Jump to content

BREAKING NEWS!! EFL -12 Points - Full Written Explanation Thread


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, S W F C said:

I don’t get how we managed to f it up... 

 

if they agreed we could do it, but then changed their mind, what have we done wrong? 

We were basically a year late in actually getting the necessary paperwork completed from my interpretation of what I've read.

 

Again, to reiterate, it seems we tried to propose and arrange the stadium sale in the space of about six working days... despite having months to clock we were going to break P&S without an artificial cash injection like that. 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

re point 1... I think the fact that they were inherently assuming active dishonesty from us and trying to make the whole thing come across as far more serious than it necessary was. The attitude that DC was faking his lack of English in order to make things difficult. Even the commission say it's regretful that they were so intent on seeing quite a serious level of "bad" in how we conducted ourselves.

 

I am not sure, having read the document in full, I would go as far as to say the EFL as an organisation was vindictive. Incompetent in the extreme, yes.

 

However, there as, as the report states, "mutual recriminations by each side involved in the discussions, with allegations of dishonesty, bad faith and deception". In particular our FD being accused of lying (point 118).  Also the EFL accusing DC of using his lack of English to muddy the waters (para 15) and categorically dismissed by the panel: "we do not accept the contention of the EFL that he (DC) gave evidence in a manner "apparently designed to make it difficult to follow or to assess his credibility".

 

So certain individuals at the EFL were certainly not backward in making pretty damning accusations, which suggest this went way beyond a civilised dialogue...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, toooldforthis said:

Having read it, it is clear that Katrien Meire's (our then CEO) evidence, given after leaving the club to become COO of Club Brugge, was both damning and condemning.

i think she comes out of it well.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bigdan2003 said:

Deary me. What an absolute embarrassment the EFL is.

 

B8625F28-EA6C-4773-A228-C881101A857F.jpeg

lol so basically the EFL originally interviewed a guy who clearly has limited English, yet the didn't have the brains to use an interpreter. lol

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

Is that suggesting that the EFL tried to discredit Chansiri by claiming his use of the English language was better than he was portraying? If so, wow, that's some accusation to make and have rejected.

A little bit racist by EFL? 

Edited by striker
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Read the whole verdict now. Its appalling. 

 

Seriously the EFL though.... relying on a hand written note to defame SWFC club officials. Not using their own investigatory powers properly. Applying a different standard to DCFC than SWFC. There actually does seem to be an agenda - which you think is ridiculous - but its there in black and white. 

 

Our problem is governance. Anyone who has worked with owners getting their finger into things they dont know anything about will feel for KM, JP etc! What a nightmare that must be. 

 

One point that shouldn't be missed is at the time of the non ground sale, the points sanctions had not been written by the EFL and they were criticised for this by the tribunal. If it had been known that a 12 pointer was coming our way KM could probably have motivated DC to do things in the correct timeframe.

 

The tribunal seems to say that both sides were wrong to try to get the ground sale concluded after the end of July as the oral contract from July 15th was invalid according to law. That seems to be weird in a case where we are discussing EFL rules and not the law of the land.

 

Who is to blame if both sides come away from the August 3rd meeting with different assumptions about what happened, the ruling body or the club? Wouldn't the ruling body produce minutes as is the case in any contentious meeting - not some scribbles that they find 18 months later and haven't passed on to SWFC? Its a complete failure of governance on their part.

 

Loads of issues for NdM to unpick

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, marcx666 said:

Seems like it dont it

It's certainly a bold accusation to suggest someone with limited grasp of English is deceitful and obstructive on the basis of they are not a natural English speaker. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, toooldforthis said:

 

I think she was correct...but it didn't help us

in a way, but it was never established that there was a "plan" to backdate the Heads of Terms into July. She certainly counselled the Chairman against doing this - "Chairman I only will say that I don't feel comfortable signing a document of a transaction that is backdated".  That was good advice in my view.

 

And the fact KM was seen as a good and reliable witness will I think have helped our case's credibility and reassured the Panel that she was a check and balance on the Chairman who (as ever) needed strong advice from those around him.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, agentwalker said:

lol so basically the EFL originally interviewed a guy who clearly has limited English, yet the didn't have the brains to use an interpreter. lol

There was an interpreter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The EFL have never been to a DC Fans Forum night by the sound of things. They would have seen and heard first hand DC's difficulty in 

answering a straightforward question.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On a very quick read: I think the EFL's conduct was pretty shady. The club was nowhere near methodical and careful enough to ensure that the ground sale applied when they wanted it to - there are clearly management issues within the club that need addressing. I don't expect an appeal to reduce our penalty, but I also don't think it matters if we appeal and fail.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, bigdan2003 said:

Deary me. What an absolute embarrassment the EFL is.

 

B8625F28-EA6C-4773-A228-C881101A857F.jpeg

 

Any legal eagles out there know if this gives DC the opportunity to sue the EFL/individuals for deformation of character?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nero said:

One point that shouldn't be missed is at the time of the non ground sale, the points sanctions had not been written by the EFL and they were criticised for this by the tribunal. If it had been known that a 12 pointer was coming our way KM could probably have motivated DC to do things in the correct timeframe.

 

yes, great point. I noted this too. We had no idea what we might be dealing with at that time.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sham67 said:

Any legal eagles out there know if this gives DC the opportunity to sue the EFL/individuals for deformation of character?

 

Not a legal practitioner but people have been taken to court for what I would suggest are more minor, erm... "saloon bar" grumblings :ph34r:

 

("Defamation" by the way)

  • Like 1
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...