Mel Morris

[RoyMac5]

8 minutes ago, IslandExile said:

How?

My point is we're a mess. Whether you blame Morris for that or not, and most do, how are we going to get out of this ever deepening hole?

We aren't, he hopes to.

How? Well there's plenty of suggestion for Morris to think about!

[Philmycock]

I know Mel, why not hold a meeting that only the select few can attend, then tell them all to keep what's said secret, and keep all the other 99.999999% of fans in the dark.

I suppose someone worth half a billion pounds can do what they want without a care for us mere peasants.

You may have had good intentions when you bought the club, I for one was looking forward to drinking in the East Stand fan park extension and watching the Oasis reunion under a retractable roof.

Now it seems all I've got to look forward is Fleetwood on a Tuesday night.

What the duck is going on? Duck. ? 

[G STAR RAM]

28 minutes ago, richinspain said:

Very true, IF we are found guilty and docked points. Will people's opinions change however if all charges against us are dropped and we  find that we have been in embargoes unjustly for the past however many years. He spent (we believe) millions of his own money trying to get to the Prem. Just maybe (I know as much as anyone else on here) the EFL have screwed him over and he loses all of his investment, plus the club he loves as much as we do is in the ?. I'm not trying to defend Mel at all costs, if the club does end up with points deductions or worse then the buck will stop at Mel's door.

One of the reasons we are under embargo is for not submitting accounts to Companies House. 

Now if I was Mel I would submit the accounts that we prepared to Companies House.

It is not up to the EFL to tell us whether our accounts comply with FRS, that is what we pay auditors for.

Submit them and then wait to see if the EFL wish to make this battle a legal one or if they are just sabre rattling. 

[richinspain]

15 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

One of the reasons we are under embargo is for not submitting accounts to Companies House. 

Now if I was Mel I would submit the accounts that we prepared to Companies House.

It is not up to the EFL to tell us whether our accounts comply with FRS, that is what we pay auditors for.

Submit them and then wait to see if the EFL wish to make this battle a legal one or if they are just sabre rattling. 

Agreed, the only thing is that we don't know why they haven't been submitted. We believe that the club only has to submit the accounts using a valid method, following on from the previously submitted accounts. What I, and I would assume everyone else don't understand, is why they haven't been submitted. My assumption is that the club wants all accounts to be verified in the same manner. I have seen so many assumptions and suggestions that I honestly don't know, but would submitting the outstanding accounts alone bring us out of our embargo? Would that change the type of embargo we are under?

Edited September 11, 2021 by richinspain
Missed word

[G STAR RAM]

9 minutes ago, richinspain said:

Agreed, the only thing is that we don't know why they haven't been submitted. We believe that the club only has to submit the accounts using a valid method, following on from the previously submitted accounts. What I, and I would assume everyone else don't understand, is why they haven't been submitted. My assumption is that the club wants all accounts to be verified in the same manner. I have seen so many assumptions and suggestions that I honestly don't know, but would submitting the outstanding accounts alone bring us out of our embargo? Would that change the type of embargo we are under?

Looking at the list of charges, they specify:-

Regulation 16.2 - Failure to provide audited annual accounts

Regulation 16.3 - Annual Accounts not filed with Companies House

So for me, we submit them, in the format they were prepared, to Companies House and provide a copy to the EFL.

That should remove both charges. 

If they have a problem with our accounts then they make adjustments to them to reach the P&S figure. 

We cannot have the EFL deciding whether our accounts are compliant with FRS or not. It is not their job and they are completely unqualified to make any such assertions. 

 

[RoyMac5]

14 minutes ago, richinspain said:

Agreed, the only thing is that we don't know why they haven't been submitted. We believe that the club only has to submit the accounts using a valid method, following on from the previously submitted accounts. What I, and I would assume everyone else don't understand, is why they haven't been submitted. My assumption is that the club wants all accounts to be verified in the same manner. I have seen so many assumptions and suggestions that I honestly don't know, but would submitting the outstanding accounts alone bring us out of our embargo? Would that change the type of embargo we are under?

Yes, how many goes do we get at submitting our accounts? It can only be that the EFL aren't happy with the way we do the accounts and we're trying to reach a consensus. As to the embargo status, can anyone say for sure as the EFL seem to fudge things as they go along - after all they let us sign Jags and Baldock. Reading can offer more wages than we can (supposedly), etc. Hard, soft and slightly squidgy, what are the embargo limits?! 

Edited September 11, 2021 by RoyMac5

[kevinhectoring]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

I really wish people would stop saying we need to agree a deal with the EFL, we really don't. 

You’re right of course, we don’t need to agree a deal with them. But I think we should. 
4 reasons (there are more):

-We need a sale.

- The fighting is mutually destructive and it could go on for years, what with appeals and Gibsons

- I’m guessing our fancy accounting footwork raises difficult issues about retrospective changes to policies which could come back to bite us

- if we agree 6 points, I think we can stay up if we strengthen in January. 

[G STAR RAM]

3 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

You’re right of course, we don’t need to agree a deal with them. But I think we should. 
4 reasons (there are more):

-We need a sale.

- The fighting is mutually destructive and it could go on for years, what with appeals and Gibsons

- I’m guessing our fancy accounting footwork raises difficult issues about retrospective changes to policies which could come back to bite us

- if we agree 6 points, I think we can stay up if we strengthen in January. 

If we were going to agree to any Disciplinary action it needed to be done before the season started.

[RoyMac5]

15 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

You’re right of course, we don’t need to agree a deal with them. But I think we should. 
4 reasons (there are more):

-We need a sale.

- The fighting is mutually destructive and it could go on for years, what with appeals and Gibsons

- I’m guessing our fancy accounting footwork raises difficult issues about retrospective changes to policies which could come back to bite us

- if we agree 6 points, I think we can stay up if we strengthen in January. 

I would be okay with settling for a points deduction if that's what our resubmitted P&S showed (even though we don't deserve it). But would be very unhappy making any agreement that couldn't be then pointed to in the regulations.

[kevinhectoring]

18 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

If we were going to agree to any Disciplinary action it needed to be done before the season started.

But timing didn’t allow that. Date for delivery of accounts was set. We got the stuff in at the last minute and the EFl took its time to respond (surprise surprise). The EFl would certainly say it couldn’t  make an offer until it had our submissions.
 

You might say we should have forced the timing, but hard to know if that was possible without knowing more. And the EFl isn’t wanting to help us out and they know the clock is against us 
 

[kevinhectoring]

11 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

I would be okay with settling for a points deduction if that's what our resubmitted P&S showed (even though we don't deserve it). But would be very unhappy making any agreement that couldn't be then pointed to in the regulations.

I’d guess the resubmitted accounts do not show any breach. And the EFl is saying they’re wrong and they should be showing a breach. And that we are in yet another  grey area.
Let’s move on ! 

[RoyMac5]

4 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

I’d guess the resubmitted accounts do not show any breach. And the EFl is saying they’re wrong and they should be showing a breach. And that we are in yet another  grey area.
Let’s move on ! 

But what happens when something similar happens (maybe not even to us)? It's not how to play the game - it's in the rules or it isn't. If they pointed to the 'unfair advantage' spiel then we could decide whether to fight and it would show how the EFL play. But just some vague 'we don't like the way you do things'? That can't be acceptable.

[Gaspode]

2 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

I really wish people would stop saying we need to agree a deal with the EFL, we really don't. 

Not sure you're correct there - the EFL clearly want to dish out some punishement. If it was clearcut breach of FFP, they'd work out the penalty and we'd get points docked. They're clearly intending to hit us with a punishment for something where the punishment isn't set in stone (or their reading of the situation is contrary to ours) so they expect us to appeal any points deduction.

I'm sure neither side want this to drag on any longer or the punishemnt would have been announced and we'd be back to the appeal court already, so it makes sense to discuss any proposed sanctions and see if an agreement can be reached.

In reality, the only way the club can move forward is to put this whole saga to bed asap and the problem for the EFL is that the longer this drags out, the more ridiculous they'll look if we get off scot free (a possibility if it goes to appeal) - that means the club talking to the EFL and trying to agree a compromise where both sides can walk away with some credibility.....

[G STAR RAM]

13 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

Not sure you're correct there - the EFL clearly want to dish out some punishement. If it was clearcut breach of FFP, they'd work out the penalty and we'd get points docked. They're clearly intending to hit us with a punishment for something where the punishment isn't set in stone (or their reading of the situation is contrary to ours) so they expect us to appeal any points deduction.

I'm sure neither side want this to drag on any longer or the punishemnt would have been announced and we'd be back to the appeal court already, so it makes sense to discuss any proposed sanctions and see if an agreement can be reached.

In reality, the only way the club can move forward is to put this whole saga to bed asap and the problem for the EFL is that the longer this drags out, the more ridiculous they'll look if we get off scot free (a possibility if it goes to appeal) - that means the club talking to the EFL and trying to agree a compromise where both sides can walk away with some credibility.....

They might want all sorts of things, doesnt mean we should just accept it.

Unless they charge us with something we should not be accepting points deduction of any sort.

Would accepting a points deduction lead to other charges being removed?

[atherstoneram]

2 hours ago, IslandExile said:

How?

My point is we're a mess. Whether you blame Morris for that or not, and most do, how are we going to get out of this ever deepening hole?

We aren't, that's up to MM

[CornwallRam]

If the question is what should Mel do, none of us can answer because we just don't know the situation. We don't know Mels personal or financial position. We don't know the debt or liability position. We don't know the likelihood or potential size of a points deduction. 

 

 

 

[atherstoneram]

50 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

But timing didn’t allow that. Date for delivery of accounts was set. We got the stuff in at the last minute and the EFl took its time to respond (surprise surprise). The EFl would certainly say it couldn’t  make an offer until it had our submissions.
 

You might say we should have forced the timing, but hard to know if that was possible without knowing more. And the EFl isn’t wanting to help us out and they know the clock is against us 
 

Of course timing allowed for that, 18th August was the latest date they had to be submitted by, if MM was that genuinely concerned he would have made sure they were in a lot earlier than that. If MM couldn't be bothered to get them in ASAP why should the EFL be expected to respond in a quick manner.

[Gaspode]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

They might want all sorts of things, doesnt mean we should just accept it.

Unless they charge us with something we should not be accepting points deduction of any sort.

Would accepting a points deduction lead to other charges being removed?

I didn't say we should accept it - we should however consider a compromise if it allows the club to move forward. The alternative is to potenttially be our current predicament next season - but in League One.....

[Gaspode]

34 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

Of course timing allowed for that, 18th August was the latest date they had to be submitted by, if MM was that genuinely concerned he would have made sure they were in a lot earlier than that. If MM couldn't be bothered to get them in ASAP why should the EFL be expected to respond in a quick manner.

Perhaps the club submitted a 'proposed' set of accounts that the EFL weren't happy with? The eFL seem to be happy to make up the rules as they go along so I wouldn't be surprised if they refused to accept accounts that showed we were compliant with FFP....

[BramcoteRam84]

1 hour ago, kevinhectoring said:

You’re right of course, we don’t need to agree a deal with them. But I think we should. 
4 reasons (there are more):

-We need a sale.

- The fighting is mutually destructive and it could go on for years, what with appeals and Gibsons

- I’m guessing our fancy accounting footwork raises difficult issues about retrospective changes to policies which could come back to bite us

- if we agree 6 points, I think we can stay up if we strengthen in January. 

Key thing there - if we agree 6 points, the EFL may have been pushing for 12, their compromise is 9 and they won’t budge any further. If there is no reason why the punishment would be that harsh then you wouldn’t agree it.

6 points would be a blow but recoverable, 9 points + would be terminal I think

But If based on the facts we don’t deserve any punishment why should we agree to one. If we’re agreeing a punishment just to make this go away - should be 3 points max in this scenario (of us not breaching any spending limits)