Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Final Thoughts on Charges...inc Palios etc..

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Final Thoughts on Charges...inc Palios etc..

    I'm leaving the messageboards and blogs well alone after I write this til Friday pm, if not, I fear for my sanity and would disrupt the usual day to day stuff! By the time I "wake up", hopefully this nightmare will be over...


    1. Palios - I would surmise that if he has ANY remaining contacts at the FA, they would not be in any position to cast comment on our case. In fact, given the way Palios was known for treating his staff during his short tenure as Chief Exec, I'd be mildly surprised if anyone at all was still on anything more than "professional business terms" with him, least of all people like Graham Mackrell on the disciplinary commitee. He's based his comments on the Luton scenario (co-incidentally under his watch!) which do not bear close scrutiny to our charges.

    2. Points deduction - this will still happen IMO as I've said pretty consistently BUT, I don't think will be anywhere near the 15-30 some media doom mongers are getting excitable about. Fine "could" be around £5m if no points are deducted.

    3. The charges. 7 charges, of which two are personally applicable to GP (no points deduction possible there). Of the 5 charges against the club, by far the most serious is the one of knowingly submitting false paperwork. This is the one that will cause the most bother and the one that a paper trail "could" lead to worse things to follow. There is a disrepute charge (no point deduction), the unauthorised agent charge (£30k fine precedent this season). I can see only two of those 5 charges that, in my PERSONAL opinion, could feasibly result in a points deduction in a worse case scenario.

    4. Paul Smith's Twitter info.... if correct, this is an incredibly bad move. Sets us up as the "bad guys", makes us look shifty and doing anything we can to avoid ANY hearing despite the protestations (and submission to the FA) of complete innocence. I doubt the FA would look on this favourably.

    5. Cardiff or Swansea would not be punished for an identical incident as the FAW rules have no criteria over 3rd party ownership. Yet Cardiff or Swansea stand to gain a £60m place in the PL for us committing an offence that they could not be charged with. Fair?

    God speed.....see you all on the other side.

  • #2
    5. Its about time that got looked at, if they want to play in the English league then matters regarding cardiff and swansea should be dealt with by the FA and should have to follow the same set of rules as the rest.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Nodge70 View Post
      I'm leaving the messageboards and blogs well alone after I write this til Friday pm, if not, I fear for my sanity and would disrupt the usual day to day stuff! By the time I "wake up", hopefully this nightmare will be over...


      1. Palios - I would surmise that if he has ANY remaining contacts at the FA, they would not be in any position to cast comment on our case. In fact, given the way Palios was known for treating his staff during his short tenure as Chief Exec, I'd be mildly surprised if anyone at all was still on anything more than "professional business terms" with him, least of all people like Graham Mackrell on the disciplinary commitee. He's based his comments on the Luton scenario (co-incidentally under his watch!) which do not bear close scrutiny to our charges.

      2. Points deduction - this will still happen IMO as I've said pretty consistently BUT, I don't think will be anywhere near the 15-30 some media doom mongers are getting excitable about. Fine "could" be around £5m if no points are deducted.

      3. The charges. 7 charges, of which two are personally applicable to GP (no points deduction possible there). Of the 5 charges against the club, by far the most serious is the one of knowingly submitting false paperwork. This is the one that will cause the most bother and the one that a paper trail "could" lead to worse things to follow. There is a disrepute charge (no point deduction), the unauthorised agent charge (£30k fine precedent this season). I can see only two of those 5 charges that, in my PERSONAL opinion, could feasibly result in a points deduction in a worse case scenario.

      4. Paul Smith's Twitter info.... if correct, this is an incredibly bad move. Sets us up as the "bad guys", makes us look shifty and doing anything we can to avoid ANY hearing despite the protestations (and submission to the FA) of complete innocence. I doubt the FA would look on this favourably.

      5. Cardiff or Swansea would not be punished for an identical incident as the FAW rules have no criteria over 3rd party ownership. Yet Cardiff or Swansea stand to gain a £60m place in the PL for us committing an offence that they could not be charged with. Fair?

      God speed.....see you all on the other side.



      I find that part worrying!

      But as they told Warnock; "we have every angle covered"
      QPR
      Best team in the world
      Sort of

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Nodge70 View Post
        I'm leaving the messageboards and blogs well alone after I write this til Friday pm, if not, I fear for my sanity and would disrupt the usual day to day stuff! By the time I "wake up", hopefully this nightmare will be over...


        1. Palios - I would surmise that if he has ANY remaining contacts at the FA, they would not be in any position to cast comment on our case. In fact, given the way Palios was known for treating his staff during his short tenure as Chief Exec, I'd be mildly surprised if anyone at all was still on anything more than "professional business terms" with him, least of all people like Graham Mackrell on the disciplinary commitee. He's based his comments on the Luton scenario (co-incidentally under his watch!) which do not bear close scrutiny to our charges.

        2. Points deduction - this will still happen IMO as I've said pretty consistently BUT, I don't think will be anywhere near the 15-30 some media doom mongers are getting excitable about. Fine "could" be around £5m if no points are deducted.

        3. The charges. 7 charges, of which two are personally applicable to GP (no points deduction possible there). Of the 5 charges against the club, by far the most serious is the one of knowingly submitting false paperwork. This is the one that will cause the most bother and the one that a paper trail "could" lead to worse things to follow. There is a disrepute charge (no point deduction), the unauthorised agent charge (£30k fine precedent this season). I can see only two of those 5 charges that, in my PERSONAL opinion, could feasibly result in a points deduction in a worse case scenario.

        4. Paul Smith's Twitter info.... if correct, this is an incredibly bad move. Sets us up as the "bad guys", makes us look shifty and doing anything we can to avoid ANY hearing despite the protestations (and submission to the FA) of complete innocence. I doubt the FA would look on this favourably.

        5. Cardiff or Swansea would not be punished for an identical incident as the FAW rules have no criteria over 3rd party ownership. Yet Cardiff or Swansea stand to gain a £60m place in the PL for us committing an offence that they could not be charged with. Fair?

        God speed.....see you all on the other side.
        Spot on summary
        Populus fui meus nomen , tamen meus nomen est non meus nomen

        Comment


        • #5
          5 is the interesting one as Cardiff did have a player paid for by a 3rd party in the same manner as the wintons did with shittu (which now would fall foul of the 3rd party rule)

          There is also an interesting thing about the FL who were looking in 09/10 to try and introduce a 3rd party capital company with a view to supporting loans for player acquisitions but I believe that they were unable to circumnavigate the FA rules.

          Comment


          • #6
            To Nodge, you've called it spot on IMO.

            I have long expected that they would dock us enough points to still have something to play for vs Leeds, either 9/10 points IMO which would cover all bases for the FA.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by baz View Post
              5 is the interesting one as Cardiff did have a player paid for by a 3rd party in the same manner as the wintons did with shittu (which now would fall foul of the 3rd party rule)

              There is also an interesting thing about the FL who were looking in 09/10 to try and introduce a 3rd party capital company with a view to supporting loans for player acquisitions but I believe that they were unable to circumnavigate the FA rules.
              As I understand it, Bellamy's salary is paid for by Manchester City FC and topped up by Cardiff City FC with money "loaned" to CCFC by the owners. Which is fine. Bellamy is a loan too and is registered to Manchester City

              The Shittu deal may well have fallen foul of the third party ownership as IIRC, the Winton's did stand to materially profit from any further sell on. Still don't think it is entirely the same as the Winton's were never agents nor did they ever own Shittu's registration.

              The whole "Ray Ranson" company that basically bought players for Leeds United and loaned them back during their CL campaigns simply couldn't happen in this climate

              Comment

              Working...
              X