Can we or will we appeal?

[DuncOwl]

12 hours ago, 0wl18 said:

I’d rather we took responsibility for our incompetency and move forward. 

Do you? Rather than use our democratic right to appeal a judgement, you'd rather just forget that so you can feel righteous? 

[theowlsman]

12 hours ago, Maxine said:

Surely we are appealing. 

 

I like to think so, I have a lovely smile

[SiJ]

Those who want us relegated to league one need to give their head a wobble.

 

Financially, it is a lot better to be in the Championship with minus 12 than cut adrift in League One.

 

With the impact of Covid, there's a chance that might not be much of a league one/two left. A large percentage of clubs will struggle to survive if they cant get fans into the ground. There's no massive TV deal to fall back on.

[SiJ]

And, if we believe there's a legitimate case for challenging the result, then we should do so.

 

[Guest wilyfox]

I'm sure there will be an appeal. EFL will come under pressure to appeal from other clubs challenging our verdict. We'll have to reciprocate to defend our interests and their protest. 

[Morepork]

I don’t see us going to appeal. 
 

Since matches restarted we’ve played like we already knew we were safe.
 

This whole final chapter feels contrived. I suspect the outcome was not only known to us but it formed part of a compromise.

Edited August 1, 2020 by Morepork

[theowlsman]

Can we appeal?

 

What about, Chansiri passing the fit for ownership test?

 

If so, yes we should.

[Maxine]

8 minutes ago, theowlsman said:

 

I like to think so, I have a lovely smile

I'm sure you do

[daveyboy66]

It doesn't matter -9 or-12 We've got to come back against adversity...Monk, The players and US. let's see who's up for the fight?

 

[slinger208b]

Probably. Hope not...

[HarrowbyOwl]

11 hours ago, TheEnchanter said:

 

The wording from the statement says 'found guilty based on the fact the club should not have included profits from the sale of Hillsborough stadium'. Which explains a bigger deduction in comparison to Brum last year. 

 

 

Nope. The points reflect the amount that we exceeded the 39m limit. Anything over 15m (I.e. aggregate losses of 54m + over the 3 year period) attracts the maximum deduction of 12 points. Smaller aggregate losses are punished on a sliding scale as set out in the sanctioning guidelines that all the clubs are aware of.

[torryowl]

so how do we stand on FFP now ?........do we start with a clean slate or we still in the sticky stuff for the foreseeable .......

[0wl18]

1 hour ago, DuncOwl said:

Do you? Rather than use our democratic right to appeal a judgement, you'd rather just forget that so you can feel righteous? 

No I’d rather we accepted the fact that we quite clearly broke the rules, learn from it and formulate a plan going forwards.

 

The complete and utter lack of planning has back fired. We had to push through a ground sale and, back date it to try and comply with rules which were around when our current chairman took over. 
 

However you like to dress it up, this punishment was coming one way or another. We should accept it and, work to make sure it never happens again.

[Guest]

13 hours ago, NeonLeon said:

We can appeal but, reading the EFL statement about the deduction relating to the dates not being correct, it seems a completely pointless exercise.

 

Without the ground sale we overshot FFP massively and -12 is the correct punishment. They’d have to effectively break the rule to decrease, or even increase, the points deduction.

 

Birmingham overshot by comparable amounts, losing more in one season than we did in 2017-18 without the stadium sale. They also signed players when under an embargo yet their punishment was -9 points. 

[sherlyegg]

8 minutes ago, 0wl18 said:

1 hour ago, DuncOwl said:

 

No I’d rather we accepted the fact that we quite clearly broke the rules

Well you ought have told the panel, could have had it done and dusted in 10mins, instead it took em 100yrs to decide

[Guest]

13 hours ago, S36 OWL said:

 

We have been found guilty of selling the stadium and backdating it to the previous years accounts to try and avoid breaching FFP.  

 

But the points deduction, as per the EFL statement https://www.efl.com/news/2020/july/efl-statement-sheffield-wednesday-verdict/ - is for breaking P&S rules in the 3 season to 2017-18. This obviously is due to the stadium sale being attributed to the wrong period but we were found not guilty of deliberately breaching the duty of acting in good faith.

 

We have received a bigger points deduction than Birmingham who lost very similar amounts over 3 seasons and they also pursued signing players for a fee in a period in which they were under an embargo.

 

Yes we are guilty, but are we guilty to a penalty greater than what Birmingham received?

[shez owl]

6 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

But the points deduction, as per the EFL statement https://www.efl.com/news/2020/july/efl-statement-sheffield-wednesday-verdict/ - is for breaking P&S rules in the 3 season to 2017-18. This obviously is due to the stadium sale being attributed to the wrong period but we were found not guilty of deliberately breaching the duty of acting in good faith.

 

We have received a bigger points deduction than Birmingham who lost very similar amounts over 3 seasons and they also pursued signing players for a fee in a period in which they were under an embargo.

 

Yes we are guilty, but are we guilty to a penalty greater than what Birmingham received?

Yep there has to be consistency or it’s just a farce 

As a fan base this is what we should be angry about. I can accept being punished but I can’t accept being treated differently to others 

[Guest]

13 hours ago, NeonLeon said:

If you want to know why Birmingham got 9 and not 12 read the last few pages of this...

 

https://www.efl.com/contentassets/c79763f8e2174f4fb87200a371abf5fa/190322---efl-v-bcfc---decision---final.pdf 

 

It’s not as straightforward as people are making out. It could also be the case that our deduction follows the same additions and subtractions there’s did before it was settled at 9.

 

.

 

I guess we will have to wait until a similar report is released on our case to run any comparisons but point 36 of the mitigating factors shows Birmingham were awarded an additional 3 points for a serious breach, detailing the fact they continued to spend money on players, wages and managers despite the fact they were clearly heading for a breach.

I would imagine we could argue we were moving towards reducing the wage bill and had stopped signing players for fees on big salaries during the final year of our breach but if Jos was paid more than Carlos, as Chansiri suggested, then that wont help.

 

 

 

Edited August 1, 2020 by Guest

[jomaco]

14 hours ago, shez owl said:

That’s fair enough, the key point is the bit that’s says we’ve failed 3 year p&s so deducted points.

The sub plot here in this statement is that on face the panel has disallowed it from the accounts but the auditors and hmrc didn’t 

It doesn't add up, if it was allowed then that's that, it seems it was or we would have been done for trying to mislead the EFL.

I don't see how the EFL can then turn around and say sorry you have to move the sale to the next year after all and so you now broke FFP.

 

Until we see the details, to me the only conclusion based on the statement is that there should no points deduction and EFL has to accept their previous lack of oversight.

[jomaco]

1 hour ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

I guess we will have to wait until a similar report is released on our case to run any comparisons but point 36 of the mitigating factors shows Birmingham were awarded an additional 3 points for a serious breach, detailing the fact they continued to spend money on players, wages and managers despite the fact they were clearly heading for a breach.

I would imagine we could argue we were moving towards reducing the wage bill and had stopped signing players for fees on big salaries during the final year of our breach but if Jos was paid more than Carlos, as Chansiri suggested, then that wont help.

 

 

 

Obviously I'd rather we didn't break FFP in the first place, and sold a few players etc. but it seemed we were doing the right things and moving to a new strategy. Then Parry comes in and it all goes to pieces by the looks of it.