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

CAST Meeting with the EFL

2

Comments

  • MattF said:
    What's the betting that Paul Elliott has objected to every possible candidate for sitting on this panel
    Wouldn’t object to Paul Chaisty ....
  • Addickted said:
    The meeting gave CAST the opportunity to ask a number of questions about events at the club during the last nine months 

    What were the questions?

    What was the exact response to each question?

    Where CAST members asked if they wanted to ask any specific questions of the EFL or where they decided on by the CAST Board?

    Why are the EFL unable to comment about the current ownership, embargo and OADTs?

    What is the current position in regards to the statement the EFL put out in May about concerns of in fighting at the Club taking place on Social media? 

    Don't the EFL think it's a bit ridiculous not to have timescales in their appeals process? Why don't they add them in - it can't be difficult.

    Sorry CAST, but this sounds so similar to the Fans Forum meetings that were taking place last year. It's just a box ticking exercise where absolutely sod all gets resolved and the fans are none the wiser as to what the fuck is going on.

    Finally, why wait until after todays hearing to release that statement? It must have taken all of 20 minutes to write it up.



    Would be good to know the agenda and exactly what was asked ... but yes I also feel a little disappointed by this at the moment. 

    It’s not a dig at CAST, probably more because I am pissed off that the EFL are allowing two groups of chancers to screw up our club and Bowyers plans, but I would like to believe that hard questions are being asked of the EFL. 
  • Ever get the feeling you're being strung along?
  • edited September 2020
    @Cafc43v3r Think its 71 other clubs.
    @Addickted Good questions. Who do we get the answers from ?
    @killerandflash Agreed. If this meeting on was on Tuesday why didn't @castrust inform people before todays hearing ?

    I know it sounds like I am criticising the Trust, I am a member, even though I haven't been to The Valley since March 2016, and do support them in general. 
    I just want honesty and transparency, something that the crooks have neither of.

    Edit;
    PE says that that he was refused first time on the OADT's by an administration error. His or @EFL’s ?
    Could it be possible he knew about what would happen next (or not happen in the case of @EFL).
  • @Cafc43v3r Think its 71 other clubs.
    @Addickted Good questions. Who do we get the answers from ?
    @killerandflash Agreed. If this meeting on was on Tuesday why didn't @castrust inform people before todays hearing ?

    I know it sounds like I am criticising the Trust, I am a member, even though I haven't been to The Valley since March 2016, and do support them in general. 
    I just want honesty and transparency, something that the crooks have neither of.

    Sorry, yes your obviously correct. 
  • edited September 2020
    MattF said:
    What's the betting that Paul Elliott has objected to every possible candidate for sitting on this panel
    Wouldn’t object to Paul Chaisty ....
    If PE fails the appeal he can appeal again and it goes to the Arbitration Panel.  At that stage the rules say that, if the third member is not appointed within 14 days, the EFL asks the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators to appoint the third member.  

    Why on earth there is not a similar provision for the first appeals process is beyond belief.

    There is a review underway at the moment of EFL rules and no surprise if this will be addressed as a result of PE abusing the system - but too late to help us out of this shit fest.
    Will the review be completed before the World ends? I still can't understand why LK didb't make more of this. Ok, we hadn't gone out of business in the last couple of weeks, be we are learning that Elliot(t) is not rushing to get the appeal resolved either, even though he failed on a minor administrative point and resolution would greatly strengthen his position. I just don't get it. Maybe LK could explain to somebody (CAST?) who could then say it makes sense at least!
  • looks like CAST have been fobbed off with more EFL stalling bullshit . The EFL are not fit for purpose . They haven't been for quite some time. 
  • Pathetic really from CAST
  • Sponsored links:


  • Did no-one from CAST ask them about who they are dealing with. A certain Chris Farnell. Is he not on their radar ?? Errr - Bury chaps  ???
  • Did no-one from CAST ask them about who they are dealing with. A certain Chris Farnell. Is he not on their radar ?? Errr - Bury chaps  ???
    They'll probably just remind CAST that they've done their bit by rejecting Farnell through the ODAT too
  • Absolutely fucking speechless. Beyond parody.



  • So, there is an appeals process that doesnt have a time element & the person appealing can have a say on all 3 of the people sitting on it.
    Each side appoint one allegedly independent person and each side both agree on the third.
  • Addickted said:
    The meeting gave CAST the opportunity to ask a number of questions about events at the club during the last nine months 

    What were the questions?

    What was the exact response to each question?

    Where CAST members asked if they wanted to ask any specific questions of the EFL or where they decided on by the CAST Board?

    Why are the EFL unable to comment about the current ownership, embargo and OADTs?

    What is the current position in regards to the statement the EFL put out in May about concerns of in fighting at the Club taking place on Social media? 

    Don't the EFL think it's a bit ridiculous not to have timescales in their appeals process? Why don't they add them in - it can't be difficult.

    Sorry CAST, but this sounds so similar to the Fans Forum meetings that were taking place last year. It's just a box ticking exercise where absolutely sod all gets resolved and the fans are none the wiser as to what the fuck is going on.

    Finally, why wait until after todays hearing to release that statement? It must have taken all of 20 minutes to write it up.



    I don't think they were going to release it......not until @Large Addick asked.

    Plenty glad I haven't joined.


  • The EFL simply aren't set up to  cope with a bad faith actor. Their rules assume that an owner (or potential owner) wants to pass the tests and operate the club. If you make that assumption then everything else makes sense. You assume the tested wants a quick resolution and will quickly agree a fair panel to hear their appeal.

    It's the same with the courts. The judges today, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, had to assume that PE wants to buy us and wants to keep us trading. We all know differently, but the system is being exploited by these cockroaches.

    The EFLs failure is to a)anticipate bad faith actors and b)to protect the integrity of their own rules
    Agreed, the rules are farcical when you have someone who'd sole purpose is to not be disqualified, rather than wanting to be qualified

    Even then, you'd expect a time limit

    AND did Panorama/Kreamer know why Elliott's appeal hasn't happened yet, surely that information would have been relevant today?


    Kreamer was on the board of CAST until very recently so I'm surprised if she didnt know what happened at that meeting. 
  • The EFL simply aren't set up to  cope with a bad faith actor. Their rules assume that an owner (or potential owner) wants to pass the tests and operate the club. If you make that assumption then everything else makes sense. You assume the tested wants a quick resolution and will quickly agree a fair panel to hear their appeal.

    It's the same with the courts. The judges today, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, had to assume that PE wants to buy us and wants to keep us trading. We all know differently, but the system is being exploited by these cockroaches.

    The EFLs failure is to a)anticipate bad faith actors and b)to protect the integrity of their own rules
    Agreed, the rules are farcical when you have someone who'd sole purpose is to not be disqualified, rather than wanting to be qualified

    Even then, you'd expect a time limit

    AND did Panorama/Kreamer know why Elliott's appeal hasn't happened yet, surely that information would have been relevant today?


    Kreamer was on the board of CAST until very recently so I'm surprised if she didnt know what happened at that meeting. 
    Given we didn't even convince the judges that there was any prejudice from a delay it would not have made a jot of difference.

  • Anyone betting against the third member nominated by LD was Mr Farnell - celebrated solicitor of serial wronguns.

  • Anyone betting against the third member nominated by LD was Mr Farnell - celebrated solicitor of serial wronguns.
    Either that or a Mr Chaisty

  • Anyone betting against the third member nominated by LD was Mr Farnell - celebrated solicitor of serial wronguns.
    Either that or a Mr Chaisty
    You would HOPE that the EFL would be able to object on gorunds of non-independence based on current proceedings, but I doubt it
  • Sponsored links:



  • Anyone betting against the third member nominated by LD was Mr Farnell - celebrated solicitor of serial wronguns.
    I doubt he has any intention of ever nominating anyone. 

    He doesn’t want to take the test, he doesn’t want to run the club. 

  • Anyone betting against the third member nominated by LD was Mr Farnell - celebrated solicitor of serial wronguns.
    I doubt he has any intention of ever nominating anyone. 

    He doesn’t want to take the test, he doesn’t want to run the club. 
    Which to me would have been pretty damning in court

    "Several weeks after he was rejected, PE has yet to arrange his appeal meeting with the EFL; indeed ones wonders whether he actually wants to be approved to own a football club"
  • edited September 2020
    .
  • Think this oadt test, or whatever it's called, needs to go back to basics. You fail it, go away for 6 months
  • Think this oadt test, or whatever it's called, needs to go back to basics. You fail it, go away for 6 months
    Well the first reform surely has to include a time frame that any appeal gets dealt within

    Its madness to think that Elliott failed the ODAT 41-days (?) ago

    We've had THREE court cases since then, had his appeal over the ODAT been rejected would we still be under an injunction?

    Its highly doubtful!!!
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!