EFL rules, sanctions & embargos are unfair?

3 minutes ago, TamworthWednesdayite said:

If I run someone over in my car and sell my car does that mean the punishment for running that person over passes to the new owner of the car?

Depends whether it's an SUV!

1 hour ago, The_Ghost_Of_91 said:

 

This annoys me. It's like the charges against Man City have been permanently frozen.

 

Arguably their charges are far worse than ours - they've won multiple trophies through cheating the FFP rules.

Man City and there backers have more cash than the football authorities, they can tie them up indefinatley and the football governing bodies cannot afford to take them on and lose.

Expect a fine that City are happy to pay and they will carry on.

Is there a particular reason football clubs get sanctions if they are late in paying HMRC? 

Didn’t see many Owls fans complaining about the ‘unfair treatment’ that the EFL dished out to other clubs.

The previous owner was ‘the club’. The club gets punished.

Don’t breach those regulations that are there for everyone to see, you don’t get punished.

Stop crying about things, it’s becoming tedious.

We are where we are.

2 hours ago, Lawrie’s Left Peg said:

I genuinely wonder if the EFL could have envisioned that one owner could be so awful. My guess is that the rules are as they are to close all the loopholes. Eg pay HMRC but default on transfer payments, default on loans but make sure the wages are paid etc.

The problem arises when a monumental fool breaks all the rules at the same time. No one else in history had 6 umbongos all at once. We’re punished 6 times for the same idiot. 
And by we, I mean the players, staff, supporters and new owners, none of whom have done anything wrong

To put the tin hat on things, the new owners have to fund the incompetence of the old owner. 
Surely this wasn’t the intentioned outcome when the clubs (including us) voted in the rules. 

That's why they should have stepped in after he passed their finance test back in March either he lied about finances or the EFL messed up. He should have been suspended then and the club put into administration at that point. Guess where the regulator now has to be the one if the licence system is adopted. 

47 minutes ago, Big Jack said:

That's why they should have stepped in after he passed their finance test back in March either he lied about finances or the EFL messed up. He should have been suspended then and the club put into administration at that point. Guess where the regulator now has to be the one if the licence system is adopted. 

Not sure they have the powers to do that

5 hours ago, nethertonowl said:

If the clowns that supported him had seen the light earlier it might not have been so bad. He was to blame but some people are so stupid. 

Yup

all the usual hyprocrites pretending they saw all this coming 

5 hours ago, Lord Nilsson said:

We're getting unfairly hammered for DC's ineptitude?

https://www.change.org/SetSWFCfree 

We've had this discussion numerous times. There's no point in disputig the rules, all the clubs have to abide by them and so do we. If a club decides they don't like the rules thet can always decide to find another league to play in. 

Oh, wait a minute, there isn't another league that offers the same exposure and financial benefits. .

It's pointless getting upset about it, We broke the rules, we get punished. 

2 hours ago, TamworthWednesdayite said:

If I run someone over in my car and sell my car does that mean the punishment for running that person over passes to the new owner of the car?

Yes…if you were a D-Taxi driver 

If it was Sheffield United we would be saying the punishments are not hard enough.

Yep we know rules and must abide by them, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be looked at again and changed if required.

The fans and the club are taking the hit not the man who refused to bring investment etc into the club.   

Other clubs are going to suffer similar issues as us and I don't believe the fans should suffer. 

There must be a better way to police incompetence and for the authorities to step in at an early stage. 

1 hour ago, bluezer said:

Yes…if you were a D-Taxi driver 

1 hour ago, Inspector Lestrade said:

Yep we know rules and must abide by them, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be looked at again and changed if required.

 

The fans and the club are taking the hit not the man who refused to bring investment etc into the club.   

 

Other clubs are going to suffer similar issues as us and I don't believe the fans should suffer. 

 

There must be a better way to police incompetence and for the authorities to step in at an early stage. 

 

 

The people who decide how a club votes on these matters are owners. Of course they won't  vote to impose the fines and sanctions on the owners but they will vote for the clubs to suffer.

Turkeys don't  vote for Christmas.

2 minutes ago, prowl said:

The people who decide how a club votes on these matters are owners. Of course they won't  vote to impose the fines and sanctions on the owners but they will vote for the clubs to suffer.

Turkeys don't  vote for Christmas.

Yep, I quite agree.  Something needs to be done.  I wonder if there is anything in the new football bill. 

I would take the -15 hit and not give Chansiri a penny