Jump to content

EFL appeal


Sith Happens

Recommended Posts

From what the athletic wrote the efl have had there pants pulled down a few times since and Middlesbrough. They have tried to join the appeal twice and told no and the efl wanted to get more evidence and told no because they say there legal team were basically crap. So they’ve got to debate on what they currently have and that’s duck all from what I read 

Edited by Barney1991
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Rab a dab doo said:

Anything' MORE' than fine. 

The way our finance's are at the moment even that's a big thing.

Any way, why even a fine if we haven't actually been proven to have done anything thing wrong?

I interpret it as a worse case scenario of it being a fine, but most likely scenario still being no punishment.

Given the facts of the case, I would personally put the chances at 99% vs 1% in favour of no punishment as all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Barney1991 said:

From what the athletic wrote the efl have had there pants pulled down a few times since and Middlesbrough. They have tried to join the appeal twice and told no and the efl wanted to get more evidence and told no because they say there legal team were basically crap. So they’ve got to debate on what they currently have and that’s duck all from what I read 

Well the rules of appeal do state new evidence can't be submitted.
It certainly comes across as the EFL based their entire appeal based on submitting new evidence.

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

Far too early for an outcome on this yet. It needs to be much closer to the end of the season so as the EFL know how many points to dock in order to relegate us.

On current Rooney-revival trajectory that might be about 25 points!!

 

 

After 25th March any points deductions can’t be applied to this season.

Assuming that would be the case with this, unless due to it relating to something from a while back they can somehow break that rule. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/01/2021 at 15:09, rynny said:

I read all 123 pages when it was released and have just read the last 23 (the 2nd charge) we didn't have an "expert" as the EFL did. We had giving evidence on our behalf;

Andrew Delve. Mr Delve was (until 2016) Managing Partner and (until 2018) Group Chairman of 
Smith Cooper, a firm of accountants and auditors. His evidence related to the adoption, implementation and operation of the Club’s approach to amortisation of the capitalised costs of player registrations.

28) Before we leave this section, we record that the Club did not serve a report from or call evidence 
from an expert accountant, despite having been granted permission to do so on 13 February 2020. 
It took the decision not to call any such expert evidence having seen the factual evidence served by 
the EFL, and it stood by that decision even after the EFL served Professor Pope’s report.

This is what the panel said on their expert. 

while we have no doubt that Professor Pope was at all times giving his genuinely-held opinion on the issues that he was asked to address, it became clear in his cross-examination that he was unfamiliar with the role and duties of an individual in his position tasked with giving advisedexpert to a Disciplinary Commission or other tribunal. By way of example, he was unaware that  

(1) where a range of views existed on an issue on which he was opining, and (2) there were views in that range that differed from his own, his duties required him to recognise that. While we ultimately concluded that that did not materially impact the substance of his evidence in any adverse way, experts instructed to prepare a report for the purpose of disciplinary charges or to give evidence before a Disciplinary Commission must take care to familiarise themselves with their duties, and to ensure that they take the steps necessary to comply with those duties.

*all wording in italics is taken directly from the released document from the panel's decision. 

Well done rynny

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sith Happens
3 hours ago, B4ev6is said:

They cant punish us because we done nothing wrong and efl and gibson just spitting dummy out again.

that's disturbed me because saying Gibson has spat his dummy out has me realise he looks just like one of those blokes that pay women to burp him when he has a big man size nappy on. And by women,  I mean warnock. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole thing is a woeful and rather pathetic attempt to save face. Were there any substance to their appeal, this would have been resolved months back. Yet another example of the wholly impotent and unfit for purpose nature of a body completely out of touch with those it purports to serve. The EFL are like that kid at school who picks a fight with you, gets flattened then shouts insults at you when you walked halfway down the street and the fight is all over. Or....

 

Edited by 86 Hair Islands
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rampage said:

We do want them off next season

Assuming you mean don’t?

I can’t see one either way. I think the EFL are just trying to save face with the appeal and probably don’t expect to be successful.

After all, it’s not their money they’re burning in lawyer fees but every other club! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Mckram said:

Assuming you mean don’t?

I can’t see one either way. I think the EFL are just trying to save face with the appeal and probably don’t expect to be successful.

After all, it’s not their money they’re burning in lawyer fees but every other club! 

Correct. Thank you 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/02/2021 at 17:15, B4ev6is said:

They cant punish us because we done nothing wrong and efl and gibson just spitting dummy out again.

B4 I think you’re ignoring the facts. 
 

we were found ‘guilty as charged’ of preparing accounts that don’t reflect the accounting profession’s requirements. 
 

the Tribunal did us a massive favour: they did not state that the accounts were contrary to the companies act. Instead, they found ‘only’ that we contravened the accounting standards

the reason that does us a massive favour is this: if your accounts don’t reflect companies act requirements, that is a clear breach of the EFL’s rules. (I would guess it’s also a criminal offence but not sure)
 

This matters because we know there are people at and around the EFL who think we deserve it in the neck for all this.  The EFL can give it to us in the neck if it gets a judgement that says we breached the companies act, because they can then justifiably say:

- you are in breach of our rules and the companies act by not sufficiently disclosing the change in amortisation policy 

- we think you did it deliberately, so that we would not notice/challenge the change in policy.

That could in their minds justify a hefty sanction and there may be EFl precedent to support that  

@therealhantsramhas told us the scope of the appeal was debated in November. If the EFl were really gunning for us they would want a ruling on appeal that says that our accounts breached the companies act. The problem is they (probably) can’t get this. They can’t get it because the part of the judgement they want to appeal was one on which they succeeded (but in a limited way): if you get a ruling in your favour, you can’t appeal it. (That’s why I think the Tribunal did us a massive favour ) 

incidentally, you’d expect the Sheikh’s team to have been in the loop on all of this in Nov and beyond. It may have been a factor in the mess that the takeover has become, we will never know (but fans continue to say the Sheikh is a charlatan!).

Ironically, this is all a bit personal between MM and the EFL, so we’d maybe get an easier ride if he sells. But this festering  sore does not help him do that

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.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.