Question about the "Fit and Proper Person" Test

I've been reading up on the situation with Wigan, and their fans biggest gripe seems to be with the EFL for, and I quote, "Choi and Yeung tried to kill us and the EFL doing their best to finish the job. If we go bust the EFL are probably the most culpable for me as they let this happen".

I've also seen our own fans slagging of the Fit and Proper Person Test when talking about the wealth our owner may or may not have.

My question though, is what can they actually do? Let's take Wigan, when they were taken over by this Honk Kong consortium originally. The fans are now saying it looked obvious that they were not in it for the right reasons. But if this was found out during the test, what would the EFL's options be? Only things I can see is they block the sale, which would then put the club at risk of liquidation(if no other buyer could be found) or stuck with an owner that does not want them or will not fund them, or they rescind their place in the League, which would basically be as bad as liquidating the club. Are there any other courses of action available to them?

 

This is a good point.

What exactly is available to the EFL or Premier League for that matter if a team is in trouble and the owner doesnt want to know any more?

 

I think this is spot on.

I've little love for the EFL, but they are in an impossible position on this. Block a takeover and they could kill a club, ratify one and they could save it.

I recall Cellino's dealings at Leeds. I can't recall the exact details but I know he'd been convicted in Italy of something like VAT fraud, and when the EFL were asking tougher questions, they got a lot of blowback from Leeds fans.

I'd be more inclined to tighten monitoring of financial performance and more stringent penalties for near real time breaches. If clubs can't accumulate vast mountains of debt in the first place, you're naturally applying a brake on what an owner can do, whether they are "fit and proper" or not.

 

Is it possible to have all clubs gaurantee monies for salaries at beginning of season?

To me it shouldnt be possible for a team to go out of business during a season for footballing reasons.

They shouldnt be allowed to start the season

 

I'd like to see clubs submit accounts monthly to the EFL with action taken as soon as an issue becomes apparent. But I'd also like to see the TV money pooled and shared equally and only that being used to fund the playing side. Say the TV deal for the Championship is £120m/season - thats ~£5m per team to spend on the playing budget. They can't spend any more and gate receipts/other commercial activities can be used to improve the fans experience and development of new players (academy, etc)

 

I think the parachute payments need reform, personally. It needs inserting into the rules that any parachute payment a relegated club receives MUST only be used for covering the increased expenditure accrued in the Premier League. No banking it, no spunking it up the wall on players and increased Wages. If your outgoing have not increased enough to use it all, you lose the extra.

It would stop crooks trying to take control of teams just to get them up and bank the money, while not investing in the club to keep them there. It would also make the bottom of the league more competitive, as we have seen teams go up and just be happy to be there for a season so have not invested enough to be competitive.

The obvious thing to change would be to cap what a club can spend based on their income. Say 80%? That way, the bigger clubs will still have an advantage over the smaller clubs, but it would be a hell of a lot closer. It would encourage teams to use their academies too, as both a way to save on transfer fees and to generate additional money to spend through player sales.

 

When new owners take over, a bond should be lodged with the football league to cover potential future creditor debts.
if the losses are shown to exceed the bond when the accounts are produced, the EFL should have the power to dock points or place a transfer embargo on...the idea being to force owners to keep their club in good financial order.

 

I agree, however the problem is that teams in this league are competing to get into the Premier League. The money up there is on a different level, and clubs will happily gamble to get on the gravy train.

If every club in the Championship had to be self sustainable, they'd need to massively cut their wage budgets, and transfer spending. We'd then end up with an even bigger gulf in class between our league and the top division, and I can't imagine the Premier League ever turning up the pressure on financial regulation eithe. If they did the English clubs in the Champions League would fall away from the likes of Real Madrid, etc.

Some clubs struggle to file annual accounts on time, never mind monthly ones.

 

It's all very well Wigan blaming the world and his wife, anybody but them, but isnt the real culprit much closer to home - right under their noses in fact?
Who indulged them for nigh on 20 years, spunking millions of his own money to indulge his whims and ego, then walked away and sold the club to the first shyster he stumbled across without a thought for what happened next?
Where was Uncle Dave's fit and proper test?

 

Some good suggestions in this thread. One frustrating thing when chatting to Wigan fans is that they see nothing wrong with the model their club has followed amassing losses year on year. They just won’t acknowledge that this isn’t right or sustainable and the very thing that made them susceptible to a dodgy ****** when one came along.

I’d like to see a ratification process for all transfers with the EFL needing to see proof that the buying club can afford the transfer and wages without accruing debt.

Should be a limit of spending on wages as a % of turnover. No more than say 75%

 

I don't know how you can guarantee a whole season in advance. There are so many variables in a season. A true wage cap makes sense, but look at teams who get relegated, you literally have to fire sale a whole squad to get the wage bill down, and thats not healthy for longevity either. Indeed, didn't we lose around £3-4m last relegation despite clauses in contracts and selling a good number of players for fees.

 

At least they got to enjoy the good times. I dont see why they would turn on him?

 

For me there’s not much the FA can do if someone wants to buy a club to asset strip there’s not much protection .
Imo they need to work with Govt , it doesn’t need a lot of legislation or interference but just enough to stop the Shysters .
Football isn’t another buisness it’s about communities , identities etc .
Special legislation and a shoring up if good EFL rules and regs should at least deter the chancers and give clubs a chance against the more determined corporates.

 

But that's exactly my point Helen. He's a god to them, he even has a statue at the ground. But for all the hate being directed at us, the EFL, the Administrator, the QC, Old Uncle Tom Cobley and all - at the end of the day I can't see how anyone else can be more responsible for their demise.

 

There are former board members of Wigan Rugby League Club who were pressurised into walking away when attempts were being made to secure sole ownership of the new ground when Central Park and Springfield Park were finally vacated.
They would be hard pushed to describe anyone connected to that takeover as a God.

 

This is a good idea. Used by other industries, air travel, insurance etc. It would also have the unintended consequence of clubs having to develop their own talent rather than just buy it in.