Wigan in Administration

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Wigan in Administration

by Nameless » 02 Jul 2020 13:32

tidus_mi2
Sanguine
Snowflake Royal So what? You never receive your penalty as long as you're not in the Play Offs and the points deduction can't put you into the relegation zone?


This is where I'm confused. I thought the punishment was a points deduction - Nameless is insinuating that the punishment is suspended until it can affect promotion or relegation. Didn't Birmingham get a points deduction a few seasons back? It put them in the relegation zone, but they pulled themselves back out and finished bottom half.

You're correct, the punishment is the point deduction, there's not waiting for it to actually affect promotion or relegation, that would be ridiculous.


Why do people not read the details rather than just make things up !
It’s a 12 point deduction.
It will be applied at the end of the season if Wigan are not already in the bottom 3.
If they are in the bottom 3 anyway then it is applied at the start of next season.
So if they finish 13 points ahead of the relegation places there is effectively no punishment.
What happened to other clubs, in other seasons really isn’t relevant as rules get changed and in some cases punishments are determined in a case by case basis by a tribunal. Birmingham were not penalised for going into a dim, they breached FFP rules IIRC.
Not saying it is logical, fair, consistent etc but it is as it is.
I would expect any other clubs going into admin this season would get the same penalty unless circumstances were different (previous breaches etc).

Sanguine
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 24791
Joined: 27 Feb 2013 14:36

Re: Wigan in Administration

by Sanguine » 02 Jul 2020 13:37

WindermereRoyal asked if the 12 points deduction would apply if they finish more than 12 points outside of the relegation zone.
The answer to that question is yes. The punishment is the points deduction, not a relegation. You are wrong to suggest otherwise. You might be of the view that this punishment isn't sufficient, but you came into this discussion on a point of fact (will or won't the points deduction be applied) not opinion (is it sufficient?).

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39401
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: Wigan in Administration

by Snowflake Royal » 02 Jul 2020 13:39

Nameless
tidus_mi2
Sanguine
This is where I'm confused. I thought the punishment was a points deduction - Nameless is insinuating that the punishment is suspended until it can affect promotion or relegation. Didn't Birmingham get a points deduction a few seasons back? It put them in the relegation zone, but they pulled themselves back out and finished bottom half.

You're correct, the punishment is the point deduction, there's not waiting for it to actually affect promotion or relegation, that would be ridiculous.


Why do people not read the details rather than just make things up !
It’s a 12 point deduction.
It will be applied at the end of the season if Wigan are not already in the bottom 3.
If they are in the bottom 3 anyway then it is applied at the start of next season.
So if they finish 13 points ahead of the relegation places there is effectively no punishment.
What happened to other clubs, in other seasons really isn’t relevant as rules get changed and in some cases punishments are determined in a case by case basis by a tribunal. Birmingham were not penalised for going into a dim, they breached FFP rules IIRC.
Not saying it is logical, fair, consistent etc but it is as it is.
I would expect any other clubs going into admin this season would get the same penalty unless circumstances were different (previous breaches etc).

Why the need to be so rude about it Nameless?

Edit: so what are you actually saying here?

Is it that if they finish 13points above relegation the points deduction will be applied next season, or
That if they finish 13 points above relegation the deduction will be applied this season but is worthless as a punishment.

Because if it's the former I'd like to see your evidence and if it's the latter I don't know what you're getting your knickers in a twist with people about.

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Wigan in Administration

by Nameless » 02 Jul 2020 13:45

Sanguine WindermereRoyal asked if the 12 points deduction would apply if they finish more than 12 points outside of the relegation zone.
The answer to that question is yes. The punishment is the points deduction, not a relegation. You are wrong to suggest otherwise. You might be of the view that this punishment isn't sufficient, but you came into this discussion on a point of fact (will or won't the points deduction be applied) not opinion (is it sufficient?).


Are you replying to me ?
How am I wrong for describing exactly the same position as you ?
I described the factual position.
I also pointed out that there was a situation in which they effectively escape punishment. That doesn’t make my description of the permutations wrong, unlike Tidus who stated the actual situation couldn’t happen or you who compared it to an utterly different offence !

Sanguine
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 24791
Joined: 27 Feb 2013 14:36

Re: Wigan in Administration

by Sanguine » 02 Jul 2020 13:47

Nameless
Sanguine WindermereRoyal asked if the 12 points deduction would apply if they finish more than 12 points outside of the relegation zone.
The answer to that question is yes. The punishment is the points deduction, not a relegation. You are wrong to suggest otherwise. You might be of the view that this punishment isn't sufficient, but you came into this discussion on a point of fact (will or won't the points deduction be applied) not opinion (is it sufficient?).


Are you replying to me ?
How am I wrong for describing exactly the same position as you ?
I described the factual position.
I also pointed out that there was a situation in which they effectively escape punishment. That doesn’t make my description of the permutations wrong, unlike Tidus who stated the actual situation couldn’t happen or you who compared it to an utterly different offence !


Windermere Royal - Will they still be deducted the 12 points if they finish more than 12 points clear of the drop zone?
Sanguine - I'd assume yes... (plus explanation).
Nameless - you'd assume wrong.

You definitely didn't start this by 'describing the same position' as me.

And you are wrong to describe such a situation as 'escaping punishment'. The punishment is a 12 point deduction. If a 12 point deduction is applied then they haven't escaped it.


Simmops
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 14669
Joined: 04 Sep 2019 09:39

Re: Wigan in Administration

by Simmops » 02 Jul 2020 13:53

This is the most unexpected beef we have had for a while.

You are all wrong btw.

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Wigan in Administration

by Nameless » 02 Jul 2020 13:54

Snowflake Royal
Nameless
tidus_mi2 You're correct, the punishment is the point deduction, there's not waiting for it to actually affect promotion or relegation, that would be ridiculous.


Why do people not read the details rather than just make things up !
It’s a 12 point deduction.
It will be applied at the end of the season if Wigan are not already in the bottom 3.
If they are in the bottom 3 anyway then it is applied at the start of next season.
So if they finish 13 points ahead of the relegation places there is effectively no punishment.
What happened to other clubs, in other seasons really isn’t relevant as rules get changed and in some cases punishments are determined in a case by case basis by a tribunal. Birmingham were not penalised for going into a dim, they breached FFP rules IIRC.
Not saying it is logical, fair, consistent etc but it is as it is.
I would expect any other clubs going into admin this season would get the same penalty unless circumstances were different (previous breaches etc).

Why the need to be so rude about it Nameless?

Edit: so what are you actually saying here?

Is it that if they finish 13points above relegation the points deduction will be applied next season, or
That if they finish 13 points above relegation the deduction will be applied this season but is worthless as a punishment.

Because if it's the former I'd like to see your evidence and if it's the latter I don't know what you're getting your knickers in a twist with people about.


Not sure you really deserve a respectful response given your previous childishness....

Clearly the position is as explained repeatedly.

1. 12 point deduction to be applied at the end of the season
2. If they are in the bottom 3 it is carried over to next season
3. If they are not it is applied immediately

If 3 applies it may or may not lead to relegation. If it doesn’t then they have effectively not had a meaningful punishment. That might be ok, it could be argued there should be no punishment given wider circumstances, it could be argued 12 points is utterly random and getting relegated because the EFL picked 12 rather than 10 is unfair. Not really got a view on that.
But it’s true and factual that there is a huge difference in the effect of the deduction depending on where Wigan finish and the exact number of points they finish on. That is factual !

As for ‘getting shirty’, yet again you can stick you judgement, but the point is the judgement is clearly explained on the BBC. Website and elsewhere and has been repeatedly explained here. So people just saying ‘it can’t work like that’ is a bit daft. It’s like arguing that Liverpool haven’t won the league or Mark Bowen isn’t our manager.

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Wigan in Administration

by Nameless » 02 Jul 2020 14:01

Sanguine
Nameless
Sanguine WindermereRoyal asked if the 12 points deduction would apply if they finish more than 12 points outside of the relegation zone.
The answer to that question is yes. The punishment is the points deduction, not a relegation. You are wrong to suggest otherwise. You might be of the view that this punishment isn't sufficient, but you came into this discussion on a point of fact (will or won't the points deduction be applied) not opinion (is it sufficient?).


Are you replying to me ?
How am I wrong for describing exactly the same position as you ?
I described the factual position.
I also pointed out that there was a situation in which they effectively escape punishment. That doesn’t make my description of the permutations wrong, unlike Tidus who stated the actual situation couldn’t happen or you who compared it to an utterly different offence !


Windermere Royal - Will they still be deducted the 12 points if they finish more than 12 points clear of the drop zone?
Sanguine - I'd assume yes... (plus explanation).
Nameless - you'd assume wrong.

You definitely didn't start this by 'describing the same position' as me.

And you are wrong to describe such a situation as 'escaping punishment'. The punishment is a 12 point deduction. If a 12 point deduction is applied then they haven't escaped it.



Ok, hadn’t gone right back to the start and we’ve got wires crossed.
You are absolutely correct that 3 pages back I got it wrong., although since then I’ve got it right !
More recently people had continued to argue incorrectly and I had been looking at those and not your and Windermere’s original points and not clicked that you were calling me out on that original error on my part.
I stand corrected.

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39401
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: Wigan in Administration

by Snowflake Royal » 02 Jul 2020 14:02

I think you need to read back over the posts and see who is the one with the problem Nameless. Because it's clearly you here.

Ah, nice to see you've at least half done it in response to Sanguine.


Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Wigan in Administration

by Nameless » 02 Jul 2020 14:06

Sanguine
Nameless
Sanguine WindermereRoyal asked if the 12 points deduction would apply if they finish more than 12 points outside of the relegation zone.
The answer to that question is yes. The punishment is the points deduction, not a relegation. You are wrong to suggest otherwise. You might be of the view that this punishment isn't sufficient, but you came into this discussion on a point of fact (will or won't the points deduction be applied) not opinion (is it sufficient?).


Are you replying to me ?
How am I wrong for describing exactly the same position as you ?
I described the factual position.
I also pointed out that there was a situation in which they effectively escape punishment. That doesn’t make my description of the permutations wrong, unlike Tidus who stated the actual situation couldn’t happen or you who compared it to an utterly different offence !


Windermere Royal - Will they still be deducted the 12 points if they finish more than 12 points clear of the drop zone?
Sanguine - I'd assume yes... (plus explanation).
Nameless - you'd assume wrong.

You definitely didn't start this by 'describing the same position' as me.

And you are wrong to describe such a situation as 'escaping punishment'. The punishment is a 12 point deduction. If a 12 point deduction is applied then they haven't escaped it.


I’d argue with the ‘escaped punishment’ bit. They will have got away with a fair lesser punishment than they could have done (although an alternative reading might be that relegation would be a far harsher punishment than deserved). Points deductions are weird. They can be devastating or meaningless which seems to lack natural justice somehow. Why should a club 11 points off 3rd bottom be relegated with all the knock on effects and a club 13 points off get away with no real ongoing penalty both having committed the same offence ?

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39401
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: Wigan in Administration

by Snowflake Royal » 02 Jul 2020 14:09

I guess it's a decision, arbitrary or not, that the financial doping required to go into administration has a limit to how much it can benefit you and that's measured in points.

So relegating a team that would otherwise finish 7th is disproportionate to relegating a team who would finish 21st for the same offence


Auto rlegation may also only exacerbate the problem and increase the likelihood of clubs collapsing completely. At least if they're close to relegation that is probably a deserved outcome.

User avatar
tidus_mi2
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7278
Joined: 15 Jun 2012 15:24

Re: Wigan in Administration

by tidus_mi2 » 02 Jul 2020 14:15

I can understand the idea of a club avoiding punishment if they get a points deduction when they're 12+ points clear of relegation but the purpose of the deduction isn't to ensure a relegation but was brought in when Leicester went into administration and promoted in the same season.

Ironically they would have been promoted on goal difference even with a 12pt deduction that season but it was that scenario that introduced the rule change so it could be argued that it was brought in to stop teams gaining an advantage from their poor finances, not cutting costs when they could have. If they've done well enough to earn promotion or avoid relegation despite the point deduction then that's what it is.

If it is seen as unfair that a team avoids any such punishment in that case then the rule would have to be changed to automatically demote any team that enters administration.

Sanguine
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 24791
Joined: 27 Feb 2013 14:36

Re: Wigan in Administration

by Sanguine » 02 Jul 2020 14:16

Snowflake Royal

Auto rlegation may also only exacerbate the problem and increase the likelihood of clubs collapsing completely. At least if they're close to relegation that is probably a deserved outcome.


Exactly. A points deduction reflects the fact that if you marginally escape relegation running a non-viable business model (be that a failure against FFP, or going into administration), then you would have been relegated had you operated normally. Likewise, a deduction applied to a team that finishes say 6th would reflect that they might not have made the playoffs had they operated as expected.

If they are mid-table, like Wigan, then so be it. I agree that auto-relegation would just ruin clubs.

I don't know a lot about the circumstances of Wigan's administration - but if the situation is COVID-related, I have a bit of sympathy with the amount of the deduction.


User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39401
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: Wigan in Administration

by Snowflake Royal » 02 Jul 2020 14:26

Sanguine
Snowflake Royal

Auto rlegation may also only exacerbate the problem and increase the likelihood of clubs collapsing completely. At least if they're close to relegation that is probably a deserved outcome.


Exactly. A points deduction reflects the fact that if you marginally escape relegation running a non-viable business model (be that a failure against FFP, or going into administration), then you would have been relegated had you operated normally. Likewise, a deduction applied to a team that finishes say 6th would reflect that they might not have made the playoffs had they operated as expected.

If they are mid-table, like Wigan, then so be it. I agree that auto-relegation would just ruin clubs.

I don't know a lot about the circumstances of Wigan's administration - but if the situation is COVID-related, I have a bit of sympathy with the amount of the deduction.

Aye.

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Wigan in Administration

by Nameless » 02 Jul 2020 14:29

tidus_mi2
If it is seen as unfair that a team avoids any such punishment in that case then the rule would have to be changed to automatically demote any team that enters administration.


Or use other options...Currently if Wigan finish 13 points clear then they face no meaningful punishment. If they finish in the bottom 3 the points are deducted from next season, a significant punishment.
Why the difference ? Why not take the points off anyway now ? Why not let them finish on say 37 points rather than 50 and finish bottom rather than 3rd bottom ?
Logically it would make more sense to apply the deduction from next season full stop.

South Coast Royal
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5642
Joined: 16 Jan 2020 17:29

Re: Wigan in Administration

by South Coast Royal » 02 Jul 2020 14:30

Sanguine
Snowflake Royal

Auto rlegation may also only exacerbate the problem and increase the likelihood of clubs collapsing completely. At least if they're close to relegation that is probably a deserved outcome.


Exactly. A points deduction reflects the fact that if you marginally escape relegation running a non-viable business model (be that a failure against FFP, or going into administration), then you would have been relegated had you operated normally. Likewise, a deduction applied to a team that finishes say 6th would reflect that they might not have made the playoffs had they operated as expected.

If they are mid-table, like Wigan, then so be it. I agree that auto-relegation would just ruin clubs.

I don't know a lot about the circumstances of Wigan's administration - but if the situation is COVID-related, I have a bit of sympathy with the amount of the deduction.


I wonder if the fact that Wigan Warriors possibly provide money towards Wigan Athletic from ground use etc., with the Rugby League club being one of the biggest in that sport, and they have been greatly affected by having no season at all.

This is despite of course some government funding to the Rugby League but £16 million in total would not go very far even in that sport where wages are nowhere near the levels of footballers'.

Sanguine
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 24791
Joined: 27 Feb 2013 14:36

Re: Wigan in Administration

by Sanguine » 02 Jul 2020 14:31

Nameless Currently if Wigan finish 13 points clear then they face no meaningful punishment.


Fcuk me.
Yes. They. Do.

The meaningful punishment is 12 points. That they finish comfortably mid-table is neither here nor there. The punishment is 12 points.

For the second time you seem to be agreeing and then arguing the exact opposite.

SCIAG
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6362
Joined: 17 Jun 2008 17:43
Location: Liburd for England

Re: Wigan in Administration

by SCIAG » 02 Jul 2020 14:56

Nameless
tidus_mi2
If it is seen as unfair that a team avoids any such punishment in that case then the rule would have to be changed to automatically demote any team that enters administration.


Or use other options...Currently if Wigan finish 13 points clear then they face no meaningful punishment. If they finish in the bottom 3 the points are deducted from next season, a significant punishment.
Why the difference ? Why not take the points off anyway now ? Why not let them finish on say 37 points rather than 50 and finish bottom rather than 3rd bottom ?
Logically it would make more sense to apply the deduction from next season full stop.

I think the reason they’re deferred if they finish in the bottom three is to stop clubs “frivolously” entering administration when they have no chance of survival.

You could feasibly still have clubs deciding to get administration over and done with in a season where it is clear that they are going to finish in mid-table regardless. But equally, if the points deduction is applied next season then Wigan could finish comfortably mid-table again - the difference is purely psychological.

A points deduction that drops you six places in the table is a punishment no matter how you slice it, it will have an impact upon prize money and sponsorship and how attractive you are to players.

Would suggest that keeping the rules simple and only avoiding the most obvious abuses is just sensible from the PL.

FWIW I understand why you think this way and even why you were confused earlier as I made the same mistake at first. But I think the FL have the right approach.

WestYorksRoyal
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5392
Joined: 15 Apr 2019 19:16

Re: Wigan in Administration

by WestYorksRoyal » 02 Jul 2020 15:15

Basically, if you're going to break the rules do it properly so your squad is good enough to be 12 clear of the drop.

We should just ignore FFP and take a points hit one year. Then we're left with a better squad who can compete for promotion in the future

Jackson Corner
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4846
Joined: 23 Nov 2005 00:55

Re: Wigan in Administration

by Jackson Corner » 02 Jul 2020 15:25

Nameless
Jackson Corner I wouldn't laugh we could be next. Along with others sadly this Covid is going to hit football very hard.


Why would we be next ?


Well like Wigan how much do we know about the owners? They have never given interviews after three years I wouldn’t know if they walked by me in the street. We know nothing of there current financial position? Surely whatever business they are involved in like everyone else it must have been affected by COVID.. They have been very generous with funds but after spunking away millions on donkeys like Aluko and Puscas. You would not blame them for pulling the plug.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Biscuit goalie, Google Adsense [Bot], Tinpot Royal and 348 guests

It is currently 28 Mar 2024 17:50