Looks to me like it may come down to which instruments (which company, holding or club, from the accounts it appears the holding company allegedly received money) were used to take the loans and thence was there really an obligation to disclose? I suspect that once again the FL have proved their incompetence, they really need to tighten their rules, its not that difficult!!!!
I know that the supporters trust get a fair amount of stick from time to time, but they have come out with a statement that shows they are and have been trying to get information. The Watford Supportersâ Trust is concerned to learn of the charge of misconduct levelled at the club. The charges relate to financial misconduct while under the sole ownership of Mr Bassini who has also been charged as an individual. The Trust were not wholly surprised following our examination of the recently published accounts as there were a number of significant questions arising from them. We were in the process of asking the club for clarification when the news of the charges broke. Unfortunately many of the questions cannot be answered without publication of the accounts of Mr Bassiniâs company. While there is no blame attached to the new owners, they will have to deal with any consequences for the club and we have offered our support in any way possible as our interest is the long-term well-being of the club. It is our reading of the situation that the Football League have had to follow due process in bringing charges against the club in this matter, but we believe that sanctions are more likely to be levied against Mr Bassini than Watford FC â given the unusual step the Football League have taken of charging an individual. We had regular discussions with the club and continued to ask questions during Mr Bassiniâs period of ownership but no information that could be verified was forthcoming. With no real evidence we were unable to make a public statement but our concerns were made clear to senior members of the club management. We have every reason to believe, from the discussions we had, that they were also in the dark regarding the way the club finances were being run. That such a situation could have arisen is once again is a serious reflection on the fit and proper person test for football club ownership and the way that the football authorities have failed to put in place adequate rules to ensure good governance. That there is a possibility of sanctions against the club, even if the club itself was not responsible, also shows that the authorities have little regard for good governance until something goes wrong when they proceed to punish the innocent. The Supportersâ Trust will do everything it can to ensure that the club emerges intact from this serious situation.
I seem to remember that the Supporters Trust acted like Baz's poodle. All this makes me very annoyed. 1 With Baz - although in fact he has only acted as some of us always expected him to . A former bankrupt who miraculously came into enough money to spend buying Watford a couple of years later and always refused to explain how - not of course that I am suggesting he is a crook as that would be libellous. 2 With the former owners who clearly were so desperate to get out that they did so at any cost 3 With GT and others who were in a position to see behind the scenes and did not smell the whiff that some mere fans could smell 4 The FA who accepted Baz as a fit and proper person. Suspect our Mods and the not606 Mods will need to watch some comments on this carefully.
At the end of the WO article is the following paragraph. "Solicitors acting for Mr Bassini said: âWe are not instructed by Mr Bassini in relation to the proceedings commenced by the Football League however we understand from our client these matters are currently the subject of legal action and are being defended vigorously and he is therefore unable to comment furtherâ If it is legal action, does this imply serious wrong doing against the law of the land rather than breaking the rules of the FL? The solicitors say they are not involved in the FL proceedings.
Going to try to remain positive and cling to the hope that the Pozzo's and subsequently the current board of directors were aware of this some time ago (remember the scare that we were under an embargo possibly due to HMRC payments, the truth didnt come out then just relief we could trade again) and have been transparent with the FL, they are, after all footballing business men. The FL acted far to quickly with the "Charge" immediatley after the annual accounts were released suggesting it is structured and with the current owners co-operating with the FL. As I said going to remain positive for the time being and will refrain from making any reference to he who should not be named
I`ll do it for you Leo, Baz is a crook, if you remember when he took charge we analysed his failed business ventures with some trepidation ,well now all that has been realised , I hope the authorities find him and nail him . The club is guilty of being scammed thus being incompetent,by allowing baz to deal with 3rd party finance without telling FL.However the defence is there that he never told anyone what he was doing ,and when he did say anything more often than not it was a pack of lies . When I met him at shendish I reported back on here and called him a slimy weasel and that that my gut feeling was bad, although like others on here tried to give him benefit of the doubt. Oh how we were all suckered No wonder his interest in pompey quickly dwindled as he must hae known people were on to him). I really Hope the Pozzo`s have the capability to give baz the horses head treatment.
The fact that Bas was taking money out of the club while saying he was waiving a salary (the "consultancy fees") and the fact that he appears to have been very tardy in paying suppliers and the Revenue (which would have led to administration if continued) is bad enough. The allegations that he was using the club money to refurbish a pub (which he hoped to own) and that he raised loans for his own company against the security of revenues that properly belonged to the football business (from player sales and the FL) is worse. Especially since it is alleged that when these revenues were eventually paid to the club, they were not in fact used to pay off the loans. But the worse thing is that through either incompetence or recklessness he seems to have broken basic FA rules that now put the future of the club at risk. A disaster at every level. Surely the FA cannot make it worse by imposing sanctions on the club.? The victim of a mugging should not be in the dock along with the defendant. The bottom line is that we are completely dependent on the goodwill of the Pozzos. Will they stay to see the "project" through? Success on the pitch may persuade them to tough it out, since the rewards from promotion and the sale of a any players we develop could be great. But we are not out of the woods yet . We are in debt to the Pozzos for £8m, rely on them to fund the on-going deficit and to pay the wages of the loan players. A big ask. Oh, and we have a £1m overdraft and owe quite a lot to Mr Fransen. We could really do without the Bas factor.
My sense is that the Pozzos had a good idea of what they were letting themselves into. All the hints from them and people like GT suggest that they knew something financially odd was going on. It wouldn't surprise me if we hear that the club alerted the FL to the irregularities once they had discovered exactly what they were. The FL has been very swift to lay charges following the publication of the financial results. They could only do that when they had facts. I wonder if they had the charges all ready for when the results were published, and to do that they had to have prior knowledge.
Unbelievable - Having read this I immediately bounded upstairs (quite a feat in itself at my age) and grabbed the old boy's Purdey and gun oil and started to clean in anticipation - only for Mrs YTY to come back from the WI having spoken to some solicitor who told her it was still illegal to shoot Baz. Rubbish I reply - Dave the Rave and his sidekick Clegg have said it's okay to use reasonable force against criminals and in my view shooting Bas is far too kind to him -if I had my way I'd string him up by the testies first and draw out the few guts he might have. No says Mrs YTY - that only applies to Burglars you catch in your home. Aha says I - Watford is my second home - so I carry on cleaning ...
Haha YTY did make me chuckle! This really does expose Baz as a crook. I'll put my hands up and say that when he first came the club i supported him, we were in a desperate situation and he came in and invested in players. Clearly things have become very murky in 2012 regarding his time in charge of the club. I have a feeling Baz will be banned from any involvement in a football club by the FA/Football League, hopefully he will be up in court before long. As for Watford FC, we should sit tight and wait. As others have mentioned, the Pozzis/Nani/Duxbury I think had an inkling that the club was not run as it should be under Bassini, I think we may get a fine and nothing else.
"I'll put my hands up and say that when he first came the club i supported him," - thats no good - not in the mood I'm in ... don't blinking care if Baz waves a white flag - he's gonna get both barrels and not in the kneecaps either ..
I wonder if a deal has already been done with the FA? Full disclosure of known facts by the club and "open books" , in return for a negotiated fine and no point deductions? The fine would be seen by the Pozzos as part of the cost of the acquisition. Baz needs to be isolated as the wrongdoer, any money he took out of the club returned and him banned from any association with a football club ever again. He will not find it easy to borrow money again in future, nor find anyone willing to go into business with him nor even supply him with groceries.
I will never doubt the Supporters Trust again as that is the most level headed and spot on response to the situation as could be expected.
I think that there may well have been discussions as Roger describes. The only thing that I cannot see happening is the money owed being returned to the club, unless he sees it as a way of keeping out of the courts. It might well be of course that he has not committed a criminal offence. Nicely balanced I think.
OFH--I think you steer a steady course between the rock of the libel court and the hard place of wanting to say what you really think about our mutual friend. BTW I do realise that it is the Football League and not the FA that is the relevant authority in all this. I think this may drag on for a while, since Bas will do his best to obscure the facts, feign illness , resist disclosure, mislead via phone calls to the press. That seems to be his way.... Still no word from his erstwhile "partners" about what they knew--or even how they were taken advantage of?
Maybe we should wonder a bit about the role of his advisers. Accountants and lawyers who you assume are members of professional bodies. Just what has been their involvement? I suspect that the surgeon, councillor etc were there to create a picture of respectability and were dropped as soon as he gained control.
If he ever sets foot in my front garden I'll do the job with a quick burst from the Sterling AND still be within the law. You have to like that Septic second amendment.
