Bolton and Bury games likely to be suspended....latest update, what a mess.

[KerrAvon]

In what way is it inadequate? How would you change it?

One assumes that it was approved by the member clubs of the EFL.

[WanChaiMiller]

Yes I read that some weeks ago. It's inadequate.
It has the EFL,s logo on it so I presume they drafted it and they currently endorse it.

I don't think even Theresa May could have made a bigger mess

Using the current regulation on what grounds would you have barred Day and Dale?

How would you change it to ensure this could nver happen again?

[Grist_To_The_Mill]

Now pushing for EFL employees to lose their jobs.

Heres the regulation:

https://www.efl.com/-more/governance...irectors-test/

More it's an appendix, bolted on.

[mellowmiller]

Businesses fail for a host of reasons and having presided over previous failed businesses would not automatically prevent a person from becoming an owner or director of a football club and nor should it.

The EFL is bound by its own rules which set out the criteria that have to be applied in the ‘fit and proper person’ test. A person subject to bankruptcy or an IVA or with convictions for serious criminal matters or for breaches of the Companies Acts would not pass it. Nor would someone with involvement with two previous insolvency events at football clubs, but none football insolvencies would not meet the test (unless they were of a nature that resulted in disqualification proceedings by the DTI).

If the EFL get it wrong, they end up on the end of an appeal.

The EFL could not prevent Bassini from getting ‘involved’ in the Bolton affair. That would be a matter between him and Bolton’s administrators. Had a sale to him been agreed and the appropriate notice been given to them, the EFL would then have made an assessment against the criteria set out within the EFL rules. I understand that there is a dispute between Bassini and the EFL over whether he would have passed the test.

That's ok then. Nothing to worry about here.
The EFL are on top of things, diligently applying their rules and enforcing the deadlines they have set. Everything is fine.
Oh hell and Nat Lofthouse would have been 94 today so that's a great reason to trot some sentimental stuff out and let the farce roll on for a bit longer.

[WanChaiMiller]

That's ok then. Nothing to worry about here.
The EFL are on top of things, diligently applying their rules and enforcing the deadlines they have set. Everything is fine.
Oh hell and Nat Lofthouse would have been 94 today so that's a great reason to trot some sentimental stuff out and let the farce roll on for a bit longer.

What sentimental stuff has been trotted out? Did I miss that?

[mellowmiller]

Businesses fail for a host of reasons and having presided over previous failed businesses would not automatically prevent a person from becoming an owner or director of a football club and nor should it.

The EFL is bound by its own rules which set out the criteria that have to be applied in the ‘fit and proper person’ test. A person subject to bankruptcy or an IVA or with convictions for serious criminal matters or for breaches of the Companies Acts would not pass it. Nor would someone with involvement with two previous insolvency events at football clubs, but none football insolvencies would not meet the test (unless they were of a nature that resulted in disqualification proceedings by the DTI).

If the EFL get it wrong, they end up on the end of an appeal.

The EFL could not prevent Bassini from getting ‘involved’ in the Bolton affair. That would be a matter between him and Bolton’s administrators. Had a sale to him been agreed and the appropriate notice been given to them, the EFL would then have made an assessment against the criteria set out within the EFL rules. I understand that there is a dispute between Bassini and the EFL over whether he would have passed the test.

Bassini has been bankrupt twice and been involved in some serious financial impropriety that led to him being banned from football for 3 years.
Obviously this background makes him an ideal candidate to own a football club.

[mellowmiller]

What sentimental stuff has been trotted out? Did I miss that?

Yes you did if you didn't see the BBC news.

[Brin]

I wasn't aware until tonight, that last season, Bury had signed players on £9,000 a week contracts. Obviously something that they were never going to be able to pay. It resulted in them gaining promotion by signing these better players.

I think this stinks and while the Bury fans lapped all of this up and were enjoying the high time of promotion, then I now feel it serves them right for screwing everyone over by gaining promotion by default.

[WanChaiMiller]

Yes you did if you didn't see the BBC news.

No I didnt see the BBC news. Truly sad if any club bits the dust - particularly one with the history of Bolton. But carry on with your comments wishing them to be booted out of the league and into liquidation. I find it distasteful from a football fan - just my opinion mind. My view is to give them every chance we can.

The game was up today apparently. Was there an 11th hour buyer? I didnt see.

[KerrAvon]

Bassini has been bankrupt twice and been involved in some serious financial impropriety that led to him being banned from football for 3 years.
Obviously this background makes him an ideal candidate to own a football club.

He had been banned from football for three years. Can you see an issue with arguing that he shouldn't have been allowed to be 'involved' with Bolton more than three years later off the back of that.

I can.