Further to your email, whilst I understand that the decision of the independent disciplinary commission is theirs alone I would like to ask whether these decisions are reviewed by EFL for consistency with past decisions.
It is a poor process that has no checks and balances and this is clearly a contentious decision that has huge ramifications for Charlton Athletic.
Please advise whether there has been any consideration of this decision by EFL
I wrote to the EFL on the !st August a copy of my email is on page 6 of this thread. Below is a response I have received in the last few minutes. Basically they passed the whole case, including sanctions, to an Independent Commission...i.e a cop-out!!
Hello Malc
Thank you for your email.
While I note your views on this matter, it is first worth clarifying that one of the main responsibilities of the EFL is to enforce and uphold its rules and regulations, as agreed by and on behalf of all member Clubs, in order to maintain sporting integrity.
In November 2019 the EFL issued Sheffield Wednesday with a charge relating to breaches of its Profitability and Sustainability (P&S) rules. Since then the matter has been in the hands of the Independent Disciplinary Commission, and it is the Commission themselves who has responsibility for reaching a decision on any potential sanction, following representations from both parties. While we share the view that these matters should be concluded as quickly as possible, due to the complex and legal nature of the charges, the process can take a significant period of time to be resolved.
The panel conducted a full hearing at the end of June 2020, before finding Sheffield Wednesday guilty based on the fact that the Club should not have included profits from the sale of Hillsborough Stadium in financial statements for the period ending July 2018. The panel therefore decided the Club will face a 12 point deduction, and that this would take effect in season 2020/21.
For absolute clarity, while EFL rules determine the application of points deductions for an insolvency event, such as Administration (in the case of Wigan Athletic), the decision and timing of any sanctions determined by an Independent Disciplinary Commission, is entirely at their discretion.
I hope that has provided further clarity in relation to your query and thank you for contacting the EFL.
Regards,
Jessica
Supporter Services Department
EFL
I received an identical response this morning from Danny in the Supporters Services Department.
Yes, identical received this morning from Danny.
I trust that we are allowed to see the IDC decision making process that led to application of the sanction next season rather than this. Transparency in the decision making process is crucial otherwise the suspicion will remain that deferral of a punishment which should have been enacted immediately was made purely out of the fear that an appeal could drag matters into next season,
Not a good enough reason in my opinion given that Sheff Weds then profit from their 'crime' by not dropping down a division and losing revenue but retaining Championship status for 2020-21 and Sky-Bet TV money, albeit with a 12 point penalty.
While I note your views on this matter, it is first worth clarifying that one of the main responsibilities of the EFL is to enforce and uphold its rules and regulations, as agreed by and on behalf of all member Clubs, in order to maintain sporting integrity.
In November 2019 the EFL issued Sheffield Wednesday with a charge relating to breaches of its Profitability and Sustainability (P&S) rules. Since then the matter has been in the hands of the Independent Disciplinary Commission, and it is the Commission themselves who has responsibility for reaching a decision on any potential sanction, following representations from both parties. While we share the view that these matters should be concluded as quickly as possible, due to the complex and legal nature of the charges, the process can take a significant period of time to be resolved.
The panel conducted a full hearing at the end of June 2020, before finding Sheffield Wednesday guilty based on the fact that the Club should not have included profits from the sale of Hillsborough Stadium in financial statements for the period ending July 2018. The panel therefore decided the Club will face a 12 point deduction, and that this would take effect in season 2020/21.
For absolute clarity, while EFL rules determine the application of points deductions for an insolvency event, such as Administration (in the case of Wigan Athletic), the decision and timing of any sanctions determined by an Independent Disciplinary Commission, is entirely at their discretion.
Kind Regard
Danny
Supporter Services Department
EFL
Timescale and legal issues etc is waffle. If they’d been anywhere near the play offs it would have got done far quicker. Imagine this decision being made 4 days before the play off final if Wednesday had been in it
Wishing Charlton good luck with this. Two things, Wednesday were lucky that the independent panel set the punishment at only -12 points, also that the points are carried over to next season. If you read the full story, they committed fraud and deception. The sale of their stadium, to themselves, was back dated by over a year, the price was inflated and no money was ever transferred by the sale. The owner, created new companies and moved the sale around, this was done over one year after the FFP had shown them to have overspent. They will get hit next season with a further charge.
Not to mention the illegal sponsorship deals, also designed to help them with FFP. Isn't there a fake taxi (no not that one) company that don't actually exist as a taxi firm sponsoring them? Basically another dodgy company set up by Chansiri .
How have they been able to get away with this?
That side of the club has been going on for a few years, their chairman basically set up several companies that don't actually trade. These companies can be easily checked via Companies House. It is a shambolic set up, that is now imploding very quickly. Unfortunately the cheating has been left unchecked for too long, and as a result other honest championship clubs will pay the price of Wednesday's corrupt ways. Although it has given the red side of Sheffield lots of laughs, it doesn't help Charlton.
Rod Liddle in The Sunday Times today (behind paywall so full article)
The
new season may be about to start but the old one, the weird one, keeps
clinging on, delivering its cornucopia of manifest injustices. It would
take a master of sophistry to explain away the comparative fates of
Sheffield Wednesday, Charlton Athletic and Wigan Athletic — and I’m not
sure that Rick Parry, chairman of the English Football League,
necessarily fits that description.
Wigan,
you may remember, were handed a 12-point deduction for going into
administration. This deduction relegated them. Last week they failed in
their appeal against the decision. In June the club was taken over by a
shadowy Hong Kong partnership that, as virtually its first act, put the
club into administration (a record for English football). This may or
may not have been linked to a huge bet in
southeast Asia on Wigan getting relegated, nobody knows. Sheffield
Wednesday, meanwhile, were also handed a 12-point deduction for having
flogged off their ground in 2017-18 to meet the financial fair play
(FFP) rules, wholly against the EFL’s stipulations. But the independent
tribunal that determines each case decided Wednesday should serve their
sentence next season. Those
12 points would have relegated them and, according to the rules, should
have done so. They have effectively survived by cheating. As one poster
on a Sheffield Wednesday fan forum put it: “We’ve driven a tank through
the rules and got away with it.” That, incidentally, was the general
view.
Wednesday’s
reprieve meant that poor Charlton were relegated. Wednesday took six
points from Charlton last season using players whom, under FFP, they
could not remotely afford. Charlton’s yearly wage bill is just short of
£8 million. Wednesday’s last season was £21.8 million. In 2018 Wednesday
had the fifth-highest wage bill in the Championship.Charlton
are said to be considering legal action against the decision, which for
a virtually ownerless club would be some feat. They claim they have the
written support of “seven or eight” Championship rivals. My guess is
that those clubs would include Middlesbrough, whose excellent chairman,
Steve Gibson, has been a doughty campaigner against infractions of FFP,
Bristol City (who feel likewise) and Millwall (who also enjoy taking six
points from Charlton each season). This is just a guess, however, as
none of those clubs have officially confirmed my suspicions. Those who
haven’t signed up in support probably quite like the idea of a team
starting next season 12 points behind the rest.Why
the disparity between Wigan and Wednesday? The EFL insists that the
decision on timing was solely down to the independent panels that
adjudicate on such matters and waves the reliable Mr Covid around as a
reason for Wednesday’s hearing not taking place until the Championship
play-off final. And yet Wednesday were charged in November 2019: surely
any decision must relate to the season in which they were charged?The
EFL has also pointed out that Wigan’s 12 points was an automatic
penalty for going into administration, whereas Wednesday’s was a
“disciplinary” matter; a bizarre discrepancy. Wednesday brazenly flouted
the rules to give themselves an advantage. Wigan, meanwhile, were the
victims of a kind of heist. Both Wigan and Charlton enter League One
next season either ownerless or having owners nobody knows anything
about, probably in both cases managerless and having had their best
players poached. Frankly, it will be a minor miracle if Charlton even
exist in the autumn, given their ownership troubles.There
could — and certainly should — be two Championship teams starting the
new season on minus-12 points. Some 50 miles down the M1 from
Hillsborough, Derby County face an adjudication panel for having flouted
FFP with an even more cavalier disregard. They too sold their ground
for a hilarious £80 million to keep themselves in the black. A 12-point
penalty this time around would not have affected Derby, so the rules
state it should apply next season.Meanwhile,
the EFL, to its credit, has accepted that the FFP rules are somewhat
short of pristine and need looking at. My contention is that it is the
owners who should be penalised for chicanery, spending too much, going
bust, or what have you, not the clubs themselves. Hit them with fines
and disqualification. And tighten up those “fit and proper” rules for
who is allowed to own a club. Hell, under the current definitions, even
Matt Hancock would be given the go-ahead.You
want more woe? Here’s some. National League side Dover Athletic look
like they’re about to go bust, the first football victims of Covid-19.
The club asked players to take a temporary 20 per cent pay cut, the
players — always mindful of the bigger picture — voted not to do so. The
entire team are available on free transfer. Further, chairman Jim
Parmenter has announced that if no investment is found by the end of
this month, the club will go into liquidation. More clubs, surely, will
follow.
So, are we still appealing against this, and given the previous behaviour of the EFL, will sheff Wednesday be relegated around March next year ? And, who is at The Valley to decide the course of action ?
So, are we still appealing against this, and given the previous behaviour of the EFL, will sheff Wednesday be relegated around March next year ? And, who is at The Valley to decide the course of action ?
I would assume that any appeals by EFL and/or Wednesday will occur first. Depending on the result(s) any legal action (I doubt we can appeal) would follow.
If any appeal did go in from Charlton (Farnell or Nimer) it would probably be thrown out on the basis that neither are recognised by the EFL as owners of CAFC. If Duche is recognised as the owner then it would be worth his while appealing as he could benefit to the tune of 1.5 million.
What strikes me as particlularly unfair is that with the Wigan punishment, the EFL basically told Wigan that if they got relegated they would have the points deducted the next season. I presumed the idea was to ensure that they increased the chances of getting some kind of punishment. Sheffield Wednesday got insufficient points to avoid a deduction punishing them so it was the right time to punish them. Unless an EFL punishment is about giving teams as much chance as possible to avoid punishment. Surely, it should be the other way.
Rod Liddle in The Sunday Times today (behind paywall so full article)
The
new season may be about to start but the old one, the weird one, keeps
clinging on, delivering its cornucopia of manifest injustices. It would
take a master of sophistry to explain away the comparative fates of
Sheffield Wednesday, Charlton Athletic and Wigan Athletic — and I’m not
sure that Rick Parry, chairman of the English Football League,
necessarily fits that description.
Wigan,
you may remember, were handed a 12-point deduction for going into
administration. This deduction relegated them. Last week they failed in
their appeal against the decision. In June the club was taken over by a
shadowy Hong Kong partnership that, as virtually its first act, put the
club into administration (a record for English football). This may or
may not have been linked to a huge bet in
southeast Asia on Wigan getting relegated, nobody knows. Sheffield
Wednesday, meanwhile, were also handed a 12-point deduction for having
flogged off their ground in 2017-18 to meet the financial fair play
(FFP) rules, wholly against the EFL’s stipulations. But the independent
tribunal that determines each case decided Wednesday should serve their
sentence next season. Those
12 points would have relegated them and, according to the rules, should
have done so. They have effectively survived by cheating. As one poster
on a Sheffield Wednesday fan forum put it: “We’ve driven a tank through
the rules and got away with it.” That, incidentally, was the general
view.
Wednesday’s
reprieve meant that poor Charlton were relegated. Wednesday took six
points from Charlton last season using players whom, under FFP, they
could not remotely afford. Charlton’s yearly wage bill is just short of
£8 million. Wednesday’s last season was £21.8 million. In 2018 Wednesday
had the fifth-highest wage bill in the Championship.
Charlton
are said to be considering legal action against the decision, which for
a virtually ownerless club would be some feat. They claim they have the
written support of “seven or eight” Championship rivals. My guess is
that those clubs would include Middlesbrough, whose excellent chairman,
Steve Gibson, has been a doughty campaigner against infractions of FFP,
Bristol City (who feel likewise) and Millwall (who also enjoy taking six
points from Charlton each season). This is just a guess, however, as
none of those clubs have officially confirmed my suspicions. Those who
haven’t signed up in support probably quite like the idea of a team
starting next season 12 points behind the rest.
Why
the disparity between Wigan and Wednesday? The EFL insists that the
decision on timing was solely down to the independent panels that
adjudicate on such matters and waves the reliable Mr Covid around as a
reason for Wednesday’s hearing not taking place until the Championship
play-off final. And yet Wednesday were charged in November 2019: surely
any decision must relate to the season in which they were charged?
The
EFL has also pointed out that Wigan’s 12 points was an automatic
penalty for going into administration, whereas Wednesday’s was a
“disciplinary” matter; a bizarre discrepancy. Wednesday brazenly flouted
the rules to give themselves an advantage. Wigan, meanwhile, were the
victims of a kind of heist. Both Wigan and Charlton enter League One
next season either ownerless or having owners nobody knows anything
about, probably in both cases managerless and having had their best
players poached. Frankly, it will be a minor miracle if Charlton even
exist in the autumn, given their ownership troubles.
There
could — and certainly should — be two Championship teams starting the
new season on minus-12 points. Some 50 miles down the M1 from
Hillsborough, Derby County face an adjudication panel for having flouted
FFP with an even more cavalier disregard. They too sold their ground
for a hilarious £80 million to keep themselves in the black. A 12-point
penalty this time around would not have affected Derby, so the rules
state it should apply next season.
Meanwhile,
the EFL, to its credit, has accepted that the FFP rules are somewhat
short of pristine and need looking at. My contention is that it is the
owners who should be penalised for chicanery, spending too much, going
bust, or what have you, not the clubs themselves. Hit them with fines
and disqualification. And tighten up those “fit and proper” rules for
who is allowed to own a club. Hell, under the current definitions, even
Matt Hancock would be given the go-ahead.
You
want more woe? Here’s some. National League side Dover Athletic look
like they’re about to go bust, the first football victims of Covid-19.
The club asked players to take a temporary 20 per cent pay cut, the
players — always mindful of the bigger picture — voted not to do so. The
entire team are available on free transfer. Further, chairman Jim
Parmenter has announced that if no investment is found by the end of
this month, the club will go into liquidation. More clubs, surely, will
follow.
A good write up, but Wednesdays ground sale directly was not the reason for the punishment, as you state, Derby also sold themselves their own stadium, as did Reading and Villa. The sales are within the rules, those clubs exploited a loophole in the EFLs rules. The problem for the EFL was that the sale price was some what inflated. However those clubs did the sale in the same year of their accounts. Wednesday sold themselves their stadium and then back dated the sale to a previous financial year the date of the real sale and the registration of the sale to the land registry was a whole financial year later. The company that "bought" the stadium wasn't even in existence at the date of the back dated sale. The company that "bought " the stadium was registered at Companies House much later than the sale. Also the stadium in worth far less than the transaction price, and no monies were ever transferred! Basically they did a fraudulent transaction and used lawyers to argue that the EFL has given them permission to act this way, i.e. they claim the EFL via email gave permission. To value the stadium at £60 million is a joke, the whole club including the stadium would not reach that figure. Chansiri the chairman basically told the EFL to do one. Chansiri, has very little money, his very wealthy dad bankrolls him, but his funding has now been cut. So it will be interesting to see how they survive the coming season.
So the issue of whether the amount each club has "sold" their stadium for has been sidestepped thus far. I appreciate it's probably very difficult to determine a suitable value but there must be some way, otherwise what's to stop a club "selling" it for 500m?
So the issue of whether the amount each club has "sold" their stadium for has been sidestepped thus far. I appreciate it's probably very difficult to determine a suitable value but there must be some way, otherwise what's to stop a club "selling" it for 500m?
Nothing.
And there is nothing to stop those owners from selling the ground back to the club for (say) £1, and the club re selling it for £60m and round we go again.
The FFP is a joke. I predict that the salary cap will be just as effective. At best it will be useful for a club to manage agents and players expectations, but will never stop a club from getting and paying a player they really want.
If as an organisation you bring in important FFP rules for the future of the game, then member clubs seek to bypass them through loopholes against the spirit of the rules but one club cocks up, you would expect the EFL to come down on them like a tonne of bricks. You would expect it wouldn't you?
If as an organisation you bring in important FFP rules for the future of the game, then member clubs seek to bypass them through loopholes against the spirit of the rules but one club cocks up, you would expect the EFL to come down on them like a tonne of bricks. You would expect it wouldn't you?
They will do when it's someone like Oldham or Accrington...
If as an organisation you bring in important FFP rules for the future of the game, then member clubs seek to bypass them through loopholes against the spirit of the rules but one club cocks up, you would expect the EFL to come down on them like a tonne of bricks. You would expect it wouldn't you?
They will do when it's someone like Oldham or Accrington...
Sadly, we know this is true. All clubs are equal but some are more equal than others.
FWIW I've copied SkyBet's CEO in on the complaint to EFL over their non-punishment of SheffWeds.
I got a reply saying he'd fwd it to "Michael Afflick who manages our relationships with sponsors..." am awaiting anything from MA His is a name others could contact on this and other 'EFL failing game integrity' matters How much any "Sky" branded entity cares for honest, decent and respectable remains to be seen. It's only ever about the Benjamins with that rabble.
EFL got another email yesterday contesting their conduct. If anybody's got the contact details of any other parties who might bring pressure to bear on EFL please share.
message was
As a lifelong football supporter I am deeply concerned that EFL’s conduct in the Sheffield Wednesday overspending issue undermines the fundamental integrity of the Championship competition and the game as a whole.
It is a matter of record that Sheffield Wednesday (SW) were charged with the spending breach in November 2019. Fully 8 months later a hearing found them guilty of a breach. Nowhere have I found even an attempt by EFL to justify the delay in executing investigations and instigating the hearing. The COVID issue might have brought about some weeks of interruption, but in truth there was no justification for action to have been delayed even into March 2020. A delay of this magnitude and the absence of any justification whatever goes way beyond even monumental inefficiency.
We are now told that the points deduction penalty is to be imposed in the 2020/21 season. I cannot find the direct quote but justification for this is apparently sought in the notion that the penalty can’t be imposed in 2019/20 because the season is already finished. This is manifestly false as the Championship season does not end until 4 August 2020. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t use a late judgement as the excuse to defer punishment when the business of the judgement was delayed for no good reason at all.
Indeed, deferral of the punishment ensures that any notion of justice is utterly defeated in this matter. Points deduction in 20/21 permits SW an additional year to plan for the consequence. The very breach, of which they are guilty, enabled them to compete with an unfair advantage for 3 seasons from 15/16 to 17/18. I put it to you that as arbiters of the regulations and stewards of the competition you have been on notice as to SW’s potential rule breaking since early 2017 when SW’s 15/16 accounts were published. From which point a diligent and equable arbiter would have kept SW’s finances under scrutiny. To rely on the date of publication of SW’s 17/18 accounts as the reasonable starting point for EFL to pay attention to SW’s overspending is risible. In essence SW were at an unfair advantage for fully 4 seasons and now suffer no tangible penalty.
The impotence of EFL around SW’s misconduct is inconsistent with Birmingham’s similar issue a season before. Birmingham had a 9 point deduction imposed immediately for their transgression. How are we to interpret the fact that, Birmingham’s penalty demoted them just 3 places with no realistic likelihood of subsequent relegation but an immediate imposition of SW’s penalty should relegate them?
EFL’s reaction to the penalty handed to Macclesfield Town was also starkly different to EFL’s conduct with SW.
All of that in the context of negligible communication from EFL added to the opacity of the investigative process and hearing leaves we football supporters with the overwhelming impression that EFL have at no point been remotely concerned that justice be done in the SW case. SW’s placing in the 19/20 season obviously has huge significance for at least one and possibly two other clubs. Hence my contention that the integrity of that competition has been fundamentally undermined, principally by EFL’s conduct in this matter.
I look forward to your comments on the issues raised and will be particularly interested to hear any additional facts and clarifications which could serve to illuminate football supporters’ understanding of EFL’s standpoint on this ignominious affair.
Yours faithfully
I got the stock reply from 'Danny' banging on about how they "...stuck it to Wigan, cos them's the rules, but all this SW biz is down to the independent-smoke-screen thingumajig..." I never raised the Wigan thing obvs. If it would do any good I'd pitch it to 'Danny' that EFL has the discretion to appeal when penalties are too lenient, precisely like they did on Macclesfield Town. My money's on 'Danny' being a made up person from whom all the "we don't give a fuck and wish you'd all be quiet" emails can be sent to any and all chattering hectors like me, regardless of the merits of my grievance.
Macclesfield relegated after getting a points deduction after the season finished WTF
The EFL make this shit up as they go along to screw over the smaller clubs. It's almost as though they are embarrassed to have all but the very biggest clubs in their organisation.
So, are we still appealing against this, and given the previous behaviour of the EFL, will sheff Wednesday be relegated around March next year ? And, who is at The Valley to decide the course of action ?
ok I'm trying this one this morning to EFL - who knows what I'll get back!
Dear Mr Parry,
I am sure you will have seen the Sunday Times article by Rod Liddle and I suspect you will have despaired at the fact that he reported that the 12-point deduction for SW resulted from them having sold their ground in 2017-18 (rather than the reporting year breach which was the real reason).
Nevertheless, as you must admit, the perception is out there that SW have benefited massively for several seasons having successfully evaded FFP by a ruse and that they have got off comparatively lightly by escaping relegation should the penalty be applied next season rather than this season.
Indeed, in the case of Macclesfield your appeal against the IDC decision has resulted in the relegation of that club this season.
Will you now provide some assurance that you will seek to appeal the IDC decision to apply the SW points deduction next season and to argue that it should apply this season instead as a fit and proper punishment?
If not you may give encouragement to other club owners in utilising what amounts to a loophole by a) selling the ground and b) gambling on putting the profits in the wrong accounting year to avoid FFP scrutiny.
I assume that you are now in possession of the reasons why the IDC came to their decision even if it has not yet been made public.
Comments
Danny
Further to your email, whilst I understand that the decision of the independent disciplinary commission is theirs alone I would like to ask whether these decisions are reviewed by EFL for consistency with past decisions.
It is a poor process that has no checks and balances and this is clearly a contentious decision that has huge ramifications for Charlton Athletic.
Please advise whether there has been any consideration of this decision by EFL
Thank you
Kind regards
Valley Ant
Let's see whether they reply to my follow up
I trust that we are allowed to see the IDC decision making process that led to application of the sanction next season rather than this. Transparency in the decision making process is crucial otherwise the suspicion will remain that deferral of a punishment which should have been enacted immediately was made purely out of the fear that an appeal could drag matters into next season,
Not a good enough reason in my opinion given that Sheff Weds then profit from their 'crime' by not dropping down a division and losing revenue but retaining Championship status for 2020-21 and Sky-Bet TV money, albeit with a 12 point penalty.
So, lets see those reasons published please.
Unfortunately the cheating has been left unchecked for too long, and as a result other honest championship clubs will pay the price of Wednesday's corrupt ways.
Although it has given the red side of Sheffield lots of laughs, it doesn't help Charlton.
The new season may be about to start but the old one, the weird one, keeps clinging on, delivering its cornucopia of manifest injustices. It would take a master of sophistry to explain away the comparative fates of Sheffield Wednesday, Charlton Athletic and Wigan Athletic — and I’m not sure that Rick Parry, chairman of the English Football League, necessarily fits that description.
Wigan, you may remember, were handed a 12-point deduction for going into administration. This deduction relegated them. Last week they failed in their appeal against the decision. In June the club was taken over by a shadowy Hong Kong partnership that, as virtually its first act, put the club into administration (a record for English football). This may or may not have been linked to a huge bet in southeast Asia on Wigan getting relegated, nobody knows. Sheffield Wednesday, meanwhile, were also handed a 12-point deduction for having flogged off their ground in 2017-18 to meet the financial fair play (FFP) rules, wholly against the EFL’s stipulations. But the independent tribunal that determines each case decided Wednesday should serve their sentence next season. Those 12 points would have relegated them and, according to the rules, should have done so. They have effectively survived by cheating. As one poster on a Sheffield Wednesday fan forum put it: “We’ve driven a tank through the rules and got away with it.” That, incidentally, was the general view.
Wednesday’s reprieve meant that poor Charlton were relegated. Wednesday took six points from Charlton last season using players whom, under FFP, they could not remotely afford. Charlton’s yearly wage bill is just short of £8 million. Wednesday’s last season was £21.8 million. In 2018 Wednesday had the fifth-highest wage bill in the Championship.Charlton are said to be considering legal action against the decision, which for a virtually ownerless club would be some feat. They claim they have the written support of “seven or eight” Championship rivals. My guess is that those clubs would include Middlesbrough, whose excellent chairman, Steve Gibson, has been a doughty campaigner against infractions of FFP, Bristol City (who feel likewise) and Millwall (who also enjoy taking six points from Charlton each season). This is just a guess, however, as none of those clubs have officially confirmed my suspicions. Those who haven’t signed up in support probably quite like the idea of a team starting next season 12 points behind the rest.Why the disparity between Wigan and Wednesday? The EFL insists that the decision on timing was solely down to the independent panels that adjudicate on such matters and waves the reliable Mr Covid around as a reason for Wednesday’s hearing not taking place until the Championship play-off final. And yet Wednesday were charged in November 2019: surely any decision must relate to the season in which they were charged?The EFL has also pointed out that Wigan’s 12 points was an automatic penalty for going into administration, whereas Wednesday’s was a “disciplinary” matter; a bizarre discrepancy. Wednesday brazenly flouted the rules to give themselves an advantage. Wigan, meanwhile, were the victims of a kind of heist. Both Wigan and Charlton enter League One next season either ownerless or having owners nobody knows anything about, probably in both cases managerless and having had their best players poached. Frankly, it will be a minor miracle if Charlton even exist in the autumn, given their ownership troubles.There could — and certainly should — be two Championship teams starting the new season on minus-12 points. Some 50 miles down the M1 from Hillsborough, Derby County face an adjudication panel for having flouted FFP with an even more cavalier disregard. They too sold their ground for a hilarious £80 million to keep themselves in the black. A 12-point penalty this time around would not have affected Derby, so the rules state it should apply next season.Meanwhile, the EFL, to its credit, has accepted that the FFP rules are somewhat short of pristine and need looking at. My contention is that it is the owners who should be penalised for chicanery, spending too much, going bust, or what have you, not the clubs themselves. Hit them with fines and disqualification. And tighten up those “fit and proper” rules for who is allowed to own a club. Hell, under the current definitions, even Matt Hancock would be given the go-ahead.You want more woe? Here’s some. National League side Dover Athletic look like they’re about to go bust, the first football victims of Covid-19. The club asked players to take a temporary 20 per cent pay cut, the players — always mindful of the bigger picture — voted not to do so. The entire team are available on free transfer. Further, chairman Jim Parmenter has announced that if no investment is found by the end of this month, the club will go into liquidation. More clubs, surely, will follow.And, who is at The Valley to decide the course of action ?
Reading it has just made me angry all over again
Basically they did a fraudulent transaction and used lawyers to argue that the EFL has given them permission to act this way, i.e. they claim the EFL via email gave permission.
To value the stadium at £60 million is a joke, the whole club including the stadium would not reach that figure.
Chansiri the chairman basically told the EFL to do one.
Chansiri, has very little money, his very wealthy dad bankrolls him, but his funding has now been cut. So it will be interesting to see how they survive the coming season.
And there is nothing to stop those owners from selling the ground back to the club for (say) £1, and the club re selling it for £60m and round we go again.
The FFP is a joke. I predict that the salary cap will be just as effective. At best it will be useful for a club to manage agents and players expectations, but will never stop a club from getting and paying a player they really want.
His is a name others could contact on this and other 'EFL failing game integrity' matters
How much any "Sky" branded entity cares for honest, decent and respectable remains to be seen. It's only ever about the Benjamins with that rabble.
If it would do any good I'd pitch it to 'Danny' that EFL has the discretion to appeal when penalties are too lenient, precisely like they did on Macclesfield Town. My money's on 'Danny' being a made up person from whom all the "we don't give a fuck and wish you'd all be quiet" emails can be sent to any and all chattering hectors like me, regardless of the merits of my grievance.
https://www.efl.com/news/2020/august/official-statement-macclesfield-town/
Macclesfield relegated after getting a points deduction after the season finished WTF
If not you may give encouragement to other club owners in utilising what amounts to a loophole by
a) selling the ground
and b) gambling on putting the profits in the wrong accounting year to avoid FFP scrutiny.