S25OWL Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 2 minutes ago, bladeshater said: If we are confident on our right to appeal and get a fair hearing why shouldn't we appeal Nothing to lose from what I see - can't impose any more than 12 as that's the rule - should have been applied 2018/19 and EFL are trying to set the rules based on the clubs position - it's also confusing as if derby overstated value of stadium and still broke FFP they have to apply same rules to them as season has finished ...... if they don't wow ... this opens a MASSIVE can of worms .... apply to this season and not us ... Charlton will then go for EFL too ... apply both to 2018/19 as it should be - then there is no issue .... that's what would have happened - like the report says .... neither team has gained any advantage (i.e. promotion to PL) from the overspending .... so I think the best thing is .... cancel all points deductions and parachute payments - then you might have a level playing field ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Grandad Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 I would imagine there will be legal contestation from other clubs too having read the document Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S36 OWL Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 26 minutes ago, TheEnchanter said: That's probably why she left. Doesn't take advice from anyone. Not quite true mate, he takes his advice from Paxo. Wonder what Stuffing boys advice was on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owlsend Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 2 hours ago, @owlstalk said: This is more uncertainty for Monk and his team hanging over them If we appeal and have the hope that we are going to get the deduction reduced and it doesn't happen that's another big hammer blow Not saying DC shouldn't appeal by the way - he absolutely should But it's just more uncertainty and clouds hanging over us this new fresh season which isn't ideal I agree about the uncertainty But these are professional players they should continue with there job and get as many points as we can because if the EFL do you decide that we are still guilty . we have already reached the maximum charge of 12 points as they have stated so the worst scenario would be fine or even the chairman getting banned from Dealing with the EFL And the chances of that is very unlikely . The EFL like to tread very carefully they’ve already accused Mr c which originates from Thailand that he is pretending not to understand as much as You can saying he’s lying about the language barrier they are Walking the Thinline racism can easily be brought into this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyndon Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 1 hour ago, McRightSide said: Then you missed the point. Not at all. They wanted to take points off Derby next season and us this season just finished so they were treating us differently. Clear as day. So what was your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrysgame Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 21 minutes ago, Swifty75 said: I have just read through the documents on the EFL website, and for me their is a startling admittance of a desire for them to relegate us contained within it. It says: Clearly they are not charging Derby this season because the maximum 12 point deduction would not relegate them. Does this then read they did not charge us in the 1819 season as it would not relegate us. I think it clearly does. It would seem that the EFL do not want to adhere to their own rules when it does not relegate the club charged. It says the club should be charged and penalties imposed in the subsequent season and that a 12 point deduction is the maximum. It does not say the EFL can choose when to impose that sanction so as it ends in relegation for that team. It is a complete mess. What is the point in a body writing rules and then not sticking to 'their' rules as it does not give the outcome they would like. They should have written the rule to say 'a breach of the profit and sustainability rule will result in automatic relegation in the subsequent season'. Startling statement that. Thought it was their job to give the penalty of up to 12 points regardless of the league position of the club in the correct timeframe. I can't see why anyone would want to be part of any membership organistion that would want to cause as much damage as possible to members, not a club I would want to be part of? Looks ..very murky this. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westfield Owl Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 Anyone else feeling totally jaded by this whole debacle? The club are a circus. DC needs to appoint a CEO, DoF etc asap. As he’s totally out of his depth. The EFL need to sort out their P&S rulings and stop making it up as they go along. A total shambles all round, on both sides. 4 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrysgame Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 1 hour ago, The Horse said: Glad this is going to drag on until 'autumn'. Wouldn't feel right starting the new season and playing games without legal proceedings hanging over our heads and not knowing where we stand. This feels much more like the norm. I dont think this will impact players. This is becoming bigger than just swfc, now. Glad we have a chairman who is standing up for not just us; but all clubs who might find that someone wants to make an example out of them. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swifty75 Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 The EFL want to impose the sanctions, but they want to impose the sanctions when it has the biggest detrimental effect on the club in question. Surely the EFL would want the clubs within the league and under their guidance to be as successful as possible???? One way or another they have managed to damage, or indeed destroy, Bury, Bolton, Macclesfield and Wigan. If the premier league acted in this way then it would be back page news and there would be an outcry. Anything below the premier league nobody is really bothered, especially for little clubs like Macclesfield. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
33 Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 2 hours ago, alanharper said: If we win an appeal, the EFL will get the points taken off again by bringing Neil Swarbrick out of retirement and having him ref all our games. Also Darren Deadman 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N0rtherner Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 3 hours ago, toooldforthis said: We should get off with this if the facts are true but it leaves the back door open for Charlton to make a legal challenge now. I don't know about Charlton's own ongoing situation with the accepted transfer of ownership, but seeing as they've got their own worries, maybe they will remain quiet for the time being. Even if they won a legal challenge over this, they could then be in trouble over the ownership situation.. I don't know if that is something the EFL can then penalise with a points deduction too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldishowl Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 So if Derby get found guilty which season do we expect their points deduction to be in? Bear in mind they have somebody on the EFL board who probably keeps Parry supplied with chocolate bourbons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animis Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 2 minutes ago, oldishowl said: So if Derby get found guilty which season do we expect their points deduction to be in? Bear in mind they have somebody on the EFL board who probably keeps Parry supplied with chocolate bourbons. interesting question - Derby would clearly want a 12 point deduction in the season just finished, now they've failed with the play off push. However, SWFC would clearly like their deduction in 20/21 like us - we will both start on -12, and they can keep us company. Maybe we'll sue the EFL if this doesn't happen... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swifty75 Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 15 minutes ago, Animis said: interesting question - Derby would clearly want a 12 point deduction in the season just finished, now they've failed with the play off push. However, SWFC would clearly like their deduction in 20/21 like us - we will both start on -12, and they can keep us company. Maybe we'll sue the EFL if this doesn't happen... But I think we should both have had a deduction in 1819, if we were found to be guilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daizan10 Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 3 hours ago, toooldforthis said: The appeal is legally sound...but the EFL We should get off with this if the facts are true but it leaves the back door open for Charlton to make a legal challenge now. I'm please we are doing this and fully back the club and DC Even if Charlton do that there is no way it will impact us. They might win some compensation off the efl, but its too late in the day for relegating a team or not, by the time its sorted the season will be underway and cant start moving teams after that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daizan10 Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 3 hours ago, S36 OWL said: The fact we breached FFP isn't in question. So we can only be appealing the number of pts deducted surely.? We are arguing they cleared the stadium sale being backdated, meaning we wouldnt have breached it at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beswetherick Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 12 minutes ago, Swifty75 said: But I think we should both have had a deduction in 1819, if we were found to be guilty. Not sure the EFL would go for that... we weren’t formed until 48 years later 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelcityowlsfan Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 Funny how the EFL can go hell for leather in trying to do us but allow an owner to purchase Wigan with the sole intention of putting them in admin. But they are there to protect the 72... I mean 71 clubs. They must be change or this will only get worse for clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonestown83 Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 7 minutes ago, Daizan10 said: We are arguing they cleared the stadium sale being backdated, meaning we wouldnt have breached it at all. And it appears their response to this is we didn’t look at it properly because were off on our jollies or have I misunderstood that ? if you used that defence in any court in the land you’d be laughed out 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Jimbob1867 Posted August 17, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted August 17, 2020 My two penneth. I am a lawyer for what it's worth. Some good points made on this thread about the EFL eg failing to investigate Charge 2 properly, accusing Chansiri of faking how bad his English is, trying to pick when to deduct points so as to relegate us etc. I won't comment on these further. HOWEVER - what seems clear to me is what an utter poo show things are in terms of how the club is run. I also don't think they have a leg to stand on with respect to an appeal. We brought this on ourselves and it seems to have been totally avoidable if we'd had competent people dealing with this. The club keeps saying they proceeded because they had EFL and auditor sign off. However: (i) the EFL basically said they would sign off if there was a binding contract before 31 July with sufficiently certain terms (particularly as to price) - and it turns out there wasn't; and (ii) the auditors included an Instructed Assumption that the heads of terms was a binding contract dated 15 July - which, it turns out it wasn't. In fact it seems the heads of terms, while binding, had insufficient certainty as to price, and was not entered into before 31 July, but was entered into on 15 August and backdated to 15 July. On that basis I don't think the EFL has done an about turn in relation to what they initially said would be acceptable, which seems to be the crux of our defence (although you can certainly question their motivation for only looking at this months and months later). It's beyond all comprehension why the club thought a backdated contract would be acceptable from a legal point of view. Apparently the club didn't take any decent legal advice on how to deal with this. We should have been on top of this well before the deadline and not be relying in August on an email exchange with the EFL to say this was all ok. We seem to have got away with charge 2 partly because the EFL didn't investigate properly at the time and partly because of our own incompetence ie it seems the heads of terms was backdated but because in emails and meetings after 15 July we made clear there wasn't a binding agreement (why would you do that if you were trying to demonstrate everything had been signed off before 31 July?!) then we can't be guilty of having deliberately misled the EFL. If we'd just backdated the heads of terms and stuck to the script throughout that it had been signed on 15 July, and not on 15 August as seems to be the case, I think we might have fallen foul of charge 2 as well. There don't appear to be any realistic grounds for a reduction in the points deducted, only that we be found not guilty, which doesn't seem at all likely. We should just accept this and move on and PLEASE, DC, appoint some competent people to run the club. 5 2 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now