|
Post by rickyqpr on Jul 31, 2020 19:09:02 GMT
So Sheffield Wednesday have been deducted 12 point suspended until next season. Had they been deducted this season, they would have been relegated and Charlton would have survived. They have delayed and delayed the disciplinary hearing and now produced an outrageous conclusion. I think Charlton have every right to complain. The only justification for next season is that Wednesday have the right to appeal. How can this be fair or correct? If Wigan win their appeal and Barnsley are relegated, the EFL should hand their collective heads in shame!
|
|
|
Post by terryb on Jul 31, 2020 19:13:08 GMT
This will be interesting. How can it stay out of the courts?
1) Will Charlton take legal action as a point deduction this season for Wednesday would have saved them from relegation. Mind you, will Charlton retain their EFL licence as the "new owners" had not supplied proof of funds?
2) If Wigan are not deducted points, Barnsley can take action on two counts. That would be that the non implementation of deductions from Wigan & Wednesday has relegasted them.
Are Barnsley being serious with the sugestion that they would take the EFL to court? If so, can the EFL restart in September whilst court action is outstanding?
|
|
|
Post by londonranger on Jul 31, 2020 19:17:51 GMT
Thats what the EFL are paid for. To pick on the lower leagues. Leave the Prem alone. Although I think Newcastle were harassed about being bought by a Saudi outfit, and its now off. Correct me Terryi if I am wrong.
|
|
|
Post by terryb on Jul 31, 2020 19:28:01 GMT
The Newcastle takeover is off london.
The Premier League did prevaricate & not give approval to the takeover, but this was based on commercial grounds. Basically, the "new owners" would ahve been the Saudi Royal Family (from what i can gather) & they do not permit PL broadcasts by the contracted broadcasters & illegally show them through their own company. It this 21st century piracy?
What annoys me is that the takeover was opposed on commercial grounds rather than on human rights issues!
|
|
|
Post by bowranger on Jul 31, 2020 21:05:05 GMT
The Newcastle takeover is off london. The Premier League did prevaricate & not give approval to the takeover, but this was based on commercial grounds. Basically, the "new owners" would ahve been the Saudi Royal Family (from what i can gather) & they do not permit PL broadcasts by the contracted broadcasters & illegally show them through their own company. It this 21st century piracy? What annoys me is that the takeover was opposed on commercial grounds rather than on human rights issues! Yeah, in this case their profitable relationship with BeIn Sport (whose streams a Saudi Royal-backed company was pirating, apparently) was more important. Apparently the Prem is very highly regarded for its tough stance on piracy, pubs using unapproved streams instead of Sky etc - I believe the Prem had gone to court in support of BeIn Sport multiple times in fact? The fact they couldn't care less about City essentially being funded as a state-backed PR campaign to cover up for human rights abuses tells us everything on that front.
|
|
|
Post by terryb on Aug 1, 2020 11:16:53 GMT
The Times has published an article that states that the company that bought Hillsborough(Owned by the Wednesday owner)in the accounts ending July 2018, were not incorporated until ten months later!
|
|
|
Post by Ashdown_Ranger on Aug 1, 2020 11:23:05 GMT
EFL have been pathetic in allowing this to drag out so long.
Yes, it's a complex process, but surely they must have the means and expertise to deal with it.
Sheffield Wednesday should be the one's being relegated, not Charlton - or Barnsley, should Wigan's appeal succeed.
I'd be spitting blood it I were an Addicks or Tykes fan...
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on Aug 1, 2020 11:37:48 GMT
The oddest thing is the timing. Why announce now? Had they delayed a couple of weeks and even provided for a private appeal, It would have probably slipped under the radar. Had they deducted only 7 points, then all would want it imposed next season and not this. But to take a month to announce a deferred penalty seems illogical. The Wigan penalty was imposed with the conditions stipulated to have maximum impact. Had they avoided relegation this season, the penalty would have been actioned next season. There is a logic to that. When Birmingham was penalised, it worked out that they did not suffer at all and that did not seem fair. If the EFL were to make a ruling that all penalties are to be imposed at the start of a subsequent season, at least that would be clear. But with their usual ineptitude, I think this is just going to be money for the lawyers!
|
|
|
Post by bowranger on Aug 1, 2020 12:38:47 GMT
Yeah that's confused me, it doesn't match the EFL pattern. My cyncial take is that EFL tend to just want an easy life with the punishments dished out. Brum, give them enough of a deduction that they can point to punishment without adjusting the relegation picture. Even us with Faurlin - investigation found a case for us having a 'sporting advantage' which normally means a deduction but a big fine suited everybody and didn't mess up the promotion and playoff situation (big up David Pleat for arguing that one player doesn't really affect anything haha).
This one though, big enough deduction to relegate a club but not imposed yet - I presume they just hope enough people will just go "covid timetable, exceptional times" and shrug it off? I know they have to factor in time for an appeal but this goes back to the blunt point about the Derby and Sheff Wed cases - the potential breaches were known about AGES ago, it didn't need to be this way. If I had to guess, I thought this would have had 'X points off to put them fourth bottom' written allover it, but apparently not. I can't remember if they were backed into a corner by their own rules - breach of this type starts at 9 points and then +/- depending on aggravating/mitigating circumstances...?
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on Aug 5, 2020 9:39:18 GMT
SSN - CHARLTON GATHER SUPPORT
Charlton Athletic have received support from seven championship clubs in their attempt to change the decision by the independent disciplinary commission to sanction Sheffield Wednesday next season for a breach of profitability and sustainability rules.
As reported in The Times, Wednesday were deducted 12 points for season 2020/21 by the Commission last week but Charlton, who were relegated to league one, believe the sanction should apply in the season just finished.
The London club are yet to say if they will proceed with legal action and both the EFL and Sheffield Wednesday can still appeal the commissions decision.
|
|
|
Post by Ashdown_Ranger on Aug 5, 2020 11:11:14 GMT
Much as I support Charlton's action, time just isn't on their side.
With the start of the season being only a few weeks away and fixture lists having to be hastily drawn up (largely based on geographic location and potential local clashes) I think they have zero chance of playing the the Championship in September. The very best they could hope for is financial compensation, but that too would seem extremely unlikely.
|
|
|
Post by terryb on Aug 5, 2020 12:26:19 GMT
Much as I support Charlton's action, time just isn't on their side. With the start of the season being only a few weeks away and fixture lists having to be hastily drawn up (largely based on geographic location and potential local clashes) I think they have zero chance of playing the the Championship in September. The very best they could hope for is financial compensation, but that too would seem extremely unlikely. I would agree with that ashdown, but it wouldn't be Charlton's fault if they were to take court action & the EFL had to postpone the start of The Championship & Division One. That might make the EFL realise that they would have to take quicker action in the future!
|
|
|
Post by Ashdown_Ranger on Aug 5, 2020 12:47:23 GMT
Much as I support Charlton's action, time just isn't on their side. With the start of the season being only a few weeks away and fixture lists having to be hastily drawn up (largely based on geographic location and potential local clashes) I think they have zero chance of playing the the Championship in September. The very best they could hope for is financial compensation, but that too would seem extremely unlikely. I would agree with that ashdown, but it wouldn't be Charlton's fault if they were to take court action & the EFL had to postpone the start of The Championship & Division One. That might make the EFL realise that they would have to take quicker action in the future! I suppose in a legal sense that might be so. But can you imagine the uproar among EFL clubs unable to start the season and therefore start to earn TV money again - possibly just about the only income available to them at the moment. Clubs would go bust (some probably will anyway) and there'd be a mutiny - maybe the Championship would become independent of the EFL along the lines of the Premier League breakout group - possibly not a bad thing given the level of utter incompetence shown by the EFL.
|
|