Well well who would’ve thought it, can’t afford to play games but https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53475241
Any team that refuses to play due to financial reasons should be given a transfer embargo to ensure they "don't spend beyond their means"
The EFL needed some sort of requital for those that voted to end the season. But they are too thick and bent to realise that clubs would vote for league position as opposed to whether they could afford to play on or not Lets not forget, we have since found out that clubs were then funded in the play offs.
The end of season debacle was sickening, as was the start of same, these administrators are not fit for purpose, and keep on proving it.
There was a link on the SMB but can’t find it. That said, 4 league one clubs had players tested the day before the vote, just the 4, so the result was already known. Surely those clubs who said it wasn’t economically viable would fork out for tests and have no income? So we have two options, the EFL funded those tests, or the clubs did find it economically viable to continue. Either way it was a ****ing farce