Bolton /Bury | Page 3 | Vital Football

Bolton /Bury

chris who said:
The fact that Scally is quoted as saying this.

“At the moment, anyone could be sent to prison for fraud but still be able somehow to take over a football club as long as he has not had an insolvency in football".

And then still employs Steve Evans who was found guilty of fraud while manager of Boston says it all.
Click to expand...
He may be mistaken there though, according to the EFL fit and proper person test (as posted on one of the many threads on this subject), he would not be allowed to take over that club as he has a criminal record. If he was under investigation for a criminal offence, he's be fine but only until he was found guilty.
 
The whole problem is that one person or entity is allowed to take over a club. In Germany the rule is that 51% of the shares have to belong to the members, and they're fighting tooth and nail against certain "progressive" owners who want to drop that rule for the sake of competitiveness.

Also, it might be a good idea for clubs to have to fulfil certain conditions prior to getting a license for the division they intend to play in next season. The way this has been handled has been been a disgrace from start to finish, and in the case of other clubs, long before that.

The whole system wants shaking up (sorry, Bury) from top to bottom.
 
What's Scally on? Of course the EFL is to blame for allowing chairmen to do more or less as they wish against weak EFL rules.
 
Just seen a couple of things on twitter.

Apparently there is an unscheduled meeting at the EFL at 12noon today.

Rumoured to be about this late bid to save Bury and then further rumoured to be a possible reprieve or stay of execution or extended deadline.

Maybe all just rumour. Might be something in it tho.
 
The state of modern football is such that in the same week that Bury are expelled from the league, Manchester United are arranging a loan deal for one of their players whereby they will continue to pay £300k of his £400k per week salary whilst he is on loan.

We all know that most of the clubs in the lower divisions are struggling financially whilst those in the top division are reaping financial rewards that mean they are richer than ever before.

The disparity between the rich and the poor is growing, and it is reaching such a stage that some of those at the bottom (whether it be through mismanagement, bad luck or a combination of both) are falling by the wayside and going under.

That last statement is true when applied to the condition of football clubs in this country but it is also true when applied to society. The uber-capitalism that has infected modern football is the same neo-liberalism that has so harmed society during the last thirty to forty years. In this respect football is a reflection of society.

I fail to understand how any of you who are angered by the demise of Bury and the general plight of clubs of a similar stature to ourselves are not similarly angered by the division of wealth in society?! Why bleat on about how fcked the system is in football yet not extend it further to the system in general? What makes you think there is any chance that football can become more egalitarian before society does?
 
I have also read about the meeting. Surely its to discuss the charge against Bolton cancelling their game with Doncaster as they have secured their future.

I have no problem with Bolton singing players, any team would do this regardless of what stage of the season they are in. What happens though if we finish on level points or less than 3 points behind Tranmere for example and they stay up because they scored 5 against a youth team and we play a Bolton team with 5 new faces.

This should all of been sorted before the season starts.

The other option could be reinstating Bury, surely that just makes a mockery of the whole thing????
 
Buddha said:
The state of modern football is such that in the same week that Bury are expelled from the league, Manchester United are arranging a loan deal for one of their players whereby they will continue to pay £300k of his £400k per week salary whilst he is on loan.

We all know that most of the clubs in the lower divisions are struggling financially whilst those in the top division are reaping financial rewards that mean they are richer than ever before.

The disparity between the rich and the poor is growing, and it is reaching such a stage that some of those at the bottom (whether it be through mismanagement, bad luck or a combination of both) are falling by the wayside and going under.

That last statement is true when applied to the condition of football clubs in this country but it is also true when applied to society. The uber-capitalism that has infected modern football is the same neo-liberalism that has so harmed society during the last thirty to forty years. In this respect football is a reflection of society.

I fail to understand how any of you who are angered by the demise of Bury and the general plight of clubs of a similar stature to ourselves are not similarly angered by the division of wealth in society?! Why bleat on about how fcked the system is in football yet not extend it further to the system in general? What makes you think there is any chance that football can become more egalitarian before society does?
Click to expand...
Bolton had large parachute payments when relegated from the premiership, they managed to waste the lot.
The problem is about mismanagement not a lack of money, give extra money to all the 71 EFL clubs and some will still get in trouble by overspending.
I have many friends who had the same job and salary as I did, some mismanaged their money by living the extravagant life style and now have little in their retirement, I invested wisely and now have a more comfortable retirement,
Some did better than me and are considerably better off.
I don't envy the one's who did better, I don't feel sorry for the one's who did worse, we all had equal chances.
 
Football clubs businesses, no one would expect Sainsbury's to bail out Londis or Spar. Why then should Premier League clubs help less wealthy clubs, not nice I know, but that's life.
 
Buddha said:
The state of modern football is such that in the same week that Bury are expelled from the league, Manchester United are arranging a loan deal for one of their players whereby they will continue to pay £300k of his £400k per week salary whilst he is on loan.

We all know that most of the clubs in the lower divisions are struggling financially whilst those in the top division are reaping financial rewards that mean they are richer than ever before.

The disparity between the rich and the poor is growing, and it is reaching such a stage that some of those at the bottom (whether it be through mismanagement, bad luck or a combination of both) are falling by the wayside and going under.

That last statement is true when applied to the condition of football clubs in this country but it is also true when applied to society. The uber-capitalism that has infected modern football is the same neo-liberalism that has so harmed society during the last thirty to forty years. In this respect football is a reflection of society.

I fail to understand how any of you who are angered by the demise of Bury and the general plight of clubs of a similar stature to ourselves are not similarly angered by the division of wealth in society?! Why bleat on about how fcked the system is in football yet not extend it further to the system in general? What makes you think there is any chance that football can become more egalitarian before society does?
Click to expand...
Totally agree with that. Thats why you wont find me whining about the disparity between the premier league and the efl. Ultimately i actually dont think its the premier leagues job to prop up the whole of the efl - which is ultimately what people are asking for.

In fact, i would say i have more like the opposite view on the question of disparity of wealth in society... I fully agree in the rich 'propping up' those less fortunate in our society. I just dont think it applies to football. So im probably the opposite of your complaint, if that makes sense.
 
The Roone said:
Football clubs businesses, no one would expect Sainsbury's to bail out Londis or Spar. Why then should Premier League clubs help less wealthy clubs, not nice I know, but that's life.
Click to expand...
We're talking about two different things. First, stewardship of a company that is regulated by the Companies Act and insolvency legislation and, second, the way those companies act within EFL rules - at present almost non-existent.

For example, if a company owner engages in asset stripping that is wholly within the law, then so be it but for a football club that can mean life or death, which then leads on to the EFL's role. It can't interfere in the running of a company per se but it can establish a set of criteria that companies must fulfil in order to play in the League, eg debt/asset/earnings ratio, rules for borrowing powers and so on.
 
Agree with a lot of that Wayne. Think the EFL need to become independent with a new more stringent set of membership rules. My only fear of that is it might see a whole raft of clubs go to the wall, either by not meeting the EFL's criteria or because of owners deciding they can get more financially out of asset striping rather than running a 'proper' bussiness as a football club. IMO its a really difficult one that really needs looking at closely with no rash or quick decisions, it needs to be thought through properly.
 
Captainreblue said:
Agree with a lot of that Wayne. Think the EFL need to become independent with a new more stringent set of membership rules. My only fear of that is it might see a whole raft of clubs go to the wall, either by not meeting the EFL's criteria or because of owners deciding they can get more financially out of asset striping rather than running a 'proper' bussiness as a football club. IMO its a really difficult one that really needs looking at closely with no rash or quick decisions, it needs to be thought through properly.
Click to expand...
I didn't envisage enforcing stringent rules overnight, ie there would have to be a transition period and your point about looking at it properly rather than a knee-jerk reaction is very important. Making the EFL independent from rather than run by club chairmen could make a difference overnight.
 
I think your issue there is define independent.

Auditors are supposed to be independent but dig deep enough and you usually find the job has been given to a mate who won't ask too many questions.

Hence, some of the recent spectacular failures such as Carillion. Afraid the accountancy profession is as corrupt as football. How can anyone get oversight of a company when all they do is obfuscate and give generic answers and then when you press them for specific answers they hide.

Not one accountant or auditor has been struck off for Lehmans, Bear Stearns, AIG, RBS, Carillion, ABN Amro, Dexia, Lloyds Bank. Just how can that be?

If you can't trust the watchdogs who can you trust?
 
Independent, perhaps a board headed by an ex High Court Judge from the Chancery division, a couple of ex managers, academy coaches and players, seven in all, slightly different from the present set up whereby there are two representatives from each of the three English leagues who are not likely to rock the boat so to speak.
 
Whitstabletangerine said:
Independent, perhaps a board headed by an ex High Court Judge from the Chancery division, a couple of ex managers, academy coaches and players, seven in all, slightly different from the present set up whereby there are two representatives from each of the three English leagues who are not likely to rock the boat so to speak.
Click to expand...

And it would help if they explained their thinking and decisions concisely and promptly. That might help to provide some shared idea of what is expected of clubs and what they can expect to happen if they don't measure up.

I don't expect the Premiership to be bailing out failing clubs but I do think the rules favour them and they then bend the rules further. In some ways it's counter productive when they hoover up far too many youngsters to manage and develop properly and then fail to prepare them for competitive football.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.