Jump to content
oneBoro Forum

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 02/27/2017 in Posts

  1. 1 point
    I think all this fight or no fight talk is rubbish myself. The simple fact (ok as I see it anyway) is that some players are not up to the task. Very good in the champo but over a long season getting found out in the prem. AK knows that , Stevie G knows that and we know it but getting the players in to change that is not easy. If you look at our players and who would probably get in a best of the bottom 7 teams currently I suspect only Valdes and Gibson would feature. The fact we are still hanging on in there tells me we have (mainly) good honest pros in our squad who are performing at their best and if we are still a premiership team in a few years that they will likely as not all have been replaced.

  • Latest Posts

    • The last section is the exact reason Wigan won't win their appeal. The EFL simply refuse to acknowledge that their set of tests is not fit for purpose. They even then mention another case where that was evident (Bury).
    • The owners haven't massively overspent and run the club into the ground. From what I have seen Wigan is/are a fairly well run club in terms of finances (in a football sense anyway). But the owners have literally used the club for some very murky reason. They sold the club to a new owner (a fund) that the old owner was the majority shareholder in. Then immediately installed a new majority shareholder to the fund that now own Wigan. That shareholder bizarrely has no online footprint at all, other than everything related to him owning Wigan. This man then on the exact same day he has acquired the club has placed it in administration. It is that reason that Wigan are appealing the decision. All of the above of course was signed off by the EFL themselves. Which opens a whole new can of worms.
    • https://www.efl.com/news/2020/july/efl-update-wigan-athletic/   Here is the latest statement by the EFL on the Wigan situation. I agree with a lot of what they say up until they start trying to defend their fit and proper test.
    • Apologies when I said 1/4 of the creditors, I was meaning 25p out of the £. I should have made that clearer. In terms of our situation in 1986 I'm not too well versed with the details (as it was before my time). But I'm pretty sure we were going into Liquidation rather than administration.  I also imagine that the EFL regulations/rules have been updated since 1986.  
    • As far as I can tell it's the only argument that they can even try to make, and even that's weak AF.
×
×
  • Create New...