The Prince-e-Paul said:

When an average terraced house next door to Hillsborough stadium costs around £130k I can't see th land being worth anywhere near that. 

Did you add the k by mistake?

Karim_myBagheri said:

golfaddick said:

All you need to know is that they put the sale value in the wrong year's accounts. Doesn't matter if it was worth £6m or £60m. Offsetting the value in the wrong accounting year because that year was the one you overspent on is not a clerical error. Its fraud.

 do we know if the EFL actually know about this fact? wouldn't surprise me if they completely missed it. 

Email them. 

Our future could depend on it !!

ForeverAddickted said:

guinnessaddick said:

There shouldn’t be a points reduction, if found guilty, the punishment should be relegation, it’s the only way clubs will not attempt to cheat.

I think its only England that doesnt do this - Any other European Leagues and the punishment is instant relegation

Would be another reason why you hear more dodgy owners wanting to buy clubs here compared with elsewhere

Every game they have played contained players that were only there because they cheated and it really should be relegation. As I said before, if they end up avoiding relegation there hasn’t been a punishment.

Stewart said:

Redmidland said:

Pundits on sky sports at today's game between Bristol City and Wednesday saying that Wednesday will find out next week the verdict and possibly points deduction. 

Do do they mean possibly tomorrow then? Shame they won today, but great if that pulls another team into the relegation fight. 

Yes anytime from tomorrow apparently. In my opinion if found guilty, and I can't see how they couldn't be, then 12 points must be the minimum deduction, but it should be more for blatantly false accounting!

Did I read somewhere on here that if they appeal, and I don't know if they can, and lost it the penalty is doubled?

Redmidland said:

Did I read somewhere on here that if they appeal, and I don't know if they can, and lost it the penalty is doubled?

Dont think that's true. 

Sheffield Wednesday: Some players not yet paid in full this month

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53242237

Karim_myBagheri said:

golfaddick said:

All you need to know is that they put the sale value in the wrong year's accounts. Doesn't matter if it was worth £6m or £60m. Offsetting the value in the wrong accounting year because that year was the one you overspent on is not a clerical error. Its fraud.

 do we know if the EFL actually know about this fact? wouldn't surprise me if they completely missed it. 

EFL can't hide behind 'not knowing this' - it's in the accounts SW have presented to EFL and published on Companies House
The date the company, which "bought" Hillsborough from SW, was incorporated is a matter of public record and that date is after the accounting year into which SW reported the sale.  SW postponed delivering those accounts until after they could add in those figures.
The sale can't have taken place when the buyer wasn't born yet.

On recent experience that's slightly distracting cos Birmingham overspent and got a points penalty that didn't relegate them, then failed to comply with the rest of the "punishment" and got away scot free.

The only matter yet to be clarified is SW's contention that EFL knew about the accounting treatment before it was presented.
If SW can establish that EFL knew about it and failed to act then SW are free and clear.  Notwithstanding the absence of any defense for the simplistic malpractice, EFL may well have stood by and let it happen.  That being the case SW have nothing to worry about.

EFL has form for failing to act promptly, or at all, when clubs or their owners are accused of transgressing rules and regulations.

Birmingham
Bury (RIP)
ESI (version1)
🐀 douchebag
Sisu & Coventry 

_MrDick said:

Wigan have gone into Administration. Where does that leave them  

Debt free

_MrDick said:

Wigan have gone into Administration. Where does that leave them  

At the end of the pier.

StigThundercock said:

Karim_myBagheri said:

golfaddick said:

All you need to know is that they put the sale value in the wrong year's accounts. Doesn't matter if it was worth £6m or £60m. Offsetting the value in the wrong accounting year because that year was the one you overspent on is not a clerical error. Its fraud.

 do we know if the EFL actually know about this fact? wouldn't surprise me if they completely missed it. 

EFL can't hide behind 'not knowing this' - it's in the accounts SW have presented to EFL and published on Companies House
The date the company, which "bought" Hillsborough from SW, was incorporated is a matter of public record and that date is after the accounting year into which SW reported the sale.  SW postponed delivering those accounts until after they could add in those figures.
The sale can't have taken place when the buyer wasn't born yet.

On recent experience that's slightly distracting cos Birmingham overspent and got a points penalty that didn't relegate them, then failed to comply with the rest of the "punishment" and got away scot free.

The only matter yet to be clarified is SW's contention that EFL knew about the accounting treatment before it was presented.
If SW can establish that EFL knew about it and failed to act then SW are free and clear.  Notwithstanding the absence of any defense for the simplistic malpractice, EFL may well have stood by and let it happen.  That being the case SW have nothing to worry about.

EFL has form for failing to act promptly, or at all, when clubs or their owners are accused of transgressing rules and regulations.

Birmingham
Bury (RIP)
ESI (version1)
🐀 douchebag
Sisu & Coventry 

And Oyston at Blackpool.

I do not like seeing clubs in financial problems, and do not know how many points Wigan will be penalised, 8, 10 or 12, which will help our position, providing it is this season, but I hope they get it sorted out and can carry on playing.

Just noticed a Wigan thread so will add it over there

Redrobo said:

Apparently the Sheffield Wednesday decision will be made public in the next two weeks. I feel a bit sorry for their fans having to wait this long. It has been with the EFL for nine months. What on earth can take so long? I can only assume that there is more to it than we have heard to date. Looking at Owls talk it seems the taxi firm that is a sponsor and who’s advert appears on their season tickets is a sham and one of the owners “pop up” companies. Makes you think how many more there are.

If they were quicker with their initial decisions it would be fairer and speed up the whole process. For example, if they had said in November 20 points deducted, SW would be falling over themselves to appeal and get the evidence together. Letting it drag on gives them an argument for mitigation for delay. If they had said 5 points they may have shrugged and got on with it. Saving a huge amount of angst and lawyers fees.
Suspended point deduction would help ensure future compliance. 
They really need to get it together.

For Wigan, having the decision now means that their players have the advantage of knowing how many wins they need. 4= net 50 and that could well be safe.
bang in form.
With us and Sheffield W , we may get the points deduction  but if we don’t get a decision from the EFL about our investigation soon it could leave us in the shit as we have no idea of our real target.

ross1 said:

I do not like seeing clubs in financial problems, and do not know how many points Wigan will be penalised, 8, 10 or 12, which will help our position, providing it is this season, but I hope they get it sorted out and can carry on playing.

Just noticed a Wigan thread so will add it over there

Administration carries a penalty of 12 points deduction.

If applied immediately, Wigan would now be bottom with 38 points ....... 4 points behind safety with 6 games to play.
On current form, they would have every chance of safety.

But the double whammy is that should they escape relegation, they start next season in the Championship on minus 12 points.