By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
When will the EFL get off the fence? That has to be a question worth asking hard now given the way in which events have unfolded with a failed hostile takeover by a faceless payroll company.
The threatening of Rochdale supporters and the Dale Trust with High Court legal action allows us to remind ourselves of the role of the EFL as regulator.
A regulator regulates. It is there to ensure that the rules and governance is upheld and not overridden to the detriment of the game.
To be fair to the EFL, the EFL HAVE already launched disciplinary actions against "multiple individuals" in August 2021 but that is it so far.
Furthermore, Morton House MGT, its directors, and representatives, have confirmed to the League they are refusing to co-operate with the League’s ongoing investigations.
As we have highlighted before from the demise of bury fc was the criticisms in the Bird and Bird review, ordered by the Department of Culture Media and Sport.
It's a really good read and if you're interested in doing so make sure you have brew before you start!
The pertinent bit for Dale fans in challenging the EFL and the mockery of a process and our experience as fans so far is on Page 31 (of 33) "8.3 This case has highlighted several issues with the EFL Regulations, in particular in relation to:
8.3.1 the OAD Test. There is no doubt that the EFL applied the OAD Test properly in relation to Mr Day and Mr Dale. The question is whether the test as currently written is fit for purpose. In particular, it only looks at a narrow list of objective criteria, and does not take into account various other factors that speak to whether a new owner or director is a fit and proper person to own/run a member Club.
8.3.2 the regulations that apply to changes of ownership of a Club. Once again, the EFL applied those regulations when Mr Dale acquired Bury FC from Mr Day. However, the regulations do not prevent a new owner acquiring the Club before he or she has provided a business plan for the Club and proof of the funding required to underwrite that plan. I am aware that the EFL is already considering blocking changes in control until the new owner has provided adequate evidence of source and sufficiency of funding. For example, it could require the new owner to provide irrevocable financial guarantees of payment of any funding requirements for at least two seasons.
8.3.3 the regulations relating to ongoing monitoring of a Club's financial health. In particular, the Regulations do not currently require League One and Two clubs to submit annual business plans, underwritten by adequate proof of funding, or half-yearly management accounts, and the SCMP submissions they are required to file were never intended to be and are not an adequate substitute.
NOW HERE ARE THE DIFFICULT QUESTIONS FOR THE EFL:
1. In the testing of Morton House, Andrew Curran, Matthew Southall and any other party are the EFL applying the narrow criteria or, as recommended, the wider consideration of the Bird and Bird review?
2. Have Morton Rose, Curran, Rose, Southall provided their business plan - as opposed to the Club's business plan. Testimony from the the EFL statement indicates this has not occurred. The Bird and Bird review suggests it should have done.
3. Who at the EFL is leading the EFL review? The Bird and Bird review suggested this should be a senior leader.
4. Have Morton House, Curran, Rose or Southall provided the "irrevocable financial guarantees"?
5. When do the EFL expect to conclude the disciplinary investigations?
6. What recommendations from the Bird and Bird review are the EFL applying to the circumstances that exist for Rochdale AFC with a failed hostile takeover by a faceless payroll company?
These are six very challenging question for the EFL and some more very good reasons why the EFL should kick out these folks into touch.
WHERE IS THE EFL IN ALL OF THIS?
As noted above, the EFL have started a disciplinary investigation that is currently ongoing.
The EFL though are deafening in their silence of movement and have provided no public statement since August 2021.
That's nearly FIVE months of silence from the EFL.
If anyone wanted to contact the EFL directly then the details on their website are:
MORTON HOUSE / Why the EFL MUST get off the fence soon... on 13:40 - Oct 9 by judd
We are, of course, assuming he has been charged by the EFL. We don't know for sure.
Just like we don't know who the former director and employee is that the club has taken legal action against.
This is exactly why you would have thought the EFL would been seeking to bring clarity and closure to their investigation at the earliest opportunity.
We know that Morton House have sold in August 2022 following a club statement and that no further legal action will be continuing. This was also confirm separately by the Trust.
No doubt the EFL have their reasons though, whatever they are, for not yet being able to comment/conclude.
George Bernard Shaw had it right:
"He who can does; he who cannot, teaches."
https://www.visittheusa.co.uk/
MORTON HOUSE / Why the EFL MUST get off the fence soon... on 20:42 - Oct 9 by RAFCBLUE
This is exactly why you would have thought the EFL would been seeking to bring clarity and closure to their investigation at the earliest opportunity.
We know that Morton House have sold in August 2022 following a club statement and that no further legal action will be continuing. This was also confirm separately by the Trust.
No doubt the EFL have their reasons though, whatever they are, for not yet being able to comment/conclude.
Could the EFL get the information from the NDA's or would that require a court ruling? With their a number of them could it be they want to studied the content of those as well, before announcing their findings.
'Only happy when you've got it often makes you miss the journey'
MORTON HOUSE / Why the EFL MUST get off the fence soon... on 21:00 - Oct 9 by James1980
Could the EFL get the information from the NDA's or would that require a court ruling? With their a number of them could it be they want to studied the content of those as well, before announcing their findings.
If 'Morton House' feel they were screwed over by previous club employees, I wouldn't be surprised if they agreed to close down any NDAs as part of the recent share settlement... they might want the wider football community to have sight of any misdemeanours they feel that they fell victim to.
0
MORTON HOUSE / Why the EFL MUST get off the fence soon... on 21:10 - Oct 9 with 2465 views
MORTON HOUSE / Why the EFL MUST get off the fence soon... on 21:04 - Oct 9 by HullDale
If 'Morton House' feel they were screwed over by previous club employees, I wouldn't be surprised if they agreed to close down any NDAs as part of the recent share settlement... they might want the wider football community to have sight of any misdemeanours they feel that they fell victim to.
That would be interesting if it turned out it was a person or persons in The Dale camp who encouraged the signing of some of the NDA's rather than the prospective buyers. How many was it again double figures if I recall correctly.
'Only happy when you've got it often makes you miss the journey'
MORTON HOUSE / Why the EFL MUST get off the fence soon... on 21:10 - Oct 9 by James1980
That would be interesting if it turned out it was a person or persons in The Dale camp who encouraged the signing of some of the NDA's rather than the prospective buyers. How many was it again double figures if I recall correctly.
It was disclosed in this update by the former CEO.
Then Andrew Curran (via Alexander Jarvis) helpfully published the knowledge of it in the Manchester Evening News
Responding, Mr Curran's statement said the MP had either been 'misinformed' or 'not made aware' of the current financial position of Rochdale AFC.
He went on: "The club is certainly not a 'cash cow, far from it. It's got no money and without significant investment, the club will run out of money before the end of the year.
"The board has already confirmed it has no intention or means of putting in the funds required to sustain the club for the foreseeable future. (These include) a substantial outstanding loan (which) is secured against the stadium; HMRC payments are in arrears, and players have been sold below market value.
"We have made an offer to the current chairman to provide immediate funds to pay off these debts, increase the playing budget and buy players for the best possible opportunity of achieving promotion back to League One this season.
"We estimate this to be a requirement of around £500,000 immediately, with a further £500,000 in January. This offer has not been accepted.
"It is clear our acquisition of shares in Rochdale AFC cannot under any circumstances be likened to the situations at Bury and other clubs which have been left weakened from owners.
"If anything the board will be the demise of Rochdale AFC if they continue to act in the manner in which they have been.
"Furthermore, we have paid in excess of £1 million to date in consideration for shares, due diligence and legal costs.
"So, alluding to the fact we intend to use Rochdale AFC as a cash cow for our own benefit is factually incorrect and completely untrue. There simply is no cash to ‘milk’."
He said that the 'rumours, misinformation and speculation on social media and the forums' which Mr Lloyd describes as 'jarring' were the result of 'several individuals breaching the non-disclosure agreement which is in place between ourselves and the club, a matter which we will address legally with those individuals in due course. The most important item on our agenda as it stands is ensuring that Rochdale AFC exists past 2021'
Good of Andrew Curran (via Alexander Jarvis) to confirm that they had a non-disclosure agreement with the club in a regional newspaper
The EFL could read the MEN whilst sat on the fence; might help to pass the time!
George Bernard Shaw had it right:
"He who can does; he who cannot, teaches."
https://www.visittheusa.co.uk/
Responding, Mr Curran's statement said the MP had either been 'misinformed' or 'not made aware' of the current financial position of Rochdale AFC.
He went on: "The club is certainly not a 'cash cow, far from it. It's got no money and without significant investment, the club will run out of money before the end of the year.
"The board has already confirmed it has no intention or means of putting in the funds required to sustain the club for the foreseeable future. (These include) a substantial outstanding loan (which) is secured against the stadium; HMRC payments are in arrears, and players have been sold below market value.
"We have made an offer to the current chairman to provide immediate funds to pay off these debts, increase the playing budget and buy players for the best possible opportunity of achieving promotion back to League One this season.
"We estimate this to be a requirement of around £500,000 immediately, with a further £500,000 in January. This offer has not been accepted.
"It is clear our acquisition of shares in Rochdale AFC cannot under any circumstances be likened to the situations at Bury and other clubs which have been left weakened from owners.
"If anything the board will be the demise of Rochdale AFC if they continue to act in the manner in which they have been.
"Furthermore, we have paid in excess of £1 million to date in consideration for shares, due diligence and legal costs.
"So, alluding to the fact we intend to use Rochdale AFC as a cash cow for our own benefit is factually incorrect and completely untrue. There simply is no cash to ‘milk’."
He said that the 'rumours, misinformation and speculation on social media and the forums' which Mr Lloyd describes as 'jarring' were the result of 'several individuals breaching the non-disclosure agreement which is in place between ourselves and the club, a matter which we will address legally with those individuals in due course. The most important item on our agenda as it stands is ensuring that Rochdale AFC exists past 2021'
Good of Andrew Curran (via Alexander Jarvis) to confirm that they had a non-disclosure agreement with the club in a regional newspaper
The EFL could read the MEN whilst sat on the fence; might help to pass the time!
Well, there's not that long left of 2022, let alone 2021. However will we cope without Curran and Co?
'Only happy when you've got it often makes you miss the journey'
MORTON HOUSE / Why the EFL MUST get off the fence soon... on 08:22 - Oct 12 by James1980
How hard would it be for the EFL to release a holding statement, just so all parties know they haven't forgotten them.
Maybe with something on the line of " there are ongoing legal issues taking place that need to be exhausted before we can finalise our investigations into this ".
MORTON HOUSE / Why the EFL MUST get off the fence soon... on 14:28 - Oct 12 by TomRAFC
At the last fans forum, on the 4th of August, Simon Gauge said there was going to be a meeting/conclusion in mid-September.
Was Simon misled by the EFL or has something changed?
I recall in an interview Simon saying when this all started, something along the lines of, that it was an unusual way of trying to take control of a football club. I expect the big wigs at the EFL are scratching their heads raw trying to unpick this.
'Only happy when you've got it often makes you miss the journey'
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
