We are all wondering what the FL might hand down as punishment for the club's part in the Bassini loans case. I offer this as a solution in regards as to how the club, at least, is dealt with. Now I may be a pessimistic type but I think the footballing authorities will fine the club an amount of money, as yet to be decided - probably dependent on whether or not we are promoted. They will also dock us points, but not in an obvious way, and in away that the club can avoid if they play well and win games. These points will be docked by carefully selected referees not awarding penalties and contriving to disallow goals. It is up to the players to score the goals to win the games despite the "help" of the match officials.
The FL are already trying to dock us points (and succeeding) by sending the incompetent, no - stuff it... biased (because the incompetence shown yesterday has to have its roots in bias) numpties that they sent to us last week, yesterday in particular. One wonders whether the EPL have had a word in their shell-likes and said, "no we don't want another little club at the top table..." Paranoid? Maybe, but that doesn't mean that they're not out to get us!
Does that mean that one of the assistants we've got on Saturday is that idiot who disallowed Swansea's second goal at Brom?
I thought the referees were told not to give Watford penalty kicks at all times and we have just had some idiots who have forgoten this this year.
Just been reading about the FL men who hold our future in their hands. Richard Bowker is a transport business specialist who is a non exectutive member of the board. The six club directors are divisional representatives elected by member clubs, with three from the Championship, two from League One and one from League Two. They include Jeff Mostyn, an ex-Bournemouth chairman and current vice chairman of that club. Then there is Crystal Palace chief executive Phil Alexander, a former player with Norwich who later turned to American Football, representing the London Monarchs. Tony Kleanthous is the Barnet chief and the youngest chairman to enter the League when he bought the club in 1994. John Nixon is Carlisleâs managing director and former managing director of Pirelli Tyres. Keith Lamb is a former Middlesbrough chief executive who stepped down from the role in 2011 but has remained in the position of non-executive director to Steve Gibson. Finally, Shaun Harvey is the long-serving chief executive of Leeds and a former managing director of Bradford City. Not forgetting Clarke, of course, chairman of the Football League since March 2010 and a Leicester City season-ticket holder. Discussions have been held between these people over the sanctions that will be applied to Pompey if they come out of administration, but so far no one will say anything about their conclusions. In the Pompey case it seems that they are waiting to see if they get relegated and should they survive dock the points this season. If they don't survive they will start next season on -10. Maybe we are in a similar situation as has been mentioned before.
Having looked at what you've been accused of, either the press have massively understated it or I can only see a fine being handed out. It's basically an administrative offence, there's been no performance advantage, and none of the transactions were against the rules in their nature. It was just a disclosure issue, and looking at the punishments given out to other clubs (eg QPR) there's no real reason for points to be deducted in this case.
Thanks Ricardo, good to have your comments. It would seem that the bad guy in all this is the ex-owner who has been separately charged, something that is very unusual. How much the employees of the club knew at the time is something we cannot answer. The feeling is that we will be fined without a points deduction, but our CEO expected to be informed of the FL decision a couple of weeks ago and it seems that it hasn't arrived.
I cannot think of another situation where 3 at least maybe 4 of the 'judges' - who actually decide the 'punishment' directly benefit from choosing 1 form of punishment to the club (i.e. points deduction). It seems to me that unless the relevant 'judges' disqualify thmeselves, almost any punishment is potentially subject to a judicial review. however, I would guess that the club will take any fine (i.e. no points deduction) and shut up. all in all, however, football is run in a shoddy way, however much it improves on the field (and seeing Varney's performance at the w/e, it hasn't improved much - nor has the refereeing, but we have already aired that one to death)
It can only be a fine, surely? The Pozzo's lawyers would tear them to shreds if there is a points deduction with at least three of the panel having an extreme and highly visible conflict of interest. However impartial they might be at arriving at a 'points deduction' penalty they cannot, under such circumstances be seen to be impartial. Their influence on the other members cannot be discounted even if they disqualify themselves from a vote. Perhaps therein lies the delay?
