We'd be playing in the Northern Alliance, with much smaller attendances, since half of our fans would be in the Northern General.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, happy bunny said:

 

The damage caused by parachute payments is ignored for some reason

 

Why don't clubs fight this unreasonable disadvantage that is thrust onto them and push for a level playing field

How can FFP and Parachute Payments be included in the same sentence when one contradicts the other.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, latemodelchild said:

The way I see it, the EFL have tried to control it but made a mistake by allowing parachute payments to skew everything. There should have been a way for owners to be allowed to spend their own money up to the value of these failure payments. I'm not sure how it would have worked, maybe it was impossible, but the reason clubs overspend is to compete with others who are gaining a massive advantage cos they've been in the prem recently. 

 

It should work the other way around. The rationale for implementing parachute payments was to soften the blow caused by Premier League salaries and operating costs when the clubs are relegated. As far as FFP is concerned, it should be simple. Just disregard the parachute payments when calculating the maximum permitted losses. In other words, just pretend they don't exist.

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


Or extended Wickham and Windass who are on a fair few quid

What percentage of the loan players wages do you reckon wednesday are paying?

Genuine question.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...