Jump to content

THE EFL HEARING THREAD


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, sonofbert2 said:


I thought I read somewhere in the Spanish papers (Marca I think) that there was to be a review with a view to suspension of FFP rules due to Covid?  
 

This would be for this season and next season.  I’ll try to find the article but it was in relation to loads of clubs across the whole of Europe in danger of folding without supporters in attendance etc.

 

 

That’s for 2019/2020 season. Our accounts are due for the 2018/19 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Essix Blue said:

Agreed. But the state of our club and it’s accounts is not EFL’s fault. 


It is not entirely his fault though.  The limits are ridiculous, were set in 2014 and are totally unfair when weighed against parachute payments.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Essix Blue said:

Agreed. But the state of our club and it’s accounts is not EFL’s fault. 


Absolutely isn’t,  the rules are there to be lived by and if we’ve broken them only one man is responsible and fully expect him to take the can 

 

What doesn’t sit right with me is if there wasn’t a loophole and we’ve blatantly broken the rules how is DC not guilty of misconduct,  there has to be 2 sides to this story and the EFL won’t tell there’s , that’s what irritates me 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, sonofbert2 said:


It is not entirely his fault though.  The limits are ridiculous, were set in 2014 and are totally unfair when weighed against parachute payments.

So that’s an excuse to ignore those limits?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bazapeps said:

Why do people continue defend the indefensible 


You don’t really think FFP is fit for purpose ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Essix Blue said:

So that’s an excuse to ignore those limits?

If we were ignoring those limits why would the EFL remove the embargo...and, because they did doesn't it point to the fact that we were as DC said working with them throughout including the ground sale ?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Essix Blue said:

That’s for 2019/2020 season. Our accounts are due for the 2018/19 


I know but they may have to “backdate” it based on projections of future income.

 

Loads of clubs could go under all across Europe.  The appetite for the game is diminishing with games without crowds everywhere never mind incomes from real attendances (not really applicable in Premier League).

 

Covid will put football at a turning point.  The foundations are being laid.  The strong will survive in a European Super League with games in four quarters (drinks breaks=extra advertising income) and the big authorities FIFA/UEFA will most likely roll with it.

 

From any crisis big business always takes the opportunity to do what they couldn’t get away with in normal circumstances.

 

I’m glad I support Man City.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Royal_D said:


You don’t really think FFP is fit for purpose ?

 

No it isn't, but other Clubs have followed the rules and so should we.

As a League, we tell the EFL what we want, it's up to us as a whole to change the rules.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Royal_D said:


You don’t really think FFP is fit for purpose ?

Not the point is it, point is that clubs effectively make up the rules and all so up them. Our owner then just acts consistently for years with total disregard for them. If the roles were reversed we’b be telling the EFL to throw the books at other clubs. We deserve everything we get. Those moaning that parachute payments makes things unfair; we’ll surely it’s unfair on teams complying with FFP when clubs like us act with no regard for it whatsoever. Such double standards

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Royal_D said:


Absolutely isn’t,  the rules are there to be lived by and if we’ve broken them only one man is responsible and fully expect him to take the can 

 

What doesn’t sit right with me is if there wasn’t a loophole and we’ve blatantly broken the rules how is DC not guilty of misconduct,  there has to be 2 sides to this story and the EFL won’t tell there’s , that’s what irritates me 

What irritates you is the fact that the misconduct charges were dropped against DC which scuppers your dream of DC being responsible...don't worry I'm sure you have a new owner to dislike at some point in the future. Perhaps Dem Ten Bob Millionaires may raise their heads again

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, daleblue said:

 

No it isn't, but other Clubs have followed the rules and so should we.

As a League, we tell the EFL what we want, it's up to us as a whole to change the rules.


Aston Villa didn’t follow them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Essix Blue said:

So that’s an excuse to ignore those limits?


He ignored them initially on the basis of going up in 3 years.

 

He has an advisor who is a specialist in loopholes.

 

We are not alone.  The current rules are unfair and unsustainable purely and simply because of the difference between Premier League and Championship TV monies and the closeness of player’s wages (excluding the real big boys).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, daveyboy66 said:

What irritates you is the fact that the misconduct charges were dropped against DC which scuppers your dream of DC being responsible...don't worry I'm sure you have a new owner to dislike at some point in the future. Perhaps Dem Ten Bob Millionaires may raise their heads again

 

I personally think there should be some misconduct charges applied to any owner that consistently breaches and has no regard to the rules in place. Should be a proper message sent to the offenders as ultimately it’s their responsibility. Instead it’s the fans left to deal with the crap consequences 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, daveyboy66 said:

What irritates you is the fact that the misconduct charges were dropped against DC which scuppers your dream of DC being responsible...don't worry I'm sure you have a new owner to dislike at some point in the future. Perhaps Dem Ten Bob Millionaires may raise their heads again

 


That post must have been worded badly , am very much the same train of thought as yourself 

 

The ones wanting DC in a noose can’t explain why he’s innocent of misconduct but should still have book thrown at him for FFP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, sonofbert2 said:


He ignored them initially on the basis of going up in 3 years.

 

He has an advisor who is a specialist in loopholes.

 

We are not alone.  The current rules are unfair and unsustainable purely and simply because of the difference between Premier League and Championship TV monies and the closeness of player’s wages (excluding the real big boys).

Sorry mate but you’re literally beyond deluded

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sonofbert2 said:


He ignored them initially on the basis of going up in 3 years.

 

He has an advisor who is a specialist in loopholes.

 

We are not alone.  The current rules are unfair and unsustainable purely and simply because of the difference between Premier League and Championship TV monies and the closeness of player’s wages (excluding the real big boys).

You can't have a level playing field until the PL stop rewarding clubs for failure in order to protect a select few clubs...much like the top few European clubs did when Chelsea and Man City started to put pressure on Bayern, Madrid and Barca. 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Royal_D said:

 

The ones wanting DC in a noose can’t explain why he’s innocent of misconduct but should still have book thrown at him for FFP

Probably because there’s a difference between the 2 charges?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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