Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Options

ESI 1 v ESI 2 - Initial Hearing 01-02/09/2020, Court of Appeal 17/09/2020 (p127)

1169170172174175

Comments

  • Options
    kigelia said:
    I do wonder what happens to the injunction in the event of administration? 
    We get a 30-pt deduction from the EFL for the hell of it
  • Options
    Ok guys, no talk of anyone getting cancer, which is too personal to me and many others. (Why do folk say that ?)

    Either Thomas Sandgaard does a deal with both PM and ES2 and very quickly or we are totally screwed with no manager and a shortage of a team over a season to stay in League 1, that is the harsh reality after the Judges union was seen to be rubbish.

    We have had some shocking days in our time but black Wednesday will take some beating.
  • Options
    I can't see the EFL not ruling on PE's appeal before November 23rd. I'm sure Chaisty will be on the case soon. He passes the OADT and proves source of and sustainability of funds and he could be our owner before then. Frightening thought. 
  • Options
    Richard J said:
    The best legal team won. Anyone still think it makes no difference?
    It does if your evidence is wrong & half of it wasn't produced. 
    My point on the first hearing was based on Baristers (Advocates).The fact she won on the day was remarkable given the lack of evidence and heavyweight opponent

    What clearly happened was that PM didn't submit all of the evidence that they had. The Judge seemed to imply if they had then it would have been a different verdict. 
    Precisely my friend. 
    The better legal team won. 
    Which was not my point at the first hearing. 

    I was talking about Advocates and to win with MM's flimsy case file was a major achievement.Lauren knew the case better than Chaisty. 

    I also said it was about the written evidence. I never saw the bundle. MM was clearly negligent in his instructions. 

    As we saw today Judges do not take interviews with Jim White seriously. They deal in facts.

    So I agree about 'the team' but I maintain that a basic English High Street solicitor would have won. 
  • Options
    It's time for Sandgaard to just pay Elliott off. Simple as that. He's gone from implying he had a plan for any scenario, to now saying he won't deal with ESI V2. That's concerning and I'm worried he'll now walk away. 
  • Options
    Fiiiiish said:
    I only want to enjoy a bit of football!
    Got a Sunday league team nearby? Might be your best bet come November.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    Got most of the way through this thread but my eyes started to bleed.
    Apologies if already asked:

    @castrust have you had the meeting with the @efl ?
    If so what was said ?
    I pays my fiver, so I think I am within my rights to know what is being said by my fellow members, unless some are more equal than others ?
    This. The radio silence from CAST on this issue is unacceptable. What am I paying for?
    That whole £5 a year  :D
  • Options
    edited September 2020
    Dazzler21 said:
    Got most of the way through this thread but my eyes started to bleed.
    Apologies if already asked:

    @castrust have you had the meeting with the @efl ?
    If so what was said ?
    I pays my fiver, so I think I am within my rights to know what is being said by my fellow members, unless some are more equal than others ?
    This. The radio silence from CAST on this issue is unacceptable. What am I paying for?
    That whole £5 a year  :D
    Yep, that's what everybody pays.
    Surely everyone should be entitled to know what our elected leaders discussed. 
    Transparency would be nice.
  • Options
    I am not a violent man BUT, hypotheticaly of course,  I would like to kick Elliotttts ball bags back up the M6...  
    Many years ago I quite liked a bit of violence (Nothing to serious).
    May I then kick his bollox all the way back.
  • Options
    On my holidays. Just been not ruined, but close. 
  • Options
    What the court and LK should have sought more information on was what this minor administrative reason for failing the EFL tests was. It seems inconceivable that could be the case, even with an organisation as inept as the EFL. 

    During the process, the EFL can request more information (we have seen this referred to previously) and anything minor could and would have been sorted out within the initial process. The EFL are hardly going to say to Elliot(t) that you gave us everything we need but you should have signed the document with a black pen, not a blue one!

    It seems strange this and some other things were not better challenged. Almost as if PM didn't care about winning.  
  • Options
    The only time I ever did jury service was quite depressing really, as both sides seemed to go through the motions. I could have done a better job than the prosecution counsel.

    The "yoof's" probation officer was there when he got his guilty verdict for burglary
  • Options
    The only time I ever did jury service was quite depressing really, as both sides seemed to go through the motions. I could have done a better job than the prosecution counsel.

    The "yoof's" probation officer was there when he got his guilty verdict for burglary

    The lack of preparation in some cases is frightening. All down to money.
  • Options
    Dazzler21 said:
    Got most of the way through this thread but my eyes started to bleed.
    Apologies if already asked:

    @castrust have you had the meeting with the @efl ?
    If so what was said ?
    I pays my fiver, so I think I am within my rights to know what is being said by my fellow members, unless some are more equal than others ?
    This. The radio silence from CAST on this issue is unacceptable. What am I paying for?
    That whole £5 a year  :D
    It may seem small but not when 5000 people pay £5. They’ve got some questions to answer. 
  • Options
    On my holidays. Just been not ruined, but close. 
    Enjoy your holiday Ian. 
    Hopefully see you soon mate. 
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    edited September 2020
    What can they do though? The EFL are a rule unto themselves. They are a joke organisation and prove it all the time.
  • Options
    CAFCsayer said:
    Still convinced there's something going on in the background here
    PWR ... how’s that complaint about Farnell coming along? 
  • Options
    What can they do though? The EFL are a rule unto themselves. They are a joke organisation and prove it all the time.
    I understand there’s not much CAST can do, but if the meeting is on Tuesday, why wait till Thursday to release this? 

    They’ve not even released the minutes of the meeting, just a basic document stating they asked one or two questions that the EFL wouldn’t answer. 
  • Options
    When this trial does eventually go ahead, if LD loses, can they just appeal again and drag it out further? Are we potentially looking post new year before we know if the cockwombles are going to take us over?
  • Options
    When this trial does eventually go ahead, if LD loses, can they just appeal again and drag it out further? Are we potentially looking post new year before we know if the cockwombles are going to take us over?
    Yup... We'll be back to this stage where they can go to the Court of Appeal

    If it goes to trial and gets rejected, dont expect a resolution this side of the New Year!!
  • Options
    They probably thought it was a waste of time given the EFL unwillingness to engage. Again not their fault and I am not a member.
  • Options
    They probably thought it was a waste of time given the EFL unwillingness to engage. Again not their fault and I am not a member.
    Agreed it’s not their fault - just frustrating that the club is on the brink and our supporters trust have just lapped up the EFL’s bullshit with no push back.
  • Options
    They probably thought it was a waste of time given the EFL unwillingness to engage. Again not their fault and I am not a member.
    Not a member! Shame on you sir.
  • Options
    One hypothesis being bandied around was that the EFL were waiting on the result of today's court case before announcing any decisions.
    So are they now going to delay until November or actually do their job and announce something before then?
  • Options
    edited September 2020
    I don't understand how someone who doesn’t own the club, can prevent it being sold. I mean, many people have agreed on buying a house and then find out they have been guzumped.

    An online check says: Gazumping is legal in England and Wales. This is because an agreement to buy or sell a property is not legally binding until the contracts are written and exchanged. 

    In this case, clearly no contracts have been provided so why is this different? Can somebody explain? Does it only apply to properties or any asset?
This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!