Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The rules were there at the start for all to see. If DC hadn't dug his heels in back in November claiming he had proof blah blah blah then we may have got 6 or 9 points and it would have finished sooner and been applied this season.
 

Whatever happens next season in terms of the league position we finish can ultimately be laid at the door of one person alone. But wait, he was found not guilty of wrongdoing by an disciplinary hearing and therefore will feel he’s done nothing wrong. It beggars belief, really it does.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Athelwulf said:

 

It's always been my understanding that the money comes from his family, although where/how they "acquire" it I can't say.

 

But it can be considered an internal debt, if indeed it is one, which is the salient point.

 

As long as the family unit is prepared to tolerate the financial circumstances, which they are, then I see no problem.

 

Borrowing money from outside of that unit is, of course, a different matter altogether.

 

I guess it's like comparing Wednesday and United in the pre-Mandaric/McCabe era.

 

Wednesday's debts were largely external, to people outside the club, whereas United debts were internal and to McCabe.

I think that’s the ‘problem’ then. Although internal as you say, the money is still debt owed, so the P&S rules were brought in (in part) to stop clubs going bust or becoming impossible to sell in to reputable buyers (e.g. Portsmouth in the past).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, metaframe said:

You’re missing the point most of you.  
 

One financially affects Chansiri, the other stiffs the local and national economy and the tax payer. 
 

I don’t really get the “haha we deserve it” nonsense — pig infiltration warning. 
 

 

Rules are rules. There’s no point comparing as you can do that for any rules set in place. 
 

All you can do is obey them 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, nethertonowl said:

I agree, and that why I think it will be reduced to six.on appeal. The other badly runs clubs Wigan and Charlton will then have to get back in their boxes and life will go on.

 

Ie SWFC being ruined by a stubborn bloke who has completely misplaced idea that he knows how to run a football club.

It's a good point, you would think going into admin should incur automatic relegation as stuffing suppliers etc for maybe millions is about as bad as it gets.

What we seem to have done should in no way be the same punishment  think it will be reduced to 6 or maybe suspend so many points. In reality the whole EFL process is a shambles. Wouldn't be surprised if their will be discussions amongst the "big clubs" in the champ and may be lg1 about some challenge to the current running of the league.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, 4evaowl said:

I think that’s the ‘problem’ then. Although internal as you say, the money is still debt owed, so the P&S rules were brought in (in part) to stop clubs going bust or becoming impossible to sell in to reputable buyers (e.g. Portsmouth in the past).

 

 

 

Fair points, but I can't say that it's a debt.

 

I mean, it may well be gifted money, and even if it isn't they'll say it's a gift.

 

And Chansiri will doubtless pose the question, "what happens to the parachute clubs if they don't go back up before the parachute payments cease?"

 

How is that situation sustainable?

 

Obviously it isn't, so then you have iniquity.

 

If we compare Wednesday now to Wednesday pre-Mandaric, then there clearly is a difference with regard to debt.

 

Pre-Mandaric, the EFL rules definitely hold water.

 

If we'd borrowed hand over fist then in an attempt to get promoted, without collateral, then I think that the rules apply.

 

But we're in a different place now, and, as Samuel says, the EFL are punishing ambition.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Harrysgame said:

It's a good point, you would think going into admin should incur automatic relegation as stuffing suppliers etc for maybe millions is about as bad as it gets.

What we seem to have done should in no way be the same punishment  think it will be reduced to 6 or maybe suspend so many points. In reality the whole EFL process is a shambles. Wouldn't be surprised if their will be discussions amongst the "big clubs" in the champ and may be lg1 about some challenge to the current running of the league.

Spot on.

 

Which is why the more Charlton and co. kick off, the better it is for us.

 

The Blades have been outrageously lucky with Wilder, and Leeds fell back on Don Revie to land Bielsa, but the normal route out of this division is financial.

 

While ever the parachute clubs hold such a financial advantage, clubs will always try to circumvent the rules.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Athelwulf said:

 

Fair points, but I can't say that it's a debt.

 

I mean, it may well be gifted money, and even if it isn't they'll say it's a gift.

 

And Chansiri will doubtless pose the question, "what happens to the parachute clubs if they don't go back up before the parachute payments cease?"

 

How is that situation sustainable?

 

Obviously it isn't, so then you have iniquity.

 

If we compare Wednesday now to Wednesday pre-Mandaric, then there clearly is a difference with regard to debt.

 

Pre-Mandaric, the EFL rules definitely hold water.

 

If we'd borrowed hand over fist then in an attempt to get promoted, without collateral, then I think that the rules apply.

 

But we're in a different place now, and, as Samuel says, the EFL are punishing ambition.

I wish I knew more about accounts!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Athelwulf said:

This law is pants because there is a difference between, say, Barnsley borrowing money hand over fist to try to win the league, and a club like ours which has rich backers prepared to gift money to get us up.

 

The point is, we’ve got richer backers than Wensdeh, and no doubt they’d be willing to speculate to accumulate, but it’s against EFL rules, it’s seen as an unfair advantage, so they haven’t spent money the club hasn’t generated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, metaframe said:

Go into Administration - stuff over suppliers, government, local people and staff = 12 points 

 

breach p&s for 1 year on a technicality around ground sale, no actual financial harm done to nation or locality = 12 points 

 

 

it’s not right. 

Another points deduction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Athelwulf said:

Spot on.

 

Which is why the more Charlton and co. kick off, the better it is for us.

 

The Blades have been outrageously lucky with Wilder, and Leeds fell back on Don Revie to land Bielsa, but the normal route out of this division is financial.

 

While ever the parachute clubs hold such a financial advantage, clubs will always try to circumvent the rules.

It's as if the EFL and PL are trying to ensure their is an advantage to PL clubs over  Champ clubs who haven't been in the PL recently.

How did the EFL ever agree that it ok to let some clubs spend more to give them an unfair advantage.

Has to be an even field if not just let all clubs spend what they have.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 4evaowl said:

I wish I knew more about accounts!

So does Chansiri.

:Chansiri:

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 4evaowl said:

I wish I knew more about accounts!

 

7 minutes ago, Roscoe P. Coltrane said:

So does Chansiri.

:Chansiri:

Hes aware of many accounts on here .......

269285660_tenor(14).gif.17fc9888b31aa3dfd01492dd3ca9dc67.gif

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/08/2020 at 10:42, Athelwulf said:

This law is pants because there is a difference between, say, Barnsley borrowing money hand over fist to try to win the league, a

Except, Barnsley have richer owners than us, and the rest of the teams in the champ...and most of the prem.

 

Apart from that i agree.

lol

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Bournemouth should start next season -9 given that they are back in the EFL having totally operated outside of FFP the season they got promoted to the Prem.
Got a reduced £4.5m fine instead iirc - which given the money in the Prem was the equivalent of a slapped arse!

Edited by GMOwl72
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/08/2020 at 07:47, james o connor said:

What’s not right is justify than half wit ‘running’ our club . Got what we deserved and it’s just the tip of the iceberg where this joker is concerned 

Thread posted 7.43.

 

J O C with predictable DC bashing @ 7.47.

 

Only surprise is that he wasted 4 minutes.

 

🤣🤣

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point didn’t bring the owner into it — just the punishments are not aligned 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...