Henry I've read that comment but it is waffle. Do they say the ball is back in the ESI court? No. They are prevaricating which is damaging to our chances of competing in this division. Do they give a reason for their failure to make a judgemental? No.
FFS due diligence. When has that been visible in EFL dealings?
At the end of the day they have issued a statement giving no indication why there is a delay.
You moaned they hadn't responded within ten days but they had.
You moaned they hadn't responded to Duchatelet's rant only hours after the event but they responded the same afternoon.
You moaned the statement is waffle as it gives no indication why there is a delay but ESI are saying there is no delay.
What more can the EFL say about a confidential process? ESI are crooks? Duchatelet lied? The numbers don't add up?
They can't comment in any detail and nor should they.
I don't have 100% faith in the EFL, I've met with them, but I have zero faith in the person trying to pin all the blame on them; Roland Duchatelet.
Henry, you copy my post and criticise things I haven't said. EFL shortcomings are not about responses but adjudication, or lack of it. Their statement said nothing about what was holding up the process.
Do you and Covered End enjoy nit-picking my comments?
You did say those things hence why I commented on them. It's all on this thread in black and white.
I agree their statement said nothing about what was holding up the process. I said the same but explained why that was but you ignored that.
I’ve got a house analogy. How long does it take for solicitors to do the stuff to sell and buy a house ? They are waiting on searches, vendor and buyer details, surveyors reports, mortgage information which all takes time to collect and verify. Then there are questions those things throw up that need answering. All that work, time and effort for a few hundred thousand and all done in one country. How long does that all take ? 4 months perhaps ?
I would think the sale of Charlton to a Middle Easter group from a Belgian company in a third party land would be ten times as difficult. If they can get it done in six weeks I would be impressed.
To Red Chaser,I just get pissed off with jobsworths dragging things out for their own benefit,what else have these people got to do all day.
Don't get me wrong their track record isn't good but we don't know that for certain in our case though do we. And they are coming under more and more pressure to get their governance in order or else they run the risk of legislation being passed to usurp their authority.
Henry I've read that comment but it is waffle. Do they say the ball is back in the ESI court? No. They are prevaricating which is damaging to our chances of competing in this division. Do they give a reason for their failure to make a judgemental? No.
FFS due diligence. When has that been visible in EFL dealings?
At the end of the day they have issued a statement giving no indication why there is a delay.
You moaned they hadn't responded within ten days but they had.
You moaned they hadn't responded to Duchatelet's rant only hours after the event but they responded the same afternoon.
You moaned the statement is waffle as it gives no indication why there is a delay but ESI are saying there is no delay.
What more can the EFL say about a confidential process? ESI are crooks? Duchatelet lied? The numbers don't add up?
They can't comment in any detail and nor should they.
I don't have 100% faith in the EFL, I've met with them, but I have zero faith in the person trying to pin all the blame on them; Roland Duchatelet.
Henry, you copy my post and criticise things I haven't said. EFL shortcomings are not about responses but adjudication, or lack of it. Their statement said nothing about what was holding up the process.
Do you and Covered End enjoy nit-picking my comments?
You did say those things hence why I commented on them. It's all on this thread in black and white.
I agree their statement said nothing about what was holding up the process. I said the same but explained why that was but you ignored that.
If in black and white, copy and post please. Hope they won't be taken out of context, a KentAddick favourite. But hey he is not interested in football.
For what it’s worth, I don’t think there’s any connection to Man City at all and if the EFL have been given the requisite assurances, then why the hold up?
I have also been reliably informed of our team for tomorrow’s game at QPR:
One thing we need to factor in is the fact in the EFL’s eyes they have already passed as fit one dodgy owner on to us. Whilst Roland does not appear to be a criminal funding us with dirty money it’s well documented his take on running a football club is somewhat unique.
With the flack the EFL have put up with including CAFC fans protesting outside their offices I would suspect they don’t want to make the same mistake again.
My only concern with Roland’s latest rant is that he might not want the EFL digging too deep in case he has something to hide.
I am not sure how many have experienced the world of corporate politics but I defy anyone, in the world the EFL faces today, to not approach the approval process in the manner they have.
If you create and ask people to work in a blame culture then guess what?
Anyone and everyone is put in the mode of protecting their arse. I challenge anyone not to do the same.
Who created the blame culture? We all did - clubs, owners, media and fans.
Look at the screen roll on Sky yesterday. THE EFL "investigates" ESI links to Manchester City when there is no evidence such links exist. No mention of "validating independence" of ESI, just a secondary clarification of completing Fit and Proper Persons procedures.
Beyond a set frame work Auditors do not audit things they cannot see. They audit things they can see.
How do you investigate something which you cannot see and does not exist?
It is the same media fabricated expectation of how did the EFL allow Derby and Sheffield Wed to cheat? How did the EFL let Bolton, Bury, Macclesfield etc., etc., fail? Who allowed this or that person into the game? The answer is bloody simple. The EFL did all of those things because the EFL is not and never has been empowered to complete any greater scrutiny than is permissible under the law and the rules laid down by the members it scrutinizes.
99% of business practices which occur within the PL and EFL clubs go on in every other industry. How many leveraged club buy outs have there been? Look at the debt Man U still holds. Since taking control of United, the Glazers have reportedly cost the club nearly $1.3bn in interest. Is that good for the game? You think the PL or EFL has the authority to block such acquisitions when it is a perfectly acceptable practice in industries across the world?
The accusative and blame agenda has long been set. It is the same with any manager who has lost 3 or 4 games on the trot, "Why are you failing? Are you the right person for the job" Have you lost the dressing room? Do you have the backing of the board? Rumours are you have one game to save your job?
It drives a victim mentality. The source of the rumours 9 out of 10 times is Sky themselves trying desperately to create yet more breaking news to fill a 24hr schedule.
We have all attacked the EFL in frustration without a shred of the detail involved in any of its deliberations with the relevant parties. Are they process driven and pedantic? Absolutely because it is what a rules based organisation is. They are not paid for their business drive or innovative & creative thinking. They are paid to be methodical.
In such an environment the role of the EFL officials is to protect the organisation and its members.
Why do the EFL now pursue action against Sheffield Wed and Derby? Because the owner of Middlesboro complained about in the "in house" sales of their grounds to the owners to allegedly manipulate any FFP checks and balances. The dispute arises as to whether the prevailing rules even considered such an eventuality. The argument remains providing if such activity was completed and reported within the right accounting periods it should comply with the laws of the land and the FFP regulations.
Please think forward.
In the event of any substantial investment in Charlton the EFL will face potential challenges from 71 member clubs about any links to Man City. Sky will crawl all over it. All will brandish their ignorance of Middle Eastern culture, its history and its current social structure as a weapon of choice on behalf of the vested interests of themselves, their fans or their readers or viewers in search of "any likely fabricated or perceived injustices " for fleeting headlines and sound bites.
So for the EFL it is not just a question of justice being done but a question of justice being seen to be done!
Painful as such a process maybe it not only serves the EFL it in the long term protects us from any mischievous or malicious claims in the future.
Be realistic you know no matter what if we have any success under ESI supporters of Millwall, Palace and many other clubs across the land will cry foul. We will have bought success or cheated, these "t***** h****" are all the same. Too many enjoy wallowing in their ignorance while being spoon fed controversy whether any really exists or not.
EFL officials will need to show they have completed as thorough a due diligence process as is legally possible. I suspect in our scenario they are not yet sure they even know what is legally possible. Even then to cover their position officials will likely refer the position to an EFL Members committee.
The challenge for all involved is how do you prove a negative?
How do you investigate a "perceived crime" against football if no crime has been committed?
The challenge for the EFL beyond such a starting point is how do you even police such an eventuality without creating a massive precedent which by default would be applicable to the financial control of all members? Any specific condition they sought to apply to ESI would be challengeable in law by both ESI and Duchatelet as an inequitable restraint of trade.
I have some sympathy with the EFL officials but they do face the risk of severe jurisdictional overreach for which they have not the powers, the resource or the expertise. In truth in large part they are already there.
We should remember they are also under pressure from the threat of Government intervention into the entire administration of the game. Indeed if it were me I would place the financial licensing of ALL professional clubs whether Premier League, EFL or National League under a governmental financial authority leaving the football issues to the EFL. You could even include clubs involved in other professional team sports under such an umbrella.
I strongly suspect any Government despite its media noise to run a hundred miles from such involvement. Do you see any Government particularly one focused on deregulation wanting to step into such a space to take on the global investor powerbase behind the Premier League. There are simply absolutely no brownie points to be won - none - zilch - nada. Just a good kicking if anything goes wrong.
I repeat I have no specific knowledge but please recognise in political terms and therefore operationally this is not and never has been a rubber stamp or tick box exercise.
I have absolutely no problem with either issued statement but everybody involved will know the political game being played. Todays press release is rightly part of such process. ESI as the new boys on the block are playing everything with a straight bat and have allowed M. Duchatelet to wave a critical finger. It applies an appropriate amount of pressure to bring the EFL process into a sharper focus.
The EFL have duly waved their finger back. It is extremely frustrating but your solace in the face of such challenges is the representatives of ESI and now Duchatelet appear extremely confident of their position and their ability to meet any challenges raised.
To wind forward from Grapevines excellent post, EFL are lining themselves up for legal action by much wealthier individuals if they don't indulge in some fairness and equity and tick the fucking box.
To wind forward from Grapevines excellent post, EFL are lining themselves up for legal action by much wealthier individuals if they don't indulge in some fairness and equity and tick the fucking box.
And they are protecting themselves from action by issuing a bland statement of principles which doesn’t express their particular concern, because that would be improper.
LB has said that he has spoken to the new (hopeful) owners, I am sure him and Gallen have said the players they would like and the present one to keep, and probably some talks with agents have already been held, so as long as it done by January 1st, what is the hurry, apart from saving some finger nails
It would be great if it could get done asap so Gallen as clarity.
But that's no reason for the EFL to cut corners. If ESI and/or Duchatelet haven't provided the proof required then they can't sign off the deal.
But aren't ESI saying they have provided all the details denying any link with man city which by all reports is the reason for the hold up ? If that's the case why is there a delay still ?
No idea but EFL haven't said that.
We're getting conflicting stories from ESI and RD and no comment from the EFL.
I just don't get why people are so willing to believe Duchatelet.
I'd love to know what's done and what remains to be done, I'd guess we all would, and what if anything is holding things up.
My guess is that ESI have submitted the evidence and McHugh,on behalf of the EFL, is now going through it to make sure they tick all the boxes but I don't know how long that will take or even if that's all there is. As I said it's a guess.
Explain the delay, without any negative implication for the client. “Everything going to plan.” But Roland isn’t playing that game. He wants his money and threatens the EFL.
I see his statement as a compromise with the wording heavily rewritten by ESI, since we all know he couldn’t care less about the staff, fans or the future. But It’s still not a good thing for them because it poses the question “why?”
Nothing to see here. We just need to be patient and let the EFL get on with their job. Ignore the rants of the senile old fool. He’ll be gone soon enough.
Do you think that their PR has been a bit, how can I put it, "to good to be true"?
I used the word stink before, I think that was a bit ott now, but something isn't right. It's almost like Southall is saying everything we could possibly want to hear.
We must be the most least ( is that a thing ?) transparent football club in the country . Why does everything to do with our club have to involve secrets , conjecture and innuendo ?
Do you think that their PR has been a bit, how can I put it, "to good to be true"?
I used the word stink before, I think that was a bit ott now, but something isn't right. It's almost like Southall is saying everything we could possibly want to hear.
I think the PR has been very good, but that’s what it is.
Comments
I agree their statement said nothing about what was holding up the process. I said the same but explained why that was but you ignored that.
Some people on here are going to explode
I have also been reliably informed of our team for tomorrow’s game at QPR:
Phillips
Walker
Otamendi
Lockyer
Zinchenko
De Bruyne
Gallagher
D Silva
Bonne
Taylor
Jesus
Subs:
Maynard-Brewer
Sarr
Pearce
Doughty
Vennings
Sterling
Mahrez
With the flack the EFL have put up with including CAFC fans protesting outside their offices I would suspect they don’t want to make the same mistake again.
My only concern with Roland’s latest rant is that he might not want the EFL digging too deep in case he has something to hide.
And still the churn continues....
I am not sure how many have experienced the world of corporate politics but I defy anyone, in the world the EFL faces today, to not approach the approval process in the manner they have.
If you create and ask people to work in a blame culture then guess what?
Anyone and everyone is put in the mode of protecting their arse. I challenge anyone not to do the same.
Who created the blame culture? We all did - clubs, owners, media and fans.
Look at the screen roll on Sky yesterday. THE EFL "investigates" ESI links to Manchester City when there is no evidence such links exist. No mention of "validating independence" of ESI, just a secondary clarification of completing Fit and Proper Persons procedures.
Beyond a set frame work Auditors do not audit things they cannot see. They audit things they can see.
How do you investigate something which you cannot see and does not exist?
It is the same media fabricated expectation of how did the EFL allow Derby and Sheffield Wed to cheat? How did the EFL let Bolton, Bury, Macclesfield etc., etc., fail? Who allowed this or that person into the game? The answer is bloody simple. The EFL did all of those things because the EFL is not and never has been empowered to complete any greater scrutiny than is permissible under the law and the rules laid down by the members it scrutinizes.
99% of business practices which occur within the PL and EFL clubs go on in every other industry. How many leveraged club buy outs have there been? Look at the debt Man U still holds. Since taking control of United, the Glazers have reportedly cost the club nearly $1.3bn in interest. Is that good for the game? You think the PL or EFL has the authority to block such acquisitions when it is a perfectly acceptable practice in industries across the world?
The accusative and blame agenda has long been set. It is the same with any manager who has lost 3 or 4 games on the trot, "Why are you failing? Are you the right person for the job" Have you lost the dressing room? Do you have the backing of the board? Rumours are you have one game to save your job?
It drives a victim mentality. The source of the rumours 9 out of 10 times is Sky themselves trying desperately to create yet more breaking news to fill a 24hr schedule.
We have all attacked the EFL in frustration without a shred of the detail involved in any of its deliberations with the relevant parties. Are they process driven and pedantic? Absolutely because it is what a rules based organisation is. They are not paid for their business drive or innovative & creative thinking. They are paid to be methodical.
In such an environment the role of the EFL officials is to protect the organisation and its members.
Why do the EFL now pursue action against Sheffield Wed and Derby? Because the owner of Middlesboro complained about in the "in house" sales of their grounds to the owners to allegedly manipulate any FFP checks and balances. The dispute arises as to whether the prevailing rules even considered such an eventuality. The argument remains providing if such activity was completed and reported within the right accounting periods it should comply with the laws of the land and the FFP regulations.
Please think forward.
In the event of any substantial investment in Charlton the EFL will face potential challenges from 71 member clubs about any links to Man City. Sky will crawl all over it. All will brandish their ignorance of Middle Eastern culture, its history and its current social structure as a weapon of choice on behalf of the vested interests of themselves, their fans or their readers or viewers in search of "any likely fabricated or perceived injustices " for fleeting headlines and sound bites.
So for the EFL it is not just a question of justice being done but a question of justice being seen to be done!
Painful as such a process maybe it not only serves the EFL it in the long term protects us from any mischievous or malicious claims in the future.
Be realistic you know no matter what if we have any success under ESI supporters of Millwall, Palace and many other clubs across the land will cry foul. We will have bought success or cheated, these "t***** h****" are all the same. Too many enjoy wallowing in their ignorance while being spoon fed controversy whether any really exists or not.
EFL officials will need to show they have completed as thorough a due diligence process as is legally possible. I suspect in our scenario they are not yet sure they even know what is legally possible. Even then to cover their position officials will likely refer the position to an EFL Members committee.
The challenge for all involved is how do you prove a negative?
How do you investigate a "perceived crime" against football if no crime has been committed?
The challenge for the EFL beyond such a starting point is how do you even police such an eventuality without creating a massive precedent which by default would be applicable to the financial control of all members? Any specific condition they sought to apply to ESI would be challengeable in law by both ESI and Duchatelet as an inequitable restraint of trade.
I have some sympathy with the EFL officials but they do face the risk of severe jurisdictional overreach for which they have not the powers, the resource or the expertise. In truth in large part they are already there.
We should remember they are also under pressure from the threat of Government intervention into the entire administration of the game. Indeed if it were me I would place the financial licensing of ALL professional clubs whether Premier League, EFL or National League under a governmental financial authority leaving the football issues to the EFL. You could even include clubs involved in other professional team sports under such an umbrella.
I strongly suspect any Government despite its media noise to run a hundred miles from such involvement. Do you see any Government particularly one focused on deregulation wanting to step into such a space to take on the global investor powerbase behind the Premier League. There are simply absolutely no brownie points to be won - none - zilch - nada. Just a good kicking if anything goes wrong.
I repeat I have no specific knowledge but please recognise in political terms and therefore operationally this is not and never has been a rubber stamp or tick box exercise.
I have absolutely no problem with either issued statement but everybody involved will know the political game being played. Todays press release is rightly part of such process. ESI as the new boys on the block are playing everything with a straight bat and have allowed M. Duchatelet to wave a critical finger. It applies an appropriate amount of pressure to bring the EFL process into a sharper focus.
The EFL have duly waved their finger back. It is extremely frustrating but your solace in the face of such challenges is the representatives of ESI and now Duchatelet appear extremely confident of their position and their ability to meet any challenges raised.
Trying to figure this out though:
"t***** h****"
I see his statement as a compromise with the wording heavily rewritten by ESI, since we all know he couldn’t care less about the staff, fans or the future. But It’s still not a good thing for them because it poses the question “why?”
I used the word stink before, I think that was a bit ott now, but something isn't right. It's almost like Southall is saying everything we could possibly want to hear.