Wigan's debts

Sorry, but can't say that name without singing this

 

The same set of fans who took joy in Bolton's predicament 12 months ago.

 

http://www.ientcorp.com/attachment/pdf/15908530287ZIk.pdf

 

The inescapable fact remains that the club was originally sold to these people by their former owners and benefactors. Where was their due diligence?
In their search for who is really responsible for this debacle it seems to me the Wigan fans ought to be directing their spotlight a lot closer to home than they have so far.
They won't, of course. It's too easy to blame anybody and everybody else, principally us and the EFL.

 

Reasons for judgment against Wigan (click through for full thread)

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1295060469150027776

 

I've said this before on here, but what can the EFL actually do to stop a rogue owner buying a club?

The clubs are privately owned entities and if someone wants to buy or sell the club, as long as it is all done lawfully, the EFL can't actually stop the sale(as shown with Charlon's situation). At worst, they can revoke the clubs place in the league, which would basically kill the club anyway.

 

Knackers to all the ownership shenanigans; what grinds my gears is their unwillingness to accept they were living beyond their means. Trebling a players’ wages on smaller crowds than the club you signed him from is utter madness. Of course Moore wasn’t the only one! It is UNSUSTAINABLE. So obvious to anyone looking in, apart from the Wigan fans who’ve repeated the ‘well-run club’ lie so many times, it’s become fact in their heads.

 

You'd be one of the few. This place for example would be poisonous.

 

I think you've already answered your own question there. I can see they wouldn't have a legal say in the ownership of a club. But if the penalty of a breack of following a test can result in losing your license to play in the EFL, then that would effectively stop rogue buyers, as most buyers wouldn't want to just throw their money down the drain. I think this situation is the exception rather than the rule.

 

The appeal is written up here: https://www.efl.com/siteassets/image/201920/1920-judgements/wigan-athletic-v-efl.pdf

All seems to boil down to the fact that the new owner was a club official, and due diligence to avoid admin can't be argued when he actively sought it.

Barnsley tried to get someone else (I assume Wigan) to pay for the representation at the hearing.

 

What a shock. Only what people on here were saying for months.

 

I'm sure Bolton are thinking same about wigan

 

If you copy the link to the tweet and just paste that in here it will automatically embed it makes it easier to view the tweet

 

Spot on, and I am fed up of pointing that out to them.

 

Wigan fans seem to see the panel's report as justification of how they were run. They can't make the connection that the panel concluded that the reason they went into admin was because the owner refused to put money in any more, and the fact that leads to admin is that they were overspending. They're also frothing at the mouth at the fact that Barnsley put an order in for their representation to be covered alongside the appeal costs, as if Wigan wouldn't have done the same if roles were reversed.

That said, I do have some sympathy. There needs to be some safeguarding against owners making promises, and going back on them. Especially when they've only just taken over.

 

They're literally beyond belief.

 

That is cheeky as folk.