Sheff6

I was there at that game, seated near to the players' tunnel close to the front. I was gutted when Jimmy Case scored for them. I just had that horrible sinking feeling we weren't going to come back from it. On the way out I passed close by one of the Wednesday players, out of the side through injury, seated some way back from the pitch side along with some squad players there to watch the game. I remember patting him on the back and commiserating with him. Can't even remember who it was now, after all these years. A very disappointing day at a depressing ground. Never did like the place.

No, I've heard they're going to feed them into this thing parked on the centre circle while we all cheer from the stands!

Thanks for this . I've had quite a bit of push-back on this regarding the intent of the HMRC. Yes I know it's a process and one primarily aimed at them getting their money they're owed, but for me the clue to their ultimate powers and intent can be found in the title of their Petition. However, whether HMRC's intent is push until the very end to see us being wound up, is not the point of my post! The point of it is the question I ask at the end - Are the IFR and HMRC going to speak to each other to come to a decision on what happens next, that's in any way helpful to us, or is that asking way too much? They have very different purposes and end games in mind regarding our plight and I see a definite advantage to all parties involved if the two Government-formed agencies would only kick things off at this stage by speaking to each other. It's a revolutionary thought but it might just work. Thanks again mate for your response.

Agreed. They say 'petition' in the headline and 'order' in the text of the story.

I haven't doubled back mate and you know it. I was telling you what I'd said before but you obviously chose to ignore it. Good point about ignore list though. I'll add you to mine.

Yes you're correct on the terminology. They can be quoted either way though and it tends to be confusing which is the correct title.

Of course I understand how this works. Read what I said in my reply to you earlier. Yes I know full well it's a threat to get what they want and it's worked in the past when they issued the same thing to us in the past, but the HMRC have every intention of going through with their ultimate penalty if needs be. Howard Wilkinson told me it was the closest run and scariest thing he'd ever been involved with at the club when the HMRC made clear to him they were on the brink of pressing the button on this.

They've issued a winding up order - and that's not their intent. ok.

I never said that HMRC weren't intent on getting their money, but their stated intent is to wind us up in the process, and they'd go through with it ultimately, otherwise why state it? Yes we know it's a threat to get what they want, and it's worked in the past without us going under, but it was a damn close run thing. My point is that the IFR - another government-generated body, are working in entirely the different direction to try to help clubs in the same or similar positions like ours keep afloat.

Has anyone else noticed the fact that there are two Government-generated organisations homing in on us because of our financial state of affairs. One of them - the HMRC, is intent on ending our existence because of it, whilst the other - the IFR, is intent on helping us stay in existence because of it. Are they going to speak to each other to come to a decision on what happens next, that's in any way helpful to us, or is that asking way too much?

Do you mean Chansiri the family? It's academic I know, but it just leaves me wondering why the family felt the need to issue a statement recently that they have nothing to do with Sheffield Wednesday. It struck me at the time that the word 'further' needed to be in there, after the word 'nothing'.

I think you both need a pat on the back for highlighting this debt of DC's under the name of his Sheff 3 Co. Whoever he owes it to, it just shows the extent of the doo dah and barbed wire he's in financially and surely even he realises he needs to sell both ground and club asap otherwise he's going to come out of it with nothing in his hand.

It's nice to think that he might well be above the law - gathering speed in free-fall towards it

Thanks mate . It's what I used to do before I retired.

Secondary legislation is the means by which the Primary Legislation - the Football Governance Act - joins up with existing laws that it needs to work alongside or through without anomalies, contradictions, loopholes etc. cropping up in the joints between them. Parliament need to pass that secondary legislative work, a bit like an engineer would sign off mods to existing connections to a new-build engine in an engine bay. It needs to be done but it should be a comparatively short process. Secondary legislation doesn't need a separate Act of Parliament to be passed.