Jump to content

Recommended Posts

For me, and I am not a legal expert, but the best chance of success is in that at the time of the breach, the penalty for the breach wasn't known to us. The IDP Report mentions this, as the club (Redgate, I believe) are said to have been in dialogue with the EFL at the time as to what the potential penalties were. Could there be an argument that,

  • Had we known at the time what penalty awaited us, more aggressive strides could have been taken in order to either comply with the three-year loss rules, or at least lessen the impact and amount by which the club breached the losses. Example being had we known the club needed to raise, say, £5M (random figure for sake of argument) to lessen the penalty from -12 to -9, then perhaps an extra player could have been moved off of the books. 
  • The club have fallen foul of a sliding scale that, at the time, wasn't in place, and could it be argued as unfair to apply a scale that wasn't in place at the time we breached the limits?

Of course, the above could all be irrelevant and meaningless. But that's why I'm not charging £600 p/hr, I guess.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Has Gibson or the dingle gimp commented about our appeal yet?  I think we need to stay in our boxes until scribble hair and dribble n.o.nce say the EFL can let us out.

Edited by The_Limit_Owl
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be surprised if the points deduction is overturned in any form, but I think there are valid reasons we could apply to the appeal. (not disputing we f**led up reyt royally, and did indeed backdate the hillsborough sale wrongly) but I'd argue:

1. The delay in responsiveness (hols, no formal discussions noted, charges not clarified etc) and change in stance of the EFL didn't give us the opportunity to rectify the deficit through player sales. 

2. We played ball through the process and constantly adhered to the soft embargoes. 

3. The charge was delayed to manufacture a best possible scenario by the new EFL, against their own rules. 

4. The penalty applied didn't exist at the time of infraction. Based on previous cases, fines were the standard practice, based on precedent. We could argue we prepared for that eventuality. This didn't change until the Birmingham case after this and the EFL never brought up the possibility of a change to enable us to react accordingly and applying a charge that didn't exist could be unlawful. 

 

I would be appealing to either have the deduction backdated the correct time period or changed to a fine. Or at the very worst have some points suspended/changed to a fine. 

 

If the panel agree with the original panel, on the fact the EFL deliberately delayed the stance/actions, I'd also sue them for not adhering to their own rules and that it clearly shows a vendetta in trying to use us as an example. 

 

As I said, I don't think we'll succeed in an appeal, but I think we are within our rights to ask further questions based on the original findings and I think we'd have a case we could take against the EFL.   We are in no way innocent or not culpable for our actions, but you have to adhere to the rules and that doesn't just apply to us, but the governing body too. Look at the Man City case, as uefa? Didn't adhere to their own time rules, the original charges can't be applied. (different charges etc, but there is now a stance that can be referred too). 

 

I do now think not having the appeal heard for a while could be an incentive as I think the team are currently using that mentality and channeling it right, so it could work to our advantage (if there is a positive outcome) not having it until Jan transfer window. Give us renewed motivation for the 2nd half of the season, just so Barnsley can get relegated and try to appeal lol. OK Maybe is carlsberg did appeals haha. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll take the 12 points providing the EFL implement the same level of firmness against all the clubs who will inevitably fall foul of FFP over the next 2 year. 

 

Problem is, the EFL will cave in to the COVID-related mitigating reasons and essentially pause/suspend the 'rules' for 12/18 months.

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, splan80 said:

is overturned

 

42 minutes ago, splan80 said:

I would be surprised if the points deduction is overturned in any form, but I think there are valid reasons we could apply to the appeal. (not disputing we f**led up reyt royally, and did indeed backdate the hillsborough sale wrongly) but I'd argue:

1. The delay in responsiveness (hols, no formal discussions noted, charges not clarified etc) and change in stance of the EFL didn't give us the opportunity to rectify the deficit through player sales. 

2. We played ball through the process and constantly adhered to the soft embargoes. 

3. The charge was delayed to manufacture a best possible scenario by the new EFL, against their own rules. 

4. The penalty applied didn't exist at the time of infraction. Based on previous cases, fines were the standard practice, based on precedent. We could argue we prepared for that eventuality. This didn't change until the Birmingham case after this and the EFL never brought up the possibility of a change to enable us to react accordingly and applying a charge that didn't exist could be unlawful. 

 

I would be appealing to either have the deduction backdated the correct time period or changed to a fine. Or at the very worst have some points suspended/changed to a fine. 

 

If the panel agree with the original panel, on the fact the EFL deliberately delayed the stance/actions, I'd also sue them for not adhering to their own rules and that it clearly shows a vendetta in trying to use us as an example. 

 

As I said, I don't think we'll succeed in an appeal, but I think we are within our rights to ask further questions based on the original findings and I think we'd have a case we could take against the EFL.   We are in no way innocent or not culpable for our actions, but you have to adhere to the rules and that doesn't just apply to us, but the governing body too. Look at the Man City case, as uefa? Didn't adhere to their own time rules, the original charges can't be applied. (different charges etc, but there is now a stance that can be referred too). 

 

I do now think not having the appeal heard for a while could be an incentive as I think the team are currently using that mentality and channeling it right, so it could work to our advantage (if there is a positive outcome) not having it until Jan transfer window. Give us renewed motivation for the 2nd half of the season, just so Barnsley can get relegated and try to appeal lol. OK Maybe is carlsberg did appeals haha. 

How can you say it won’t be overturned and then give several excellent reasons why it should be? They have applied post dated changes, advised us incorrectly on how to get around it, and delayed the proccess for around ten months for no apparent reason. Although my guess is that ten months was due it being accepted and then a change of personnel at the EFL deciding it shouldn’t have been. Had the EFL done it’s job properly they could have applied the punishment in the time frame set in their own rules. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no understanding about this having not read the case files.. but my understanding is we should have been punished 14 months ago and the punishment at the time was only a charge or was it 9 points?

 

Either way if we can get it down to 9 points on appeal that would be huge as we’d only be 5 points off safety now which is achievable with 44 games to go 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, McRightSide said:


Read the summary report from the first case.

 

We’re either either guilty of the -12 point penalty or we’re not. That’s the only discussion. Not the extent to which we’re guilty (eg how much over the limit we were)

 

And there’s statements in there from our own auditor saying if they had more info they wouldn’t have signed it off.

The defence is procedural. The EFL should have brought the case in the season that the alleged transgression occured and applied any punishment in that season. This because it is that seasons competition that would have been compromised. We are now talking about comprising a competition two years later.

 

Also bear in mind that during the 18/19 season there were no published penalties, it seems obtuse to apply punishments that were not part of the rules at that time. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Royal_D said:


Based on ? 
 

I wouldn’t be surprised to see 2 or 3 knocked off 


I understand the appeal process is more like a Judicial Review. So it’s less about whether another panel agrees with the thought process, rather have the correct processes been adhered to.

 

I would guess our case is that the EFL should’ve charged and deducted points two seasons ago as noted in the findings. Instead they waited and in accusing SWFC of failing to accord with rules they didn’t do so themselves.

 

As the deduction cannot be realistically retrofitted you’d think that if we were successful the whole case would have to go back to the beginning or be declared null. But what are the chances of that? It seems low to me.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, brian joicey said:

BUT the penalty should have been applied to the correct season not held over in order to create as much damage as possible! therefore our appeal should centre on it being back dated to the correct period and that table amended to read “ * minus 12 points “ 

you never know the panel might look kindly on us ....

 maybe 🙏

 

Do this and just repay the extra money we won with the 12 points.

Win for us as it clears the -12 points

Face saving 'fine' from us to the efl.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mark1948 said:

The defence is procedural. The EFL should have brought the case in the season that the alleged transgression occured and applied any punishment in that season. This because it is that seasons competition that would have been compromised. We are now talking about comprising a competition two years later.

 

Also bear in mind that during the 18/19 season there were no published penalties, it seems obtuse to apply punishments that were not part of the rules at that time. 


That argument is negated by precedence with Birmingham

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

 

How can you say it won’t be overturned and then give several excellent reasons why it should be? They have applied post dated changes, advised us incorrectly on how to get around it, and delayed the proccess for around ten months for no apparent reason. Although my guess is that ten months was due it being accepted and then a change of personnel at the EFL deciding it shouldn’t have been. Had the EFL done it’s job properly they could have applied the punishment in the time frame set in their own rules. 

Cos I don't think it will be overturned, regardless of the reasons I think we can and should raise. (hence the point of my post) Just because I feel we have reasons to appeal does not means it would/stands a chance to be overturned.... I would have thought those reasons I stated should really  should have already been raised in the initial hearing as many were pertinent and would have helped our initial case too. If they weren't, that would seem niave to me. So maybe some were dismissed anyway. Who knows. 

I just realistically believe the chances of us overturning the decision are minimal to none. But we definitely deserve the right to respond with valid issues and have them heard/explained. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not counting the points deduction. If the 12 points makes a massive difference to my end of season table then I will take it to the human rights court.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, splan80 said:

Cos I don't think it will be overturned, regardless of the reasons I think we can and should raise. (hence the point of my post) Just because I feel we have reasons to appeal does not means it would/stands a chance to be overturned.... I would have thought those reasons I stated should really  should have already been raised in the initial hearing as many were pertinent and would have helped our initial case too. If they weren't, that would seem niave to me. So maybe some were dismissed anyway. Who knows. 

I just realistically believe the chances of us overturning the decision are minimal to none. But we definitely deserve the right to respond with valid issues and have them heard/explained. 

I believe it’s costing us 500,000 to appeal, are we doing that for fun or are we doing that because we know we have a genuine chance of overturning the sentence !!  UTO 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It should be live on TV...Wiv crowd noise..

"I put it to you"...then you get "OOeer Matron" in the background....

All the "oohs and "ahhs" as the arguments go this way and that..Then in  the final second as the judge hold the Gavel above his head...

"Nicky" "the Mark" Di Markio...Whips it out!!...(OOOOeer Matron)..The Email from the EFL giving us Permission to sell the ground!!!

The crowd erupts...fat unshirted Owls fans pour onto the pi...into the..err...out the the umm...wotsit!

The judge is held aloft..Delphjons in tears...Tango pops in from the court next door where he's appearing....Mr Farrel is heartbroken...screaming for a retrial, but his shouts go unheard as the Old Bailey rocks to "We fought the law and the law..err lost"..Fireworks, Women sobbing into their pinnies...

Gibson goes mentalist like that bloke in 12 Angry men....(where he breaks down after Henry Fonda tells...Ah..watch the f.ookin' film)

Merson reports it live on Soccer Saturday as Stelling goes over live to the Old bailey

"ahh the words were right long Jeff, then some other words that I couldn't quite catch, then something someone told me was an "Adjective",,,an ADJECTIVE!! Jeff!!!!

"Thanks Merse...So Wednesday are 12 points clear with 3 games left"

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...