walgarthjohn
Vital 1st Team Regular
If we was getting off with this it would be today Efl will be in contact with all on the panel telling them what to do independent my arse.
Why would the EFL reduce our punishment to 10 points or any points this season? It wouldn't be a punishment as such would it? A 10 point reduction wouldn't make a jot of difference now.
Any reduction would apply next season, the EFL even though backing down wouldn't want to lose face and still want us to face some punishment.
Minus 10 looks par for the course next year. Youll probably all but guarentee safety at the end of the year by just rocking up on 0 in game week 1. How many clubs are gonna get hit with deductions? 5? 6? 7? this is just the tip of a great big iceberg. Derby uo next and then a few administrations.This is where I don't understand your logic MiW.
I think we're both confident that we'll end up with the points deduction reduced. That being the case, I'd far rather have them taken off for the season just gone than next.
10 points off this season means we start next season on the championship with a clean sheet.
I dread to think what next season would be like, still in the Championship, but starting on minus 10.
Barnsley arnt the bad guys here, the former owners are.That is totally irrelevant, the EFL rules on financial fair play says member clubs can lose a certain amount of money, more if the owners have enough wealth to cover any losses, WAFC have not broken those rules in any way.
As for Barnsley their case rests on the fact that the playing field is not level and we had an advantage because we were spending beyond our means, that opinion should not hold water as any loses we had were supposed to be underwritten by the clubs owner agreed at the beginning of the season.
The ironic thing though and something that should be pointed out in court as a rebuttal to their so called evidence is they announced losses of c.3.5 million up to April 2019 yet are able to offer £1 million pounds for a player in the past week or so, are they saying it is ok for them to lose money and buy beyond their means, yet clubs operating within the FFP rules are not allowed to buy players because they lost/spent more money.
Wow.The only thing I hope these dodgy, heartless, conniving ***** get are a good dose of covid 19, 20 & 21.....
Come on his must be 12 years old its about right for that age, and we have had a scottish pensioner making up viruses to give to the former ownerVery mature.
They should face the appropriate punishment, whatever that would be God only knows, but to wish a serious illness or maybe death on someone is a bit over the top.
The Covid post was bang out of order pal!
So I was thinking this through:
The EFL want the cases to go away. They have bigger issues coming up and the previous issues with owners and clubs circumventing the rules to gain an advantage are gone. Sheffield Wednesday was an example of this case, and they couldn't prove that they wilfully tried to deceive. There isn't money in football for new owners so financial doping has less of an appeal. Now with COVID clubs are fighting for survival and the EFL has to focus its efforts on running the leagues and competitions safely and trying to ensure the commercial revenue doesn't dry up and that clubs survive as much as possible. That isn't an enviable task, and therefore they want to draw a line under the 19/20 competitions and move forward.
I'm not sure on the timing and how it relates to us, but with Wednesday they have clearly thought about these options and come up with a decision that causes the least amount of pain for them:
1. Punish Wednesday now - they will face a massive appeal from Wednesday and it drags the whole situation on
2. Don't punish Wednesday - not something they want to do because they can't really get away with it and the precedent it sets is damaging for the business model. I believe in all of these cases they need to be seen to have some teeth, so some form of punishment is likely, it's just the how and when that's up for debate.
3. Defer Wednesday's punishment - Only have to deal with Charlton's appeal, which while we all would agree is a valid grievance, I'm not sure what actual grounds they feel they have to actually deserved to stay up this season
So then what does that mean for Latics?
1. Punish Latics now - it sets a harsh precedent for clubs who are financial mismanaged through a period where revenue is zero, and then an even harsher precedent for clubs who are taken advantage of, like us. The popular opinion is that the EFL should be helping us, not harming us. We have in no way gained an advantage out of this situation, which cannot be argued for Wednesday.
2. Don't punish Latics - I'm not completely up to speed with the technicalities but there could be valid appeals if weren't not punished given the rules are quite clear about how their enforced if a club goes into administration. Barnsley would potentially appeal and it drags things on.
3. Defer our punishment. That way the punishment happens, but the EFL can use the case law of Wednesday and the lateness of the situation to conclude that it's only fair to apply the punishment next season, in particular given mitigating circumstances and the fact that Wigan are found not to had ownership changes and administration to financially dope etc etc. Also the process highlighted deficiencies with the EFLs ownership vetting.
So I really do think that we could be looking at a deferred punishment. It gets the situation off the EFL's plate quickly. Only Barnsley are likely to appeal and can be reasonably handled given their smaller size and preparedness for L1. The EFL can spin it in their favour as well. There will clearly be a massive stink from us if a punishment is instant, when Wednesday's has been deferred for no justification.
As C.Latic has said ...they tried / trying to kill OUR football club so they deserve ALL the karma that comes their way.....
BTW....I did say I hope they get CV19, 20 & 21...slightly tongue in cheek so imo not over the top...your reply however....
What a fuckin' arsehole you are!......I will rise above that
A lot to chew on there. Think the fact Sheff Wed. are a bigger club in a bigger City will be the reason why the EFL will defer theirs.So I was thinking this through:
The EFL want the cases to go away. They have bigger issues coming up and the previous issues with owners and clubs circumventing the rules to gain an advantage are gone. Sheffield Wednesday was an example of this case, and they couldn't prove that they wilfully tried to deceive. There isn't money in football for new owners so financial doping has less of an appeal. Now with COVID clubs are fighting for survival and the EFL has to focus its efforts on running the leagues and competitions safely and trying to ensure the commercial revenue doesn't dry up and that clubs survive as much as possible. That isn't an enviable task, and therefore they want to draw a line under the 19/20 competitions and move forward.
I'm not sure on the timing and how it relates to us, but with Wednesday they have clearly thought about these options and come up with a decision that causes the least amount of pain for them:
1. Punish Wednesday now - they will face a massive appeal from Wednesday and it drags the whole situation on
2. Don't punish Wednesday - not something they want to do because they can't really get away with it and the precedent it sets is damaging for the business model. I believe in all of these cases they need to be seen to have some teeth, so some form of punishment is likely, it's just the how and when that's up for debate.
3. Defer Wednesday's punishment - Only have to deal with Charlton's appeal, which while we all would agree is a valid grievance, I'm not sure what actual grounds they feel they have to actually deserved to stay up this season
So then what does that mean for Latics?
1. Punish Latics now - it sets a harsh precedent for clubs who are financial mismanaged through a period where revenue is zero, and then an even harsher precedent for clubs who are taken advantage of, like us. The popular opinion is that the EFL should be helping us, not harming us. We have in no way gained an advantage out of this situation, which cannot be argued for Wednesday.
2. Don't punish Latics - I'm not completely up to speed with the technicalities but there could be valid appeals if weren't not punished given the rules are quite clear about how their enforced if a club goes into administration. Barnsley would potentially appeal and it drags things on.
3. Defer our punishment. That way the punishment happens, but the EFL can use the case law of Wednesday and the lateness of the situation to conclude that it's only fair to apply the punishment next season, in particular given mitigating circumstances and the fact that Wigan are found not to had ownership changes and administration to financially dope etc etc. Also the process highlighted deficiencies with the EFLs ownership vetting.
So I really do think that we could be looking at a deferred punishment. It gets the situation off the EFL's plate quickly. Only Barnsley are likely to appeal and can be reasonably handled given their smaller size and preparedness for L1. The EFL can spin it in their favour as well. There will clearly be a massive stink from us if a punishment is instant, when Wednesday's has been deferred for no justification.
A lot to chew on there. Think the fact Sheff Wed. are a bigger club in a bigger City will be the reason why the EFL will defer theirs.
Think it will be a different rule for us as it always seems to be for the smaller teams.
f**k the EFL
Do you have to reply to me? If you haven’t got anything vaguely constructive to say. Don’t say anything.Do you honestly believe that bollocks?
My post wasn't tongue in cheek, for you to wish a serious illness or death (Covid 19) on someone makes you a arsehole in my book, if Choi gets prison or banned from this or that that to me will be his punishment, not suffering from a deadly virus.
You and the other idiot you refer to and the idiots that gave you likes should be ashamed of themselves!
Do you have to reply to me? If you haven’t got anything vaguely constructive to say. Don’t say anything.
No we wouldn’t. Only way they’d have made a decision today is if our appeal was thrown out outright. The timeline will be something like this. Today both sides presented their cases. The commission will probably now reconvene on Monday and spend the day deliberating before coming up with a verdict by the end of the working day. The respective parties will then be informed likely Tuesday morning with a blanket on all statements until 4pm (although we’ll probably already know the result as someone from within will have leaked it to a journalist like Nixon). The worst thing of all this will be the wait on Monday night, knowing that the commission have already made their decision.If we was getting off with this it would be today Efl will be in contact with all on the panel telling them what to do independent my arse.
If you haven’t got anything vaguely constructive to say. Don’t say anything.
Evidenced by what we have seen just last night. Why else do you think their appeal was deferred? Come on... For someone with all the insider news you're (un)surprisingly full of s***e.Try taking your own advice, big clubs, small clubs, different punishments?
Grow up!