I don't have the language skills, but I would like to know about his comments about foreigners and immigrants in a clear, accurate translation and unambiguous way. A little while ago he had three stratifications, northern Europeans, foreigners, and 'the Chinese' which alerted me to thinking he was a straightforward racist. If he is now digging out immigrants, and also digging out Islam it would be worth knowing what he says in a crystal clear form. It is bad enough that as a very peculiar individual he is involved with Charlton, but I want to know if he can be exposed as the clear evil racist he appears to be. Of course being a racist actually has appeal for some, maybe the inhabitants of the very white sleepy town of St Truiden especially. However Belgian born Romalu Lukaku recently tweeted that if he plays well be is reported as Belgian over there, but play badly he is heavily framed as being of Congalese descent. I know it wouldn't be at the level of the hunting down of Corbyn, but an exposure of the racist nature of our owner would gain traction in places hitherto unexploited. Malky McKay's stinking racism towards Vincent Tan had ripples beyond the world of football.
"The supporters' protests do me little, because I understand that they do not really know me, do not know what really happened and continue on social media and unscrupulous newspapers looking for thrill"
With every quote he comes across as a bargain basement Donald Trump. Nothing is his fault, all the blame with social media and an unscrupulous press that does not recognise his genius.
Just a question re EFL, what powers assuming Roland has broken any rules re running Charlton has the EFL got, is it limited to fines and point deductions etc., or have they got actual teeth, ie they could make him sell the club?
Not certain if this is the correct place to ask this question?
My guess is the only other sanction the EFL have is the nuclear option of throwing a club out of the League, thereby making it virtually worthless.
Even the threat of that happening would bring any sane owner into line, but...
Reading some of that I really don't know how he passed the fit and proper test. Racist views, no regard for staff, delusional to say the least of it.
CAST is now trying to find out whether making racist remarks in public is a criterion the EFL apply in the ODT. Be prepared for the possibility that it is just fine and dandy with the EFL, so long as fixtures are fulfilled :-(
I fear you are right.
It should be a morality test as well, as letting the likes of Duchatelet own a club just leaves the EFL open to owners that not only damage clubs financially, but also bring the game into disrepute at a time when racism simply has no place in society. It is ironic that the 'Fit and Proper' test is not, in itself, 'Fit and Proper'.
I'm not so sure about this. The EFL are in difficult position when it comes to approving ownership. God knows there are few enough people willing to throw their money down the drain owning a football league club, I can imagine they would be completely resistant to raising the bar to entry any higher.
Besides, FA rules cover this side of things and disrepute charges can be brought by them. Not that it's always a straightforward situation. Wigan owner Dave Whelan was punished for his inappropriate remarks about Jewish and Chinese people, even though the same FA verdict concluded that he was not a racist. You'd be hard pressed to find anybody that thought Dave Whelan was actually a bad football club owner.
Just a question re EFL, what powers assuming Roland has broken any rules re running Charlton has the EFL got, is it limited to fines and point deductions etc., or have they got actual teeth, ie they could make him sell the club?
Not certain if this is the correct place to ask this question?
At the moment the answers to your -very relevant - questions are unclear and CAST will hope to get clarity when it meets the EFL. We don't think they have the power to make him sell, it would be a legal minefield. That said, they have got themselves into a tricky precedent re Blackpool as they have retrospectively banned Belekon, despite previously waving him through and allowing him to pour millions into Blackpool to help them get to the FAPL. They now say he cannot own the club because a court in that fine upstanding bastion of justice Kyrgyzstan has sentenced him in absentia to 20 years for money laundering.
That's a good point at which to repeat the reminder that the CEO of the EFL, Shaun Harvey, is a long time friend of Karl Oyston.
Just a question re EFL, what powers assuming Roland has broken any rules re running Charlton has the EFL got, is it limited to fines and point deductions etc., or have they got actual teeth, ie they could make him sell the club?
Not certain if this is the correct place to ask this question?
At the moment the answers to your -very relevant - questions are unclear and CAST will hope to get clarity when it meets the EFL. We don't think they have the power to make him sell, it would be a legal minefield. That said, they have got themselves into a tricky precedent re Blackpool as they have retrospectively banned Belekon, despite previously waving him through and allowing him to pour millions into Blackpool to help them get to the FAPL. They now say he cannot own the club because a court in that fine upstanding bastion of justice Kyrgyzstan has sentenced him in absentia to 20 years for money laundering.
That's a good point at which to repeat the reminder that the CEO of the EFL, Shaun Harvey, is a long time friend of Karl Oyston.
Thank you for your answer, in a way that was exactly what I was expecting, I awaits the discussions and hopefully the answer from Cast, I was fairly certain that they couldn’t force him to sell, but I thought the question should be raised.
Reading some of that I really don't know how he passed the fit and proper test. Racist views, no regard for staff, delusional to say the least of it.
CAST is now trying to find out whether making racist remarks in public is a criterion the EFL apply in the ODT. Be prepared for the possibility that it is just fine and dandy with the EFL, so long as fixtures are fulfilled :-(
I fear you are right.
It should be a morality test as well, as letting the likes of Duchatelet own a club just leaves the EFL open to owners that not only damage clubs financially, but also bring the game into disrepute at a time when racism simply has no place in society. It is ironic that the 'Fit and Proper' test is not, in itself, 'Fit and Proper'.
I'm not so sure about this. The EFL are in difficult position when it comes to approving ownership. God knows there are few enough people willing to throw their money down the drain owning a football league club, I can imagine they would be completely resistant to raising the bar to entry any higher.
Besides, FA rules cover this side of things and disrepute charges can be brought by them. Not that it's always a straightforward situation. Wigan owner Dave Whelan was punished for his inappropriate remarks about Jewish and Chinese people, even though the same FA verdict concluded that he was not a racist. You'd be hard pressed to find anybody that thought Dave Whelan was actually a bad football club owner.
I don't think it needs to be raised that far really. Even just an interview and background check may well have brought out certain views. It is done for the average employee, and often weeds out those with more extreme/inappropriate views.
That being said, I don't actually know what the EFL test entails, is it just a paper exercise or does it include something like the above?
I get what you are saying about potential owners being thin on the ground, it is a balancing act for sure. The current process doesn't seem to be working, at least not for Charlton, Blackpool etc.
There are presumably some lines the EFL wouldn't allow clubs to cross. I dunno, an owner who allows a shirt sponsor that promotes dope tourism to Denver, or a club that carries programme ads for far right political organisations or whatever. Actions that whilst within the law are very much frowned upon like part of the ground being an HQ for a campaign to remove votes for women or euthanasia for the disabled. My point is not about what wrong things a club can do, but the exact procedures and sanctions that are available to the EFL or even the FA. If the line is always that clubs are independent business that can't be interfered with, what powers do these bodies actually have?
i know this may not be the right time but i dont particularly agree with the idea of bottled water anyway ...tap water is just fine just fill up your non disposable water from the tap
Possible sanctions Ive just lifted from the EFL's own site include the following:
Decisions 91.1 The Disciplinary Commission may at any time make a decision, and may make more than one decision at different times on different aspects of the matters to be determined.
91.2 A decision may:
91.2.1 order a party to do or refrain from doing anything;
91.2.2 order a specific performance;
91.2.3 make a declaration on any matter to be determined;
91.2.4 issue a reprimand or warning as to the future conduct of a party;
91.2.5 order the payment of compensation to The League, any Club, any other club, Player or other person;
91.2.6 order a suspension of membership of The League;
91.2.7 order a deduction of points;
91.2.8 impose a financial penalty payable to The League;
91.2.9 recommend expulsion from membership of The League;
91.2.10 order a withdrawal or loss of benefit otherwise available to members of The League e.g. basic award or ladder payment;
91.2.11 impose an embargo on registration of Players;
91.2.12 order any other sanction as the Disciplinary Commission may think fit; and
91.2.13 order that interest be payable on any sums awarded under this Regulation for such period and at such rates as the Disciplinary Commission thinks fit.
I think it's worth waiting for a proper translation of his potentially incendiary remarks to the Belgian press, and deciding whether or not to raise a complaint to the EFL on the basis of their own regulations, which can be found on other pages of the link.
Hopefully the Fuck All will print the interview off, frame it and put it on the wall... then, when next raving looney comes along trying to buy an English football club they can cross reference...
It's probably worth waiting until he organizes his own PR attack following all the recent bad press for him. If it's anything like his bizarre, rambling statement that led to Mel Baroni's departure or his 'vinegar pisser' outburst I'm sure there'll be something in there to confuse and delight everybody.
It's probably worth waiting until he organizes his own PR attack following all the recent bad press for him. If it's anything like his bizarre, rambling statement that led to Mel Baroni's departure or his 'vinegar pisser' outburst I'm sure there'll be something in there to confuse and delight everybody.
And with a bit of luck ROT, or CARD, or one of our other imaginative protest groups, will be able to turn it into a boomerang and send it back with interest.
Sorry if i've missed it, but how sure are we on the translation? Is it google or a native speaker? If the words and context are accurate this is pretty shocking.
"The supporters' protests do me little, because I understand that they do not really know me, do not know what really happened and continue on social media and unscrupulous newspapers looking for thrill"
With every quote he comes across as a bargain basement Donald Trump. Nothing is his fault, all the blame with social media and an unscrupulous press that does not recognise his genius.
What lower vilification than that is there!!? And we are stuck with him.
Sorry if i've missed it, but how sure are we on the translation? Is it google or a native speaker? If the words and context are accurate this is pretty shocking.
Current translation is google
@Weegie Addick studied Dutch at university, and plans to translate it after work this evening. So there should be a much more reliable English version of the article by tomorrow.
Sorry if i've missed it, but how sure are we on the translation? Is it google or a native speaker? If the words and context are accurate this is pretty shocking.
Current translation is google
@Weegie Addick studied Dutch at university, and plans to translate it after work this evening. So there should be a much more reliable English version of the article by tomorrow.
Comments
A little while ago he had three stratifications, northern Europeans, foreigners, and 'the Chinese' which alerted me to thinking he was a straightforward racist. If he is now digging out immigrants, and also digging out Islam it would be worth knowing what he says in a crystal clear form.
It is bad enough that as a very peculiar individual he is involved with Charlton, but I want to know if he can be exposed as the clear evil racist he appears to be.
Of course being a racist actually has appeal for some, maybe the inhabitants of the very white sleepy town of St Truiden especially. However Belgian born Romalu Lukaku recently tweeted that if he plays well be is reported as Belgian over there, but play badly he is heavily framed as being of Congalese descent.
I know it wouldn't be at the level of the hunting down of Corbyn, but an exposure of the racist nature of our owner would gain traction in places hitherto unexploited. Malky McKay's stinking racism towards Vincent Tan had ripples beyond the world of football.
Even the threat of that happening would bring any sane owner into line, but...
I'm not so sure about this. The EFL are in difficult position when it comes to approving ownership. God knows there are few enough people willing to throw their money down the drain owning a football league club, I can imagine they would be completely resistant to raising the bar to entry any higher.
Besides, FA rules cover this side of things and disrepute charges can be brought by them. Not that it's always a straightforward situation. Wigan owner Dave Whelan was punished for his inappropriate remarks about Jewish and Chinese people, even though the same FA verdict concluded that he was not a racist. You'd be hard pressed to find anybody that thought Dave Whelan was actually a bad football club owner.
That's a good point at which to repeat the reminder that the CEO of the EFL, Shaun Harvey, is a long time friend of Karl Oyston.
That being said, I don't actually know what the EFL test entails, is it just a paper exercise or does it include something like the above?
I get what you are saying about potential owners being thin on the ground, it is a balancing act for sure. The current process doesn't seem to be working, at least not for Charlton, Blackpool etc.
My point is not about what wrong things a club can do, but the exact procedures and sanctions that are available to the EFL or even the FA.
If the line is always that clubs are independent business that can't be interfered with, what powers do these bodies actually have?
save the environment ..just sayin
however the blokes a crackpot
Decisions
91.1 The Disciplinary Commission may at any time make a decision, and may make more than one decision at different times on different aspects of the matters to be determined.
91.2 A decision may:
91.2.1 order a party to do or refrain from doing anything;
91.2.2 order a specific performance;
91.2.3 make a declaration on any matter to be determined;
91.2.4 issue a reprimand or warning as to the future conduct of a party;
91.2.5 order the payment of compensation to The League, any Club, any other club, Player or other person;
91.2.6 order a suspension of membership of The League;
91.2.7 order a deduction of points;
91.2.8 impose a financial penalty payable to The League;
91.2.9 recommend expulsion from membership of The League;
91.2.10 order a withdrawal or loss of benefit otherwise available to members of The League e.g. basic award or ladder payment;
91.2.11 impose an embargo on registration of Players;
91.2.12 order any other sanction as the Disciplinary Commission may think fit; and
91.2.13 order that interest be payable on any sums awarded under this Regulation for such period and at such rates as the Disciplinary Commission thinks fit.
https://efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules--regulations/section-8---offences-inquiries-commissions-disputes-and-appeals/
I think it's worth waiting for a proper translation of his potentially incendiary remarks to the Belgian press, and deciding whether or not to raise a complaint to the EFL on the basis of their own regulations, which can be found on other pages of the link.
Or not!
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/roman-abramovich-used-chelsea-to-sanitise-his-image-and-made-them-winners-ddbz9jlsl
@Weegie Addick studied Dutch at university, and plans to translate it after work this evening. So there should be a much more reliable English version of the article by tomorrow.