Non-Boro Football

[Tobermory 101]

I don't know if cowardly is the word I would use, but it is certainly inconsistent.  I don't see any reason why they can't impose the 12 point deduction at the start of next season, regardless of the division Wigan are in.

To say we will impose it now if they are outside the relegation spots may or may not punish them.  With their form as it is, it seems unlikely to punish them this season.  However, if they impose it at the start of next season it punishes them whichever league they are in.

[Jamie-H 1,322]

6 minutes ago, TAPOUT said:

Certainly re Sheff Wed, but I thought the EFL were clear regarding Wigan. The penalty would apply at the end of the season. If they were in the relegation positions they would have 12 point penalty next season, if not it is applied at the end of this season and league adjusted accordingly.

My issue with the EFL and Wigan is they're both working hand in hand to find and fasttrack new ownership given the circumstances whils the EFL runs an investigation into how the administration happened, if further punishment is warranted and Wigan pleading force Majeure it's alot to ask for all of that to be wrapped up in 2 weeks but the rest of the league deserves some kind of clarity from the EFL it seems they're holding off because Wigan are mathematically safe without deduction and recognise penalties will apply this season which would put off prospective new ownership Wigan are courting to survive as a club. There isn't a real clear answer in reporting if Wigans Force Majeure grounds for appeal are actually actionable that will probably only be answered when the EFL finishes the investigation into how they went into administration. 

Me personally if they find the club had access to further credit, or ownership had access to liquidity sufficient to keep them out of administration then Force Majeure shouldn't apply. But the problem is no one knows how long the investigation will go on for or even when Wigan's appeal will be heard. 

[Borodane 6,301]

Oooof. That late goal for Everton is a sucker punch for Villa. Had they won that game they would have had a decent chance. I can’t see them getting 4 points out of arsenal and West Ham which they need due to their poor goal difference. 

[ScarBoro 857]

24 minutes ago, Jamie-H said:

My issue with the EFL and Wigan is they're both working hand in hand to find and fasttrack new ownership given the circumstances whils the EFL runs an investigation into how the administration happened, if further punishment is warranted and Wigan pleading force Majeure it's alot to ask for all of that to be wrapped up in 2 weeks but the rest of the league deserves some kind of clarity from the EFL it seems they're holding off because Wigan are mathematically safe without deduction and recognise penalties will apply this season which would put off prospective new ownership Wigan are courting to survive as a club. There isn't a real clear answer in reporting if Wigans Force Majeure grounds for appeal are actually actionable that will probably only be answered when the EFL finishes the investigation into how they went into administration. 

Me personally if they find the club had access to further credit, or ownership had access to liquidity sufficient to keep them out of administration then Force Majeure shouldn't apply. But the problem is no one knows how long the investigation will go on for or even when Wigan's appeal will be heard. 

It’s difficult to see how they can use Force Majeure. The takeover was approved on 4th June, when Covid and its effects had been well known for months. EFL say that the new owner showed evidence of funds before they approved this takeover. If the new owner then suffered a sudden loss of funds after he became owner then it is no different o any football club going into administration because the owner runs out of funds - whether for Covid or recession or any other cause. 
as far as when the penalty applies, the EFL thinking is that the deduction has to cause a proper penalty to the club. If they were already going down, then putting the club into administration just before the end of the season could mean no penalty at all, ( I seem to remember this did happen in past before rules were changed?), whereas the current system means either the club suffers point deduction this season and makes them vulnerable - as per Wigan currently, or if they are already going down, they suffer the deduction in the next season. Seems like a fair system to me.

[Jamie-H 1,322]

13 minutes ago, ScarBoro said:

It’s difficult to see how they can use Force Majeure. The takeover was approved on 4th June, when Covid and its effects had been well known for months. EFL say that the new owner showed evidence of funds before they approved this takeover. If the new owner then suffered a sudden loss of funds after he became owner then it is no different o any football club going into administration because the owner runs out of funds - whether for Covid or recession or any other cause. 
as far as when the penalty applies, the EFL thinking is that the deduction has to cause a proper penalty to the club. If they were already going down, then putting the club into administration just before the end of the season could mean no penalty at all, ( I seem to remember this did happen in past before rules were changed?), whereas the current system means either the club suffers point deduction this season and makes them vulnerable - as per Wigan currently, or if they are already going down, they suffer the deduction in the next season. Seems like a fair system to me.

It's fair in practice and I don't personally doubt they will receive the 12 point deduction it's automatic and has been applied automatically several times across the leagues it would cause such a retroactive headache for the EFL if they don't apply that despite other circumstances every administration has a sob story the rules are meant to put the circumstances aside and apply the same penalty evenly. My argument is it suites the EFL and Wigan to keep the status of the investigation and deduction quiet until the end of July deadline for the new ownership bids it suits both their interests my argument is it doesn't suit the rest of the league's interests dragging this out at this stage of a season it's in the EFLs interests for Wigan to get as many bidders as possible and stay solvent as a football club because they are involved in that process it's hard for them to also serve the interests of other clubs like ours who deserve a timeframe at the very least on when decisions will be finalised by because Wigan's 31st deadline to find new ownership shouldn't guide the EFL on their appeal scheduling or punishment but my fear is it is.

Sheffield Wednesday's punishment was meant to be delivered by the weekend so I guess we'll see tomorrow that also has a 14 day appeal period which could drag into August. My issue is time frame, procedures and motives with the EFL not necessarily the rules themselves.

Edited July 16, 2020 by Jamie-H

[TLF10 4,497]

2 hours ago, Jamie-H said:

On Luton v Hull yes if they draw we're safe. If Wigan ever get deducted points it would essentially guarantee us safety because of the Wigan v Charlton game a draw between them and we'd be safe but a win for either side essentially condemns the loser unless Charlton lose and go on to win at Leeds which seems hiiiiiiiiighly unlikely. We are looking very comfortable even just on 50 it's more than likely enough especially if the deduction ever happens to Wigan so basically if the deduction happens draws in thlse games guarantee us safety or a win for Charlton would also guarantee us safety.

Because Luton and Hull play each other there's only 1 spot in the relegation zone that we could fall into if you look at the fixtures of Charlton even if Luton or Hull pull off maximum points I find it very hard believing Charlton get 3 points from Wigan or Leeds away.

It's cowardly by the EFL putting off the deductions of Wigan and Wednesday absolutely shameful we'd be 2 places higher in the table with those deductions.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53429940

"Wigan are still in discussions with the EFL over a date for their appeal into their 12-point deduction for going into administration.

That punishment will now apply this season as the Latics know they will definitely not finish in the bottom three following their club record 8-0 win against Hull on Tuesday.

Even without the 12 points, they would be outside the relegation zone on goal difference, although bottom club Barnsley do have a match in hand, at leaders Leeds on Thursday, and the other two sides in the relegation zone - Hull and Luton - play each other on Saturday. "

That deduction appeal could run until August it's absolute madness I don't sense they have a very strong case either.

 

Thank you for that thorough explanation mate. I will focus on us needing a point which I hope we can get.

[Dan1234 1,056]

2 hours ago, Borodane said:

Oooof. That late goal for Everton is a sucker punch for Villa. Had they won that game they would have had a decent chance. I can’t see them getting 4 points out of arsenal and West Ham which they need due to their poor goal difference. 

Great wasn't it 🤣🤣🤣

Scum club, I hope they get hammered by ffp. 

[BillyWoofs_shinpad 1,884]

I hate all this talk about ffp and points deduction. We wouldn’t have been the team that we were in the Robson era if those rules had been in place then.
 

Let clubs spend what they want, it’s disingenuous to expect points deductions, live and let live, let the football do the talking, I’m sick to death of all the amateur accountants moaning about so and so did this and so and so shouldn’t get away with that. You lot must have been an absolute nightmare at school.

I really hope they scrap FFP so we can all enjoy football again. 

[Borodane 6,301]

1 minute ago, BillyWoofs_shinpad said:

I hate all this talk about ffp and points deduction. We wouldn’t have been the team that we were in the Robson era if those rules had been in place then.
 

Let clubs spend what they want, it’s disingenuous to expect points deductions, live and let live, let the football do the talking, I’m sick to death of all the amateur accountants moaning about so and so did this and so and so shouldn’t get away with that. You lot must have been an absolute nightmare at school.

I really hope they scrap FFP so we can all enjoy football again. 

There is a lot of nonsense in that middle paragraph Billy 🙂 the rules are there for everyone and as long as they are there it’s not “moaning” to expect the rules to be enforced. Clubs have already been punished under the rules so it should obviously be the same for everyone. You can’t just compare with rules 25 years ago. I think that it’s good, that the footballing authorities are trying to stop what’s happening at Wigan and what’s happened at Bolton, Portsmouth and Bury. But it’s difficult because there are so many clever financial people out there who are in it for a quick buck and couldn’t give a toss about the club. The money spent at Aston Villa the pst few years is absolutely insane and in my eyes shouldn’t be allowed to happen as the club could easily fold if their billionaire Chinese owner walks away tomorrow without a care in the world. 

[BillyWoofs_shinpad 1,884]

Have you never broken the odd rule BD?

lets just get on with the football and not get too hissy about who’s done what 😃

[thatoldchestnut 583]

7 minutes ago, BillyWoofs_shinpad said:

Have you never broken the odd rule BD?

lets just get on with the football and not get too hissy about who’s done what 😃

To be honest, the most important thing is getting Boro mathematically safe and that is not relying on any teams points deduction. Once safe then we can sit back and see what happens to other teams.

[wilsoncgp 9,283]

Let's not let clubs spend what they want. Not because it could give them an unfair advantage against those who do cut their cloth, nor because we want clubs to be punished for it to save ourselves, I think there's some on here that would be happy we survived because of a points deduction but still unwilling to let it lie that that's the only reason we survived.

Let's not let clubs spend what they want because the reason they do it is to drastically increase their financial rewards with little concern about the risks. Why would anyone be against smarter spending by clubs when we've got examples of what can potentially happen with Bury and Bolton last year. And it's not just about the fans who lose their clubs in the worst case scenario, its about the people who work at those clubs who lose their jobs too. If anyone's watched Sunderland 'Til I Die, you'll have seen the fear in people's eyes that they could be the next ones lost in the failed pursuit for bigger glories, in the world where clubs make stupid financial risks without ever considering what happens if it goes wrong.

This isn't just about levelling a playing field, this is about making sure clubs operate as sustainable businesses.

[BillyWoofs_shinpad 1,884]

2 minutes ago, wilsoncgp said:

Let's not let clubs spend what they want. Not because it could give them an unfair advantage against those who do cut their cloth, nor because we want clubs to be punished for it to save ourselves, I think there's some on here that would be happy we survived because of a points deduction but still unwilling to let it lie that that's the only reason we survived.

Let's not let clubs spend what they want because the reason they do it is to drastically increase their financial rewards with little concern about the risks. Why would anyone be against smarter spending by clubs when we've got examples of what can potentially happen with Bury and Bolton last year. And it's not just about the fans who lose their clubs in the worst case scenario, its about the people who work at those clubs who lose their jobs too. If anyone's watched Sunderland 'Til I Die, you'll have seen the fear in people's eyes that they could be the next ones lost in the failed pursuit for bigger glories, in the world where clubs make stupid financial risks without ever considering what happens if it goes wrong.

This isn't just about levelling a playing field, this is about making sure clubs operate as sustainable businesses.

Sure, their are examples of teams overspending and failing, we are one of them. On the other hand there are examples of teams spending and succeeding, if you look at history we did it to a certain extent, Blackburn did it, Chelsea have done it, Man City have too. Liverpool have spent a fortune they have a brilliant team and because they have s lot of fans, they are allowed to spend more than s club with less fans. Is that really fair?

Ive got a mate who is seething that Man City got their ban overturned. Personally I’d rather watch Man City in the champions league than Sheffield United or Leicester. 
 

 

[Brunners 7,982]

...you just listed a bunch of clubs that could sustain the spending and were essentially spending without risk. 

If you let anyone spend what they want you'll have far more Bury's and Bolton's than you will Man City's

[BillyWoofs_shinpad 1,884]

My argument is that it’s never going to be fair if anything, just a way of allowing the bigger clubs to spend more money. If there was a draft system or a spending cap then that would be fair, but there isn’t.

Fining clubs  and docking points is counter productive, it really isn’t the best way of ensuring that clubs survive, in some cases it helps to drive them out of existence. A club like Rangers can gradually recover due to its massive fan base, but look at Portsmouth, they have struggled and they were an established premier league club. 
 

I just don’t  think that docking points helps clubs survive, which is surely the intention of FFP.
Let’s either have a free for all or a salary cap, the FFP system is subjective and intrinsically flawed.