Wayne Rooney's Derby

[king_dezeeuw06]

What should the EFL have done instead KDZ ?
My memory of the details may be hazy after all this time, but I think IEC (majority shareholder Choi) sold latics to Next Leader Fund (majority shareholder Choi).
Choi sold shares in Next Leader Fund to Au Yeung. EFL can't prevent this.
So, if EFL then deem Au Yeung not fit and proper (and we all know he wasn't, no argument from me) what was the EFL course of action ?
I presume it would be to withdraw WAFC certificate of membership of the EFL and to throw us out of the championship mid season.
Is this really what you were advocating or did they have an alternative option ?
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the EFL's incompetence in the ratification of Choi probably saved this club.

Every would need to pass a test to be an owner or director when they come on board an English club. I don't know if they checked Yeung properly in the first place - that is the issue.

 

[Mighty Bongsmon]

No doubt the test was limited but I think based on what we know there is a genuine question to be asked about how much scrutiny they ever applied to Yeung's application.

Parry said themselves they found it difficult to check Yeung despite having direct access to him, yet when our fans on Twitter dug up loads of dodgy stuff just via Google.

He also commented about Yeung allowed to self certify things via forms which seems odd.

On top of that we had the covert video of Parry and what he said.

We'll never know for sure, but it seemed like there were a lot of red flags that the professionals vetting Yeung seemed to miss or waved through despite the concerns they should've raised. Either scenario makes you wonder if the tests were done thoroughly enough in the first place.

That "covert" video was utter rubbish - I asked the lad who posted it to put up the rest of the video so that what he said could be heard in context but he refused & said it wasn't relevant. For all anyone else knows that lad could have said "have you heard the rumour that it's all related to a bet on us to go down" & he replied "yes, I've heard a rumour about a bet in the far east." Well so had everybody else & him saying he'd heard about an unsubstantiated rumour doesn't show anything other than he'd heard it like other people had

And none of the things that Latics fans dug up about Choi or Au Yeung in the aftermath of the administration starting meant the EFL could disqualify either of them from owning a football club
The self-certifying thing, as bad as it sounds, was standard.

It's the tests themselves - the EFL can take a lot of the blame for them as they have not previously shown any willingness to implement the changes that would hopefully prevent this kind of thing happening again. The clubs (or rather) the owners also need to shoulder the blame for the tests as they haven't shown the inclination to want them changed

 

[Mighty Bongsmon]

You can say all you like MB about rules, regulations & punishment from EFL / PL / FA etc but & its a BIG BUT.....certain clubs will def be treated differently by the authorities regardless of rules / regs etc. I honestly think if one of the shitty top six were to fall foul & god forbid went into admin there would be all sorts of stuff done, rules bent, regs amended to enable them to not go through what we went through.....football is as corrupt as politics.

As you said its a big but and you have no proof - I don't know what the PL rules are on administration but at this moment in time, if United were relegated to the Championship & then went into administration during that season then they would be docked 12pnts just as every club that has entered into administration has done since the rule was introduced (with the exception of Blackpool).
I also think that rule needs to be reviewed as it was brought in to stop the likes of Leicester going in to administration, paying off next to nothing of what they owed, re-starting & then splashing the cash again. It wasn't introduced to cover scenarios like ours or Bury's

 

[TRUE BELIEVER]

As you said its a big but and you have no proof - I don't know what the PL rules are on administration but at this moment in time, if United were relegated to the Championship & then went into administration during that season then they would be docked 12pnts just as every club that has entered into administration has done since the rule was introduced (with the exception of Blackpool).
I also think that rule needs to be reviewed as it was brought in to stop the likes of Leicester going in to administration, paying off next to nothing of what they owed, re-starting & then splashing the cash again. It wasn't introduced to cover scenarios like ours or Bury's

I'm afraid you have more faith in the EFL than I do MB.

I am sure that if any of the clubs like MUFC were placed in a similar situation, ie. the Glazers turned round and ceased any funding then placed them into administration they would shift heaven and earth to accommodate them, including bending or changing the rules to their benefit.

They would then justify this by saying that it is to benefit of the other clubs to have MUFC in the league.

I'm sorry but my faith in the football authorities is at an all time low and see them as nothing more than a self serving organisation with no interest in the lower end of the football pyramid.

 

[jocklatic]

I'm afraid you have more faith in the EFL than I do MB.

I am sure that if any of the clubs like MUFC were placed in a similar situation, ie. the Glazers turned round and ceased any funding then placed them into administration they would shift heaven and earth to accommodate them, including bending or changing the rules to their benefit.

They would then justify this by saying that it is to benefit of the other clubs to have MUFC in the league.

I'm sorry but my faith in the football authorities is at an all time low and see them as nothing more than a self serving organisation with no interest in the lower end of the football pyramid.

.......my thots too alongside thousands of others no doubt. You only have to look at the fake outrage from PL / FA and the super 6....there will be ZERO punishment for them

 

[Zeb2]

I'm afraid you have more faith in the EFL than I do MB.

I am sure that if any of the clubs like MUFC were placed in a similar situation, ie. the Glazers turned round and ceased any funding then placed them into administration they would shift heaven and earth to accommodate them, including bending or changing the rules to their benefit.

They would then justify this by saying that it is to benefit of the other clubs to have MUFC in the league.

I'm sorry but my faith in the football authorities is at an all time low and see them as nothing more than a self serving organisation with no interest in the lower end of the football pyramid.

The EFL wouldn’t have any input to a hypothetical ManUtd administration as they are governed by the Premier League aren’t they ?

The ‘lower end of the football pyramid’ houses most of the EFLs members.

(That said I don’t know whether there are automatic punishments for going into Admin within the EPL set up)

 

[TRUE BELIEVER]

The EFL wouldn’t have any input to a hypothetical ManUtd administration as they are governed by the Premier League aren’t they ?

The ‘lower end of the football pyramid’ houses most of the EFLs members.

(That said I don’t know whether there are automatic punishments for going into Admin within the EPL set up)

Sorry if I confused you Zeb, but I was replying to a hypothetical situation put forward by MB. He hypothesised that if MUFC were in the lower leagues and the same happened to them they would receive the same treatment as us, I don't believe they would, hence the EFL not PL would be involved.

 

[jocklatic]

The EFL wouldn’t have any input to a hypothetical ManUtd administration as they are governed by the Premier League aren’t they ?

The ‘lower end of the football pyramid’ houses most of the EFLs members.

(That said I don’t know whether there are automatic punishments for going into Admin within the EPL set up)

Sadly imo Zeb the EFL / PL / FA / LA LIGA/ UEFA etc all piss in the same pot....backhand deals, brown paper bags, you scratch our back we'll scratch your back.......all driven by greed, money & power. So if the likes of Utd / Liverpool - Barca/Real M - PSG did go tits up the relevant footballing authorities would be all over it like a rash to sort it out...

 

[king_dezeeuw06]

That "covert" video was utter rubbish - I asked the lad who posted it to put up the rest of the video so that what he said could be heard in context but he refused & said it wasn't relevant. For all anyone else knows that lad could have said "have you heard the rumour that it's all related to a bet on us to go down" & he replied "yes, I've heard a rumour about a bet in the far east." Well so had everybody else & him saying he'd heard about an unsubstantiated rumour doesn't show anything other than he'd heard it like other people had

And none of the things that Latics fans dug up about Choi or Au Yeung in the aftermath of the administration starting meant the EFL could disqualify either of them from owning a football club
The self-certifying thing, as bad as it sounds, was standard.

It's the tests themselves - the EFL can take a lot of the blame for them as they have not previously shown any willingness to implement the changes that would hopefully prevent this kind of thing happening again. The clubs (or rather) the owners also need to shoulder the blame for the tests as they haven't shown the inclination to want them changed

As TB said I think you have a lot more faith in the football authorities than most Latics fans.

 

[Mighty Bongsmon]

I'm afraid you have more faith in the EFL than I do MB.

I am sure that if any of the clubs like MUFC were placed in a similar situation, ie. the Glazers turned round and ceased any funding then placed them into administration they would shift heaven and earth to accommodate them, including bending or changing the rules to their benefit.

They would then justify this by saying that it is to benefit of the other clubs to have MUFC in the league.

I'm sorry but my faith in the football authorities is at an all time low and see them as nothing more than a self serving organisation with no interest in the lower end of the football pyramid.

They may do but there’s absolutely no evidence for that - the evidence that is there shows that every club that has been put into administration whilst in the EFL has received the same punishment (with the exception of Blackpool’s unique case).

 

[TRUE BELIEVER]

They may do but there’s absolutely no evidence for that - the evidence that is there shows that every club that has been put into administration whilst in the EFL has received the same punishment (with the exception of Blackpool’s unique case).

That may be true MB, however there is evidence that some clubs punishment is dished out faster than others, as in the case of Sheff Wed last season. They were being investigated prior to our problems arising and yet their punishment was postponed to give them another season in the Championship and receive the benefits associated with that status and yet our punishment was immediate.

Before you say they were for different offences, I agree, however as we lodged an appeal, as SW did, surely the punishment should be deferred until the outcome of that appeal is confirmed, as happened in the case of SW, but not for us.

It used to be innocent until proven guilty, but unfortunately not for little Wigan, however, founder members Sheffield Wednesday are innocent until found guilty and benefit from the delay in sentencing.

Are you still convinced that there is no favouritism shown ? I'm not.

 

[Mighty Bongsmon]

That may be true MB, however there is evidence that some clubs punishment is dished out faster than others, as in the case of Sheff Wed last season. They were being investigated prior to our problems arising and yet their punishment was postponed to give them another season in the Championship and receive the benefits associated with that status and yet our punishment was immediate.

Before you say they were for different offences, I agree, however as we lodged an appeal, as SW did, surely the punishment should be deferred until the outcome of that appeal is confirmed, as happened in the case of SW, but not for us.

It used to be innocent until proven guilty, but unfortunately not for little Wigan, however, founder members Sheffield Wednesday are innocent until found guilty and benefit from the delay in sentencing.

Are you still convinced that there is no favouritism shown ? I'm not.

Like I've said they are 2 completely different scenarios.
What Sheff Wed were accused of was far more complex than the admin rules that Latics fell foul of that are very black & white (although completely unfair & not designed to cover scenarios like ours when they were designed) & for which there is a prescribed "punishment" that has been applied to every club since that rule was introduced.
Add to that that the delay in the hearing was also down to covid lockdowns & not favouritism
On top of that the hearing date, the hearing itself, the deliberation time, the judgement and the punishment were conducted/handed out by an independent tribunal & not the EFL (who are the ones being accused of favouritism towards certain clubs - the independent tribunal is just that & is a private organistaion called Sports Resolutions - they decided the punishment & not the EFL who people are accusing of bias
On top of all that, it was actually reported that the EFL were pushed for Sheff Wed's pts deduction to apply last season but they messed up by pursuing the wrong case & taking too long to charge club officials. Those cases had to be dismissed by the independent commission & the FFP case was brought too late. It was the IDC that decided for those reasons, along with inconsistencies in the EFL's punishments, the 12pnt deduction should be applied in the new season.

So did the EFL prove themselves to be incompetent? Completely Did they prove themselves to be showing favouritism towards some clubs over others? Not at all

 

[N"Zogbia's fan club]

I think Derby got away with it all purely because they engaged the best sports lawyer in the UK - Nick de Marco QC. I don't think he ever lost a sports case.
Same as Manchester City - how they got away with serious breach of Uefa's financial fair play rules.
Money talks at the end of the day.
And EFL cannot afford the best sports lawyer unfortunately.

 

[Mighty Bongsmon]

I think Derby got away with it all purely because they engaged the best sports lawyer in the UK - Nick de Marco QC. I don't think he ever lost a sports case.
Same as Manchester City - how they got away with serious breach of Uefa's financial fair play rules.
Money talks at the end of the day.
And EFL cannot afford the best sports lawyer unfortunately.

Well they haven't completely got away with it - although I do know that one of the issues raised by derby in their defence was that they consulted with the EFL as to whether this accountancy trick (the selling of the stadium one) was acceptable & received written conformation from the EFL that it was.
Apparently it was only further down the line that the EFL backtracked, told them that it wasn't & charged them
Like I've said, they're incompetent

 

[jocklatic]

Well they haven't completely got away with it - although I do know that one of the issues raised by derby in their defence was that they consulted with the EFL as to whether this accountancy trick (the selling of the stadium one) was acceptable & received written conformation from the EFL that it was.
Apparently it was only further down the line that the EFL backtracked, told them that it wasn't & charged them
Like I've said, they're incompetent

You seem to paint they organisations as beacons of light, bastions of honour & all above board MB, yet in some cases the slight doubts & niggles some people have of these organisations ( PL / EFL/ UEFA / FIFA etc etc) they tend to have reason for the doubts & niggles....just a few examples - Sepp Blatter found guilty of taken bribes, Michel Platini suspended from football...Qatar given WC despite protests from all corners of the footballing globe. I've no doubt the UK footballing ruling bodies are just as prevalent as the aforementioned but I guess you can just carry on trying to convince us doubters how honourable & trustworthy the EFL /PL are

 

[TRUE BELIEVER]

Like I've said they are 2 completely different scenarios.
What Sheff Wed were accused of was far more complex than the admin rules that Latics fell foul of that are very black & white (although completely unfair & not designed to cover scenarios like ours when they were designed) & for which there is a prescribed "punishment" that has been applied to every club since that rule was introduced.
Add to that that the delay in the hearing was also down to covid lockdowns & not favouritism
On top of that the hearing date, the hearing itself, the deliberation time, the judgement and the punishment were conducted/handed out by an independent tribunal & not the EFL (who are the ones being accused of favouritism towards certain clubs - the independent tribunal is just that & is a private organistaion called Sports Resolutions - they decided the punishment & not the EFL who people are accusing of bias
On top of all that, it was actually reported that the EFL were pushed for Sheff Wed's pts deduction to apply last season but they messed up by pursuing the wrong case & taking too long to charge club officials. Those cases had to be dismissed by the independent commission & the FFP case was brought too late. It was the IDC that decided for those reasons, along with inconsistencies in the EFL's punishments, the 12pnt deduction should be applied in the new season.

So did the EFL prove themselves to be incompetent? Completely Did they prove themselves to be showing favouritism towards some clubs over others? Not at all

You seem to have taken my point and totally changed the context.

As I said, I understand that they were different charges but the point I made is that both were appealed. The Sheffield appeal postponed their punishment, our appeal didn't. One was punished whilst still being investigated, the other was punished when a guilty verdict was pronounced after appeal.

Whether it was the independent disciplinary committee that agreed to postpone the punishment or the EFL there is no doubt that we were deducted 12 [points before we were found guilty after appeal.

 

[Mighty Bongsmon]

You seem to have taken my point and totally changed the context.

As I said, I understand that they were different charges but the point I made is that both were appealed. The Sheffield appeal postponed their punishment, our appeal didn't. One was punished whilst still being investigated, the other was punished when a guilty verdict was pronounced after appeal.

Whether it was the independent disciplinary committee that agreed to postpone the punishment or the EFL there is no doubt that we were deducted 12 [points before we were found guilty after appeal.

You're incorrect.
Wednesday's appeal didn't postpone the punishment - they didn't get a 12 point punishment dished out to them until 31st July after an initial hearing to decide whether they'd breached the EFL regs and it was said then by the tribunal that it wouldn't apply until the 20/21 season with so I believe one of the major reasons behind that being what an utter mess the EFL had made of deciding what they'd done wrong & charging them in the first place
Sheffield Wednesday did not appeal the punishment until August 17th after the written reasons for the original verdict & sanctions were released

Latics were not found guilty after appeal as there was nothing for Latics to be guilty of. There is an automatic 12 point penalty for entering administration/suffering an insolvency event regardless of the circumstances - The administrators appealed knowing full well (as they'd stated beforehand) that their only grounds for an appeal was force majeure). The appeal tribunal ruled that this did not apply in Latics circumstances