Wigan fans View on the Appeal

Fu.ck 'em. All of 'em. Wigan, the EFL, Wendy, Rooney's lot... Unless there's a massive change of direction in where the game's headed, we'll be around longer than most if not all of 'em. Sun's out, fridge is full and with all the **** going on elsewhere, it's really not that important. Staying up would be lovely, obviously, but if it's the moral high ground for us and Wigan just delaying the inevitable for them, then so be it. Season will start again on Sept 12th wherever we are.

 

Tbf it shouldn’t matter how thick they’ve laid it on all that should matter is if the EFL have followed procedure .
They’ve clearly gone into admin and as per the rules have been punished .
Wigan have made it obvious that the punishment is fair and weren’t even contesting the timing if they’d stayed up which the panel should note .
If it’s unfair it’s unfair whatever the consequences and Wigan haven’t acknowledged this .
I can only think of one reason why the appeals panel would rule against and as I’ve said in other posts that is if procedures haven't been applied correctly .

 

That's the spirit. Do you know where Dunkirk is by the way?

 

We had our arses kicked there during the Second World War.

 

I do, but you won't be allowed to go. Seriously though; it's just become one daft p1ssing contest - one I want no part of. If Wigan are happy to stick their collective heads in the sand on the overspending issue, there's nowt we can do. They're not the worst for it and certainly won't be the last to do it, but the facts remain that by bending the EFL's rules, they've built a squad way too expensive for their budget, and accrued more points than us as a result. If that's the new normal.....the new playing field we all have to play on, then we go down as we finished 3rd bottom. If the authorities finally decide to grow a pair and stand by their own rules, then one day we might reap the rewards of running a tight ship. Until then, we'll have to just carry on trying to punch above our weight and hopefully watch the likes of Wigan, Wednesday, Derby, Birmingham, Reading and probably many others, go to the wall.

 

Agreed, but l would like to watch from the comfort of the championship

 

Reading Murphy's interview on the Chronicle website, I suddenly feel less bothered. Reads as if they only want to bring back up players in. No need for experience, referred to Solbauer and other 'veterans'. Who are these other veterans? Woodrow and Mowatt the most experienced we have, they're only 25 and probably now only one full season in the championship, and two full seasons of playing regularly. So, more of the same next year if we stay up.

 

I have a horrible feeling you could be right ley the tyke.
Like all of us I've been agonising over this since brentford and I've followed this thread to try and learn more detail about the complexities of the issue.
All the righteous indignation we feel about Wigan's overspending over the years is academic to this process.
I don't think the force majeure argument re the pandemic washes either; nor the fit and proper person argument.
However, bizarrely I think the force majeure argument re the rogue owner taking over and then immediately putting them in admin does hold some weight on the grounds that it was totally unforeseeable and without precedence.
I really really really hope I'm completely wrong but like others on here, I dont think they'd be challenging the decision if they didn't have a case.
We've all got gripes with the EFL but in this case they have shown some balls and done what their rules dictate. The fact its gone to an independent panel takes it out of their hands.
The two words.... justice and football dont go together in this world.
Question....if they win the appeal what right do we have to appeal, if any? I've seen varying opinions on here but dont know the answer.

 

A force majeure event is defined within the EFL regs as being one over which the Club could not be reasonably expected to have had control and its Officials had used all due diligence to avoid happening. I can't see how the actions of an owner can be said to fall within that. He is an Official.

I can't see a precedent being set that the actions of an owner/director can be kept entirely separate from the club as an entity. It would be ludicrous and open up the gates to all kinds of abuse and chicanery.

 

As I see it force majeure can only be an adverse outside influence. Try as they might to distance themselves from the owner the fact remains that he was the principal person at the time of going into admin. and thereby an internal factor.

 

It’s really hot out there today so I think I’ll ignore what’s happening in the outside world, go and spend 168% of my income on assets I can’t then sell for what I paid for them, have a great time and then when the creditors come for their money claim it wasn’t my fault I spent more than I could afford to. If they insist on me paying my debts or suffering the consequences I’ll claim they’re part of a conspiracy against me. Why should I be blamed for things I’ve done?

 

What time does the hearing start?

 

Another comment on their forum:

'If there is some karma, 2 of Barnsleys coaching staff have left in surprising circumstances and the manager is heavily linked with Watford.

The icing on the cake would be for us to win the case today, it gives us chance to then plan and get new owners in, hopefully before a big firesale takes place. Staying in The Championship means we can keep the bulk of our first 11, whilst we will be handicapped in signing players for fees, there's enough quality there along with a few loanees added to be ok, in what will be the weakest 2nd tier for probably 20 years next season.

Add into that multiple teams on deductions.'


Already licking their lips at next year in the championship and focusing on other teams deductions. Plus Karma?? wtf?

 

Several clubs may try it on and go into administration to reduce some of their large debts knowing it can be challenged if Wigan walk away today with a result
Obviously it depends on the reason why they are reprieved
1 of their fans said if they fire enough shots one is bound to go in
I said the other day a dangerous precedence could be set here

 

Thanks Mansfield. I do hope that's how they interpret it also. I find myself looking thru this thread trying to find reassurance and your comment does that.
I understand your argument but another question.....
....in considering the definition of fm in the regs, could they not argue that the club (as a separate entity to the owner?) could not have reasonably expected the owner to behave in the way he did in that (the argument goes) he didnt communicate with anyone at the club about his actions.
I realise the definition of 'club" is crucial here and that the owner regarded as part of the club but could this be a chinknin the EFL armor?
Apologies for stretching the point but just a thought.

 

If we get relegated all players will be happy to move on to anyone willing to pay them what they earn now. Nevermind staying with us for a 50% wage cut.

 

thanks for the comment. agree he looks like he was the principle person. just hope the panel see it that way.
thanks for the comment.

 

More disingenuous claptrap from Wigan Today: "But having committed to a defence costing into the region of £500,000, the club have done everything they can to prevent what most in the game would consider a major miscarriage of justice – a side being relegated to League One despite finishing in 13th spot."

This is interesting though: "Both parties produced witnesses, with the rules also providing for a report from an independent firm of accountants, detailing what caused the administration. This holds a disproportionate weight, because of its independence, and as such will be treated as more sacrosanct than the material provided by either party."
https://www.wigantoday.net/sport/fo...hearing-will-decide-championship-fate-2929167

I'm not sure they really meant disproportionate to imply that the weight given to the report is unreasonable. Maybe they did. Either way, I find it encouraging that the outcome is heavily weighted towards an independent accounting report.

 

Ask yourself this question. What would have happened if the owner was still in place and servicing the club’s financial needs? Well firstly we would be starting next season in league one. But would the ‘club’ and Wigan fans be pointing at the owner saying what rogue he is? I don’t think so. Would they be pointing at the efl asking how did this man pass the fit and proper person test? I don’t think so. They would have quite happily carried on their merry way without questioning him or his character. Well they can’t have both ways

 

I don't think so. Here's the exact regulation:

12.3.11 For the purposes of this Regulation 12.3, a ‘Force Majeure’ event shall be an event that, having regard to all of the circumstances, was caused by and resulted directly from circumstances, other than normal business risks, over which the Club and/or Group Undertaking (as the case may be) could not reasonably be expected to have control and its Officials had used all due diligence to avoid the happening of that event.​

The definition of Official is a wide one and essentially covers all directors, shadow directors, owners etc. Even if he is a bit nutty, it cannot be said that him going rogue is a force majeure event as he, as an Official, had an obligation to use all due diligence to stop it happening. He obviously didn't as he didn't stop himself! Additionally it would be nonsense to suggest that Wigan could not be reasonably expected to have control over its own financial dealings.

I suppose the more tenuous argument is that the previous owners, upon selling to this bloke, used all due diligence to establish that he would run the club prudently and could never have expected that he would behave the way he did. I don't think that holds water though, as it would basically be saying that if the owner of a club acts with sufficient recklessness then the insolvency can be ignored in terms of a deduction. This would be a nonsense and set a very dangerous precedent which would be open to all manner of abuse.

​