EFL to go in hard on SWFC

[bigrbuk]

2 hours ago, Pieman said:

I’ve had all my energy sapped from me mate. In a nutshell, the Govt allowed all businesses to file their accounts 3 months late, due to the disruption of the pandemic. The EFL took up this option and didn’t file them by the old deadline. 10 league clubs also did the same, inc SWFC. However, the EFL didn’t align their submission date with that of HMRC. So, while they took up the offer to file late, they have placed an embargo on clubs who did the same, deciding not to recognise the pandemic and the need to cut people some slack.

 

Two different sets of rules though isn't it? Rules for clubs being members of EFL are to report by 31st March, rules for government were relaxed during pandemic. One does not affect the other.

[@owlstalk]

3 minutes ago, bigrbuk said:

 

Two different sets of rules though isn't it? Rules for clubs being members of EFL are to report by 31st March, rules for government were relaxed during pandemic. One does not affect the other.

THIS 

[Utah Owl]

3 hours ago, Pieman said:

I’ve had all my energy sapped from me mate. In a nutshell, the Govt allowed all businesses to file their accounts 3 months late, due to the disruption of the pandemic. The EFL took up this option and didn’t file them by the old deadline. 10 league clubs also did the same, inc SWFC. However, the EFL didn’t align their submission date with that of HMRC. So, while they took up the offer to file late, they have placed an embargo on clubs who did the same, deciding not to recognise the pandemic and the need to cut people some slack.

 

48 minutes ago, bigrbuk said:

 

Two different sets of rules though isn't it? Rules for clubs being members of EFL are to report by 31st March, rules for government were relaxed during pandemic. One does not affect the other.

This is why I asked you the question because people keep repeating that the EFL broke its own rules when that is simply not the case.

 

The EFL is not a football club and the rules are for it's member clubs. The filing date of 31st March is so that clubs can satisfy the EFL that they are going concerns with the financial ability to complete the next season to avoid the complications caused by going bust part way through a season as has happened in the past. Given that the penalty this time around due to Covid is a soft embargo on transfers how would that work for the EFL when they aren't a club and don't sign players?

 

Clueless had persistently stuck two fingers up to the rules (and the rest of the football world) and that is why we are being punished.

 

It's just the same in the real world, first offense and it's a slap on the wrists but keep on offending and the punishments get progressively more severe. Eventually you reach a point where the maximum punishment is applied. Hopefully we aren't there yet because in our case the maximum punishment is expulsion from the league.

[Pieman]

Some people think at a macro level, some people are wrapped in the weeds…

[Pieman]

1 hour ago, bigrbuk said:

 

Two different sets of rules though isn't it? Rules for clubs being members of EFL are to report by 31st March, rules for government were relaxed during pandemic. One does not affect the other.

Agreed. 1,999,928 companies are extended sympathy and understanding from an institution that people tell me doesn’t know what it’s doing. 72 companies are not, by an institution which seemingly is exemplary in all it does and completely blameless for anything.

[@owlstalk]

2 minutes ago, Pieman said:

Agreed. 1,999,928 companies are extended sympathy and understanding from an institution that people tell me doesn’t know what it’s doing. 72 companies are not, by an institution which seemingly is exemplary in all it does and completely blameless for anything.

Chansiri is the sole cause of all our problems

[bigrbuk]

2 hours ago, Pieman said:

Agreed. 1,999,928 companies are extended sympathy and understanding from an institution that people tell me doesn’t know what it’s doing. 72 companies are not, by an institution which seemingly is exemplary in all it does and completely blameless for anything.

 

I might a total tool, breaking rules left right and centre, but if you're part of my organisation, have a contract with me to that effect, and then you break said contract, I have the right to go after you.

[Utah Owl]

4 hours ago, Pieman said:

Agreed. 1,999,928 companies are extended sympathy and understanding from an institution that people tell me doesn’t know what it’s doing. 72 companies are not, by an institution which seemingly is exemplary in all it does and completely blameless for anything.

Seriously, why should the EFL cut us of all clubs any slack?

 

We have now been punished something like 4 seasons on the trot for breaking the rules. Quite frankly as serial offenders I'm amazed they haven'y already thrown the book at us and kicked us out of the league. They did it with numerous clubs before (Bury, Macclesfield, Boston Utd, Luton etc. etc.).

 

So far we've been lucky that they've been so patient and we genuinely have no right to complain.

[legendaryswan]

FFP just doesnt fit its purpose, how can you have one set of clubs with a cash injection of 60M and assets to sell that raise the bar and then limit the rest of the division to 39M over 3 seasons?

Its a recipe for a two tier premier league in all but name.

[Utah Owl]

15 minutes ago, legendaryswan said:

FFP just doesnt fit its purpose, how can you have one set of clubs with a cash injection of 60M and assets to sell that raise the bar and then limit the rest of the division to 39M over 3 seasons?

Its a recipe for a two tier premier league in all but name.

I agree with you, but when all is said and done don't forget who made the rules. The clubs did and we were a major part of it, so breaking the rules which we helped set hardly gives us a right to complain does it?

 

As I have said repeatedly (and will continue to do so) until a fully independent regulatory body with statutory powers is put in place to run the game, things will never change for the benefit of the game as a whole. The current system is deliberately designed to benefit a small elite bunch of clubs.

 

We were once part of that elite and didn't hear too many complaints back then!

Edited July 6, 2021 by Utah Owl

[runningaround]

its ironic the pandemic maybe saves us a points whack in league 1, lets hope so

[room0035]

40 minutes ago, legendaryswan said:

FFP just doesnt fit its purpose, how can you have one set of clubs with a cash injection of 60M and assets to sell that raise the bar and then limit the rest of the division to 39M over 3 seasons?

Its a recipe for a two tier premier league in all but name.

FFP and parachute payments are two separate issues.

 

But i do agree for the sake of football below the premier league parachute payments need to go, anything that rewards over spending and failure needs getting rid off.

[Pieman]

48 minutes ago, Utah Owl said:

I agree with you, but when all is said and done don't forget who made the rules. The clubs did and we were a major part of it, so breaking the rules which we helped set hardly gives us a right to complain does it?

 

As I have said repeatedly (and will continue to do so) until a fully independent regulatory body with statutory powers is put in place to run the game, things will never change for the benefit of the game as a whole. The current system is deliberately designed to benefit a small elite bunch of clubs.

 

We were once part of that elite and didn't hear too many complaints back then!

Crikey, you’re making an argument….

 

BOOOOOOOO. 

[Ante's Bubbly]

On 04/07/2021 at 09:32, folger said:

Why does any club have to be governed by the EFL? They've done a horrendous job for the last 15yrs or so. Time to breakaway. 

 

Yeah! 

 

What's the opposite of the Super League? We should be in that, along with all the other EFL rebels.

 

I think it might be called the National League? 

 

 

Seriously though, back when we were a normal law abiding club (pre Coco the clown) and back when we had fans owning shares in the club (pre Mr Madaric) we still had a certain amount of honour and even some respect within the footballing world.

 

We dropped out of the Prem without a penny and became the first club to soldier on under significant debt, without taking the easy option of going into administration.

 

Why did we do that?

 

There may be various different reasons, but, even under some of the disliked and horrible chairmen/owners, we never did take that option and one of the reasons was to avoid letting down suppliers, creditors and shareholders, some of whom subsequently gave up their interests in the club and did so, not in their own best interests, but in the best interests of the club. They did so to make the sale of the club, and its debt, go smoothly. 

 

This was never corrected by Mandaric, by which I mean, these people were never given back any of what they gave up, and C has never even acknowledged the fact that these people ever existed. The club was in need of financial assistance back when shares were first sold and I believe that, if C needs financial assistance now he should return some, if not all of those shares and then allow fans to buy shares again. I have never owned shares in the club, but if shares were made available surely we could raise a large enogh sum to own 50% or thereabouts? 

 

If shares were say £2,500 and the club was valued somewhere between what C paid for it and his alleged valuation, I reckon that there are enough fans with the means to make a serious offer, but it would have to be with a strong say in what the club does and help in putting somebody in place to control the day to day running of the club and it's finances.  

 

OK, C may never agree to such an idea, but I think it should be put to him and he should then at least explain why such a deal would not be acceptable to him. In plain English, so that every single fan can understand exactly what he has planned for the club and what he has planned for himself. Then we can make a proper judgement on his intentions and take the right stance in how to deal with him in the future. 

 

We owe it to the club that we love to know what is being planned by C and by the EFL, because up to now hasn't C shown that he cannot be trusted with our club's best interests?

[N0rtherner]

On 05/07/2021 at 19:47, Utah Owl said:

Think of it this way.

 

You got done for speeding two years ago, 60 in a 30 limit. You were fined say 200 quid for it.

 

Last year you did the same and got fined 500 quid and lost your license for 3 months.

 

Last week you did the same thing and you want to go before the beak and say "I've already been punished for this!"

 

If I'm honest I don't think it will wash!

 

Absolutely, I just wasn't aware we'd been making new offenses yet... there's been all these stories of unpaid wages, yet the player group have all been there in pre-season camp, all smiles, etc... but how much of these new stories that were grounds for new cases from EFL against us, I wasn't aware, so I thought they came after us for the same we'd already been penalised for last season - and at the same dropped appealing against Derby.

[RichSheffWeds]

On 04/07/2021 at 08:59, @owlstalk said:

So we have paid the players in full and within FFP with accounts published. Embargo lifted. 

 

I presume we are out of the woods for now with the EFL  ? 
 

[@owlstalk]

1 hour ago, RichSheffWeds said:

So we have paid the players in full and within FFP with accounts published. Embargo lifted. 

 

I presume we are out of the woods for now with the EFL  ? 
 

Maybe as a result of the EFL going in hard

Or maybe we're not out the woods yet

Either way it's a VERY positive week this week - we should all be a lot more relieved than we were this time last week

[nbupperthongowl]

5 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

Maybe as a result of the EFL going in hard

Or maybe we're not out the woods yet

Either way it's a VERY positive week this week - we should all be a lot more relieved than we were this time last week

That was my thought....it has forced the issue to be resolved, which hopefully means DM can now start to trade and build a team

[Harrysgame]

22 minutes ago, nbupperthongowl said:

That was my thought....it has forced the issue to be resolved, which hopefully means DM can now start to trade and build a team

Agree. We can keep harping on about the past or move forward. Yes we have been serial offenders, but we need a fresh start. This week is a good start, just got to keep it up and DC needs to start building a few bridges with the EFL and us fans. 

 

 

[TommyCraig]

Nixon seems to be the man in the know usually but was well off regarding Wednesday with this tweet. 

Well, according to the EFL's embargo list that is.