RamNut Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 18 hours ago, Tamworthram said: I think wherever you heard that rumour/suggestion from you should cross off you "reliable source" list.? There are plenty of sources for that. Try google. https://www.lancs.live/sport/football/football-news/leeds-united-fans-can-cry-18149143 https://www.nottinghampost.com/sport/football/football-news/nottingham-forest-transfer-embargo-news-4082968 https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/calls-championship-transfer-embargoes-stoke-4059841 https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/11428606/championship-clubs-coronavirus-wage-cuts-row/ https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/coventry-city-preston-north-end-18166215 unless of course you have a better suggestion for where the rumour of an embargo might have come from ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadioactiveWaste Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 7 hours ago, G STAR RAM said: The original post I questioned said "Mel also paid the taxman at our valuation" I'm sure Mel said if he'd sold himself the stadium for less than it was worth the taxman would've been after him, that's what I meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamworthram Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 58 minutes ago, RamNut said: There are plenty of sources for that. Try google. https://www.lancs.live/sport/football/football-news/leeds-united-fans-can-cry-18149143 https://www.nottinghampost.com/sport/football/football-news/nottingham-forest-transfer-embargo-news-4082968 https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/calls-championship-transfer-embargoes-stoke-4059841 https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/11428606/championship-clubs-coronavirus-wage-cuts-row/ https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/coventry-city-preston-north-end-18166215 unless of course you have a better suggestion for where the rumour of an embargo might have come from ? If it’s not been reported in the Daily Mail it can’t be true. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamworthram Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 1 hour ago, RamNut said: There are plenty of sources for that. Try google. https://www.lancs.live/sport/football/football-news/leeds-united-fans-can-cry-18149143 https://www.nottinghampost.com/sport/football/football-news/nottingham-forest-transfer-embargo-news-4082968 https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/calls-championship-transfer-embargoes-stoke-4059841 https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/11428606/championship-clubs-coronavirus-wage-cuts-row/ https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/coventry-city-preston-north-end-18166215 unless of course you have a better suggestion for where the rumour of an embargo might have come from ? They don’t seem to be from multiple sources though just the same two stories (suggestion from Alex Neill and “various clubs“) being regurgitated by different newspapers. I’m not sure I see the justification anyway. It’s like preventing a business that has furloughed staff, or agreed deferment schemes with their higher earners in order to protect the business, from investing in new machinery once furlough is over in order to progress the business. I wonder how many would have taken advantage of the scheme if they knew this was a condition. Same with football clubs. I doubt there is anything in the EFL rules that cover this scenario, given we are in uncharted territory, and therefore to impose the penalty afterwards doesn’t sound right to me. “By the way, you know that scheme that was perfectly legal and designed to help businesses through this difficult time and protect jobs that you took advantage of? Well we didn’t tell you before but we’re now going to punish you for it”. They read to me like a group of chairmen/managers trying to gain an advantage because they dealt with (possibly because they were at less risk or for moral reasons) the situation differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 I’m just trying to point out where the rumour might originate from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 34 minutes ago, Tamworthram said: They don’t seem to be from multiple sources though just the same two stories (suggestion from Alex Neill and “various clubs“) being regurgitated by different newspapers. I’m not sure I see the justification anyway. It’s like preventing a business that has furloughed staff, or agreed deferment schemes with their higher earners in order to protect the business, from investing in new machinery once furlough is over in order to progress the business. I wonder how many would have taken advantage of the scheme if they knew this was a condition. Same with football clubs. I doubt there is anything in the EFL rules that cover this scenario, given we are in uncharted territory, and therefore to impose the penalty afterwards doesn’t sound right to me. “By the way, you know that scheme that was perfectly legal and designed to help businesses through this difficult time and protect jobs that you took advantage of? Well we didn’t tell you before but we’re now going to punish you for it”. They read to me like a group of chairmen/managers trying to gain an advantage because they dealt with (possibly because they were at less risk or for moral reasons) the situation differently. I think its an issue if paying the full wages would have meant them breaking FFP rules and they used this to avoid it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBRammette Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 37 minutes ago, sage said: I think its an issue if paying the full wages would have meant them breaking FFP rules and they used this to avoid it. If many clubs had not furloughed would the EFL have preferred them to go to the wall? What then for the EFL? Most furlough/deferral measures were to help cashflow not the same issues always as accounts for FFP. EFL needs to sort itself out, sort personnel and reorganise to be more reactive and helpful to its own clubs in real time. Cant keep doing everything retrospectively after clubs have acted with no EFL guidance. Total shambles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamworthram Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 1 hour ago, sage said: I think its an issue if paying the full wages would have meant them breaking FFP rules and they used this to avoid it. But surely that wouldn’t show up until the end of this financial year and therefore not effect the current transfer window. Besides which, clubs using furlough have used a legitimate method of reducing, temporarily, their expenditure which surely is what FFP is all about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 11 minutes ago, Tamworthram said: But surely that wouldn’t show up until the end of this financial year and therefore not effect the current transfer window. Besides which, clubs using furlough have used a legitimate method of reducing, temporarily, their expenditure which surely is what FFP is all about. What if they used it to move a portion of players wages from one accounting year to another. Having said that the EFL said their is some sort of FFP window, so as you were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MackworthRamIsGod Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 Who cares if deferring wages helped to circumnavigate FFP rules. These were exceptional circumstances. Again, the EFL have done absolutely NOTHING to protect clubs during the worst period football has ever known. The fact they appealed against Birminghams not guilty verdict (for a 2nd time) in the middle of this pandemic shows everything we need to know about them. How much money did Birmingham and the EFL spend getting to Birminghams eventual guilty verdict, which ended with a slap on the wrist. Also, the fact that the charges against Sheff Weds and Derby havent yet been resolved is shocking. There was no footy for 3 months so the EFL had sod all else to do. You can understand why clubs in the bottom 3 are a bit miffed with it all. Again, assuming we do get to a not guilty verdict, how much money has been spent by Sheff Weds, Derby and the EFL to get there, not to mention the anxiety for fans of both clubs, plus relegated clubs who think they have a chance of stopping up. There has never been a better time for the footy clubs to unite and over throw the poo show that is the EFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derbados Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 Christ does the Barnsley chairman ever shut up? Talk about guilty until proven innocent! If we come out of this unscathed, Mel should sue the pants off him for defamation of character complete moron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Sagan Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 The obvious disturbing thing about this is it looks like running into next season, if there is a penalty. The EFL has taken incompetence to whole new levels and is now struggling to extricate itself. If they deduct points this season they're relegating Sheff Wed so of course there'd be further challenges and a legal minefield, to be resolved quickly with the new season just around the corner. If they take it into next season they're trying to punish clubs for actions even more seasons ago which will inevitably see them dragged through the courts again. They must be hoping that the tribunal reports there's no case to answer, so then they don't have to act but they can claim to Steve Gibson that they investigated thoroughly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomAccessMemory Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 Don't think I've ever noticed this before from the Clubs section of the EFL regulations https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules--regulations/section-4---clubs/ Quote 14 Covered Stadia 14.1 No League Match shall take place at any stadium covered or partially covered without the prior written consent of The League after full consultation with all Clubs. 14.2 Any Club proposing to cover or partially cover its stadium shall be required to submit outline plans and the copy of the planning application prior to such planning application being submitted to the appropriate statutory authority. I couldn't remember whether the proposed roof was permanent or retractable, but found this https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/pride-park-sale-mel-morris-3290644 Quote "We spent a lot of money to look at working with this third party to look at the design of putting a retractable roof on Pride Park Stadium. So it was retractable, although that doesn't mean it wouldn't at least partially cover the pitch as I think from others that are around there's only so far they can actually retract. I wonder whether that's one of the things the club had to discuss with the EFL and submit documentation for at that point? (Edit-in fact reading it back it says stadium and not pitch) That article also includes the HMRC quote Quote "We had the stadium valued and the valuation came back. Once it came back, if I had paid a penny less, HMRC (Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs) would have rang me up and said: 'By the way, you have just sold yourself an asset at under value'. "So on the one hand, I am either going to have to have a debate with HMRC and pay them a cheque, or I am going to have the EFL moaning, or some other club, saying this isn't fair, on the other side." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spanish Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 5 hours ago, Derbados said: Christ does the Barnsley chairman ever shut up? Talk about guilty until proven innocent! If we come out of this unscathed, Mel should sue the pants off him for defamation of character complete moron Is this what you saw? Many teams cheat and the league is so weak enforcing its own rules. In most other leagues, not paying players on time is automatic relegation. Administration in France and Spain is relegation by two divisions. “In England, teams like Derby and Wigan, maybe even Sheffield Wednesday, don’t pay their players [on time] and they don’t receive any penalties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomAccessMemory Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 8 minutes ago, Spanish said: Is this what you saw? Many teams cheat and the league is so weak enforcing its own rules. In most other leagues, not paying players on time is automatic relegation. Administration in France and Spain is relegation by two divisions. “In England, teams like Derby and Wigan, maybe even Sheffield Wednesday, don’t pay their players [on time] and they don’t receive any penalties. That's one of many similar quotes, he seems to be doing the rounds of all the journalists saying basically the same thing in slightly different ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IslandExile Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 Someone mentioned on one of the threads that Charlton may go into administration. It seems the problems are even worse than that... https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/charlton-risk-expulsion-football-league-efl-demand-details-takeover-a4510536.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkle Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 1 hour ago, Spanish said: Is this what you saw? Many teams cheat and the league is so weak enforcing its own rules. In most other leagues, not paying players on time is automatic relegation. Administration in France and Spain is relegation by two divisions. “In England, teams like Derby and Wigan, maybe even Sheffield Wednesday, don’t pay their players [on time] and they don’t receive any penalties. That’s actually very rude isn’t it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ripleyram88 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 The EFL are a joke and not fit for purpose and so is FFP. I was under the impression FFP was to stop owners from coming in and putting clubs into massive debt to try and achieve promotion. Yet you've got them going after us, where the owner is actively not putting the club into debt. Then you see them going after clubs like Bolton and trying to fine them for failing to fulfil fixtures when they have no players and no money. And if they don't get the outcome they want they will keep appealing it over and over until they get the "independent" panel that agrees with their verdict. Not to mention their awful fit and proper tests for owners. They approve a take over at Wigan, 3 weeks later it turns out the owner has no money and puts them in administration, and the EFL relegate Wigan for it. Wigan are being punished for the EFLs incompetence. It feels like we are being targeted becasue of how Mel has challenged the EFL on a number of issues over the years, and their executives are worried about losing their big fat paychecks that they earn for doing nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mucker1884 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 20 hours ago, CBRammette said: If many clubs had not furloughed would the EFL have preferred them to go to the wall? What then for the EFL? Most furlough/deferral measures were to help cashflow not the same issues always as accounts for FFP. EFL needs to sort itself out, sort personnel and reorganise to be more reactive and helpful to its own clubs in real time. Cant keep doing everything retrospectively after clubs have acted with no EFL guidance. Total shambles Word on the street is that some clubs have acted WITH EFL guidance, and are still getting retrospectively accused of breaking the rules! ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gritty Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 3 hours ago, ripleyram88 said: The EFL are a joke and not fit for purpose and so is FFP. I was under the impression FFP was to stop owners from coming in and putting clubs into massive debt to try and achieve promotion. Yet you've got them going after us, where the owner is actively not putting the club into debt. Then you see them going after clubs like Bolton and trying to fine them for failing to fulfil fixtures when they have no players and no money. And if they don't get the outcome they want they will keep appealing it over and over until they get the "independent" panel that agrees with their verdict. Not to mention their awful fit and proper tests for owners. They approve a take over at Wigan, 3 weeks later it turns out the owner has no money and puts them in administration, and the EFL relegate Wigan for it. Wigan are being punished for the EFLs incompetence. It feels like we are being targeted becasue of how Mel has challenged the EFL on a number of issues over the years, and their executives are worried about losing their big fat paychecks that they earn for doing nothing. I think the issue is that even though some owners bankroll the club for a while, they can a) run out of money; b) lose interest; c) sell it And then you have a business making massive losses which then become debts within a year or two. Hypothetically, Mel could sell us in good faith but new owners turn out to not have the money they promised and we could become a Bolton. FFP is designed to stop that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.