Quote:
Originally Posted by AccyMad
I was saying as much the other day, I doubt we'd have got too much if any leeway in 2009 either
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by cashman
Whats happening is weird to me, at weekend it looked like Bury dead and buried, Bolton surviving, now it looks the other way around to me? have to agree with Di, but for ilyas in 2009 we would have been knackered, i cant recall the E.F.L. offering us a chance? please correct me if thats wrong!
|
The difference here is that the EFL had nothing to do with our problems in 2009. We owed the taxman £300k and they issued a winding up petition to force us to pay. We were given two stays of execution by the high court judge (standard) who knew a trading company had a better chance of settling up than a liquidated company with no assets. EFL had no say in the matter as operational costs and wages (mostly) were being paid.
The current problem with Bury and Bolton is not that they owe substantial amounts of money, as they are operationally manageable. Bury's problem is that Steve Dale wasnt paying anyone, players, opponents, staff, possibly police. He wasnt trustworthy to stage a game and pay the interested parties for their part in that game. I believe EFL payments to the club have been withheld (tv money, solidarity and academy monies). Until he can either prove he has the money to see it through, or sells the club to someone who can, then EFL wont sanction a game.
With Bolton the problem lies in red tape. A club (or presumably any business?) cannot be allowed to trade indefinitely whilst in administration. Administrators are brought in to realise the value of a company and either facilitate a sale (again to someone who will be take responsibility for all liabilities) or liquidate the company in order to sell off the assets and repay owings. The administrators told the EFL that a deal was in place, price agreed, and paperwork drawn up needing only to be signed. So on the eve of the season the EFL granted Bolton their place as the deal was 99% in place. Bolton COULD play games as they had the operational cashflow to pay people and the administration would shortly be lifted. The deal then fell through. Another deal has since fell through.
The administrators at Bolton WILL liquidate the club in order to sell off the family heirlooms and settle their debts. The EFL have given them more than enough time and now want to force their hands one way or another with any deal left on the table.
Neither situation can be allowed to just ramble on. The EFL have taken flak over it all but have been overly lenient throughout. Their true guilt lies in having allowed new owners to take on the 2 clubs despite BOTH having history of multiple failed businesses collapsing owing money whilst they both profited (asset strippers). Quite clearly neither was 'fit and proper'
I feel for both sets of fans. Ive helped where I can with Bury, hell I even dragged my Jurassic body along to the charity match and performed 45 minutes of painfully torturous exercise (loosely), and will tomorrow be taking my van full of water along to Gigg Lane to help with the clean up of the stadium. Whatever the outcome for both clubs, this HAS to be a watershed moment where football realises what it has almost lost - and sorts its act out. Failure to do so is going to result in a huge reshuffle of footballing power. Perhaps a well run, profitable club from a small town may even see its star rising further?