THE EFL HEARING THREAD

[HarrowbyOwl]

33 minutes ago, steelowl said:

tbh i doubt it it's probably ended but who knows ? certainly no one on here does 

The Macclesfield IDC hearing was on 21 April, followed by publication of the decisions and award on 5 May. Reading the award is quite instructive about the nature and complexity of the proceedings and legal arguments:

https://www.efl.com/siteassets/image/201920/general-news/200505---efl-v-macclesfield-town---decision.pdf

Not beyond the realms of possibility that deliberations in ours case are still continuing in what was probably a much more complex and strongly contested case

[sonofbert2]

2 hours ago, room0035 said:

I am past caring.

 

We will find out soon enough if the club has got off or has maybe got us relegated or heavily fined. Then on Friday in two days we find out how much money we lost last season and hopefully we won't have breached the EFL losses rules again.

 

Does anyone not think we have been given a suspended sentence, but because the accounts are so close to being filed (in 2 days) no judgment has been made public because all parties would look pretty stupid if on Friday we show losses that mean we have breach the rules for last season.

 

Not like you to talk absolute shiiiiiiiiiite!!!!

 

[room0035]

11 minutes ago, sonofbert2 said:

 

Not like you to talk absolute shiiiiiiiiiite!!!!

 

So you don't think they are waiting what is no only a little over a day to see filed figures for the 2018/19 season. 

 

As long as the club are not late filing those figures of course, an action that last season saw us placed under a transfer embargo preventing any players being officially signed.

[sonofbert2]

Just now, room0035 said:

So you don't think they are waiting what is no only a little over a day to see filed figures for the 2018/19 season. 

 

As long as the club are not late filing those figures of course, an action that last season saw us placed under a transfer embargo preventing any players being officially signed.

 

No I don't think Hillsborough is in the top ten of deprived areas in the country.

[darra]

18 minutes ago, Animis said:

This is probably the best-detailed read on both cases - the author's conclusion is also quite positive both us and Derby:

 

https://www.footballlaw.co.uk/articles/the-owls-and-the-rams

 

 

 

Didn't understand a lot of what the article said but it seems to be that we told the EFL what we were doing how we were doing it and when dame with Derby and the EFL said fine go ahead. Then for whatever reason, they changed their mind and as I've before expected us and Derby to say yes sir sorry sir won't happen again. Instead, we've taken them to court and have a good chance of winning.

[Nero]

15 minutes ago, HarrowbyOwl said:

The Macclesfield IDC hearing was on 21 April, followed by publication of the decisions and award on 5 May. Reading the award is quite instructive about the nature and complexity of the proceedings and legal arguments:

https://www.efl.com/siteassets/image/201920/general-news/200505---efl-v-macclesfield-town---decision.pdf

Not beyond the realms of possibility that deliberations in ours case are still continuing in what was probably a much more complex and strongly contested case

Thanks I hadn't read that.

 

VERY IMPORTANT POINT

 

The impact of the point deduction as opposed to just deducting points as per the rules, determined how many points were deducted by the tribunal in the end. 

 

I guess for us that gives us a second potential get out.

 

First we are not guilty obviously,

 

Second we are guilty, but if the impact of a 9 or 12 point deduction would mean relegation (in the middle of Covid19) and if the tribunal believe this is not an appropriate punishment for the rule breach, they will reduce the points deduction. That is clear, no argument in this case. 

[sage owl]

22 minutes ago, sonofbert2 said:

 

No I don't think Hillsborough is in the top ten of deprived areas in the country.

Hillsborough isn't even in the top ten most deprived area's in Sheffield  !.

[Guest Grandad]

4 hours ago, mark1948 said:

Isn't a price merely a sum agreed by buyer and seller. Price is not necessarily linked to value. Value is entirely in the eye of the beholder.

 

I can't see why the EFL, The Government or anyone else should be bothered about what two parties agree as a price, so long as the necessary taxes are paid in full.

 

Not when its a Related Party Transaction

 

3 hours ago, bigdan2003 said:

How much was the old Wednesdayite car park  land sold for? 

 

Pretty sure it was £2m. Certainly not £13m  

[Animis]

28 minutes ago, Nero said:

Thanks I hadn't read that.

 

VERY IMPORTANT POINT

 

The impact of the point deduction as opposed to just deducting points as per the rules, determined how many points were deducted by the tribunal in the end. 

 

I guess for us that gives us a second potential get out.

 

First we are not guilty obviously,

 

Second we are guilty, but if the impact of a 9 or 12 point deduction would mean relegation (in the middle of Covid19) and if the tribunal believe this is not an appropriate punishment for the rule breach, they will reduce the points deduction. That is clear, no argument in this case. 

 

We also need to reflect that the EFL have many 'penalties' available in the case of a 'guilty verdict by the disciplinary panel.

 

Points deductions are only one, which most people seems to have jumped to the conclusion this will be the outcome. I believe there is no precedent on this, so not sure why people thing a points deduction is inevitable.

 

92 Decisions

92.1 The Disciplinary Commission may at any time make a decision, and may make more than one decision at different times on different aspects of the matters to be determined.

92.2 A decision may:

92.2.1 order a party to do or refrain from doing anything;

92.2.2 order a specific performance;

92.2.3 make a declaration on any matter to be determined;

92.2.4 issue a reprimand or warning as to the future conduct of a party;

92.2.5 order the payment of compensation to The League, any Club, any other club, Player or other person;

92.2.6 order a suspension of membership of The League;

92.2.7 order a deduction of points;

92.2.8 impose a financial penalty payable to The League;

92.2.9 recommend expulsion from membership of The League;

92.2.10 order a withdrawal or loss of benefit otherwise available to members of The League e.g. basic award or ladder payment;

92.2.11 impose an embargo on registration of Players;

92.2.12 order any other sanction as the Disciplinary Commission may think fit; and

92.2.13 order that interest be payable on any sums awarded under this Regulation for such period and at such rates as the Disciplinary Commission thinks fit.

 

92.3 These sanctions may be imposed immediately or may be deferred or suspended for such period and on such terms as the Disciplinary Commission shall decide.

 

[Nero]

5 minutes ago, Animis said:

 

We also need to reflect that the EFL have many 'penalties' available in the case of a 'guilty verdict by the disciplinary panel.

 

Points deductions are only one, which most people seems to have jumped to the conclusion this will be the outcome. I believe there is no precedent on this, so not sure why people thing a points deduction is inevitable.

 

92 Decisions

92.1 The Disciplinary Commission may at any time make a decision, and may make more than one decision at different times on different aspects of the matters to be determined.

92.2 A decision may:

92.2.1 order a party to do or refrain from doing anything;

92.2.2 order a specific performance;

92.2.3 make a declaration on any matter to be determined;

92.2.4 issue a reprimand or warning as to the future conduct of a party;

92.2.5 order the payment of compensation to The League, any Club, any other club, Player or other person;

92.2.6 order a suspension of membership of The League;

92.2.7 order a deduction of points;

92.2.8 impose a financial penalty payable to The League;

92.2.9 recommend expulsion from membership of The League;

92.2.10 order a withdrawal or loss of benefit otherwise available to members of The League e.g. basic award or ladder payment;

92.2.11 impose an embargo on registration of Players;

92.2.12 order any other sanction as the Disciplinary Commission may think fit; and

92.2.13 order that interest be payable on any sums awarded under this Regulation for such period and at such rates as the Disciplinary Commission thinks fit.

 

92.3 These sanctions may be imposed immediately or may be deferred or suspended for such period and on such terms as the Disciplinary Commission shall decide.

 

True, but they have to set out what sanctions they want at the start of the hearing. See MTFC tribunal findings. They asked for about 15 points.

Its implied that they asked for a points deduction for us but not 100 % certain. Just 99% 

The tribunal make the final decision 

Until the appeal....

Edited July 29, 2020 by Nero

[Animis]

4 minutes ago, Nero said:

True, but they have to set out what sanctions they want at the start of the hearing. See MTFC tribunal findings. They asked for about 15 points.

Its implied that they asked for a points deduction for us but not 100 % certain. Just 99% 

The tribunal make the final decision 

Until the appeal....

 

It's interesting how the EFL play these things - a sort of amateur CPS who get all excited in the initial case then hopefully end up caving in when the big-wig defence lawyers show them the errors of their ways, and end up plea bargaining to a lessor charge.

[Nero]

1 minute ago, Animis said:

 

It's interesting how the EFL play these things - a sort of amateur CPS who get all excited in the initial case then hopefully end up caving in when the big-wig defence lawyers show them the errors of their ways, and end up plea bargaining to a lessor charge.

Agree. To be fair to them, they've only got a small staff for the shittestorms they are in. Probably got staff on 20k a year doing their research and 45k per year making big decisions. And all the time forced to litigate by the likes of Gibson etc.

[Blue and white]

Fast approaching 600 pages of pureshite, hopefully the results of the hearing can't be that much further away.

[HarrowbyOwl]

1 hour ago, Nero said:

Thanks I hadn't read that.

 

VERY IMPORTANT POINT

 

The impact of the point deduction as opposed to just deducting points as per the rules, determined how many points were deducted by the tribunal in the end. 

 

I guess for us that gives us a second potential get out.

 

First we are not guilty obviously,

 

Second we are guilty, but if the impact of a 9 or 12 point deduction would mean relegation (in the middle of Covid19) and if the tribunal believe this is not an appropriate punishment for the rule breach, they will reduce the points deduction. That is clear, no argument in this case. 

Yes, interesting that they use principles of totality and proportionality and take into account the unique context, including league table position, consequences of relegation and the like

[sherlyegg]

20 hours ago, Sheff74 said:

 

So who would that be serving right? The owner, or the supporters who lose the club they have supported all their lives?

 

The reason why there are rules in place is to avoid that very thing happening.

Eh?

What about employees who end up out of work cos the boss was nuts.

The rules are in place as an handicap method. It will not stop a club going bust.

[owls-swfc]

Dad,..Dad,.. Why have you left H. G.Wells book 'The Time Machine' on the floor.. and f**ked off into the garage banging about like mad,,, Dad? 

[darra]

Still, my bet that ours and Derbys verdict will be given at the same time.

[Essix Blue]

2 minutes ago, darra said:

Still, my bet that ours and Derbys verdict will be given at the same time.

There’ll be a major meltdown if Derby’s is announced first 

[BRADDO]

Nearly 600 pages. 

 

Wowzers! 

[Guest paulvcooke]

Barnsley attempting to influence an 'independent' disciplinary commission (Wigan's). How on earth is that allowed?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53583068

Edited July 29, 2020 by paulvcooke
typo