Macclesfield | Vital Football

Macclesfield

Luke Imp

Alert Team
Staff member
#10
Tbh, I think the EFL have made this decision with half an eye on the appeal of the independent ruling of the Bolton one.

This is effectively backing up what they think Bolton should get.
 

buckielugger

Vital 1st Team Regular
#11
Tbh, I think the EFL have made this decision with half an eye on the appeal of the independent ruling of the Bolton one.

This is effectively backing up what they think Bolton should get.
Well hopefully.
Still doesn't explain why Macclesfield do receive the entirely correct punishment and are dealt with in 10 days or so, whereas Bolton's worse offences are ignored totally for many months and then they receive an effective zero punishment from the same EFL. It all makes no sense whatsoever
 

NottyImp

Vital Football Legend
#12
Well hopefully.
Still doesn't explain why Macclesfield do receive the entirely correct punishment and are dealt with in 10 days or so, whereas Bolton's worse offences are ignored totally for many months and then they receive an effective zero punishment from the same EFL. It all makes no sense whatsoever
Bolton are a big club, Macclesfield aren't. From the perspective of those that run the game, it makes perfect sense.
 

Chesterimp

Vital 1st Team Regular
#17
Maybe this is why Bolton seem to have received preferential treatment from the FA

If that is the case it's a quite clear conflict of interest. Any direct involvement in these cases - they are all related, they all impact on Notlob - or any indirect lobbying is a clear breach of his professional code of conduct, which the SRA should be acting upon with a likelihood of him being struck off.
 

Bazzzer

Vital Squad Member
#18
Mentioning Bolton, I see they have sorted things out with FGR regarding Doidge. Also, that Doidge won some sort of player of the month award in the SPL.