Points Deduction AGAIN

[Mid Sussex Royal]

is there any chance we get off scot-free here?

There`s always a chance until we see it in black and white, the club and in discussions with the EFL, it`s their decision ultimately.

I think its been accepted as 6 points on basis of what Ince said in press conf on Thurs....if Bowen had said that I'd be more inclined to think it was 100% happening

[Snowflake Royal]

Pretty impossible to do when accounts are only published 9 months after the season finishes and the money doesn't have to route through an independent regulator.

That, imo, would be the ideal solution. All player wages go through the PFA or an independent regulator, all transfer fees and registrations etc go through an independent regulator. Including bullshit like image rights, sponsorships etc. Contracts sorted out by lawyers not dodgy thieving bastard agents...

the return submitted on 1st March will relate to this season. The accounts might not be publicly published for 9 months but would have been available to the EFL much earlier. Don't expect EFL would have agreed all the signings in the summer if we were in breach of the season 21/22 business plan.

As with all football clubs I suspect there are grey areas of interpretation between the club and EFL as there are lots of costs that get removed from what would appear in the published accounts to the EFL's £13m per year / £39m over three years P&S scrutiny

I'm pretty sure the accounts submitted were for 21/22 with a forecast covering 22/23 - as it hasn't finished yet.

Same. Every time I've looked at them in the past the figures were for the previous season, but I think 3 points has vastly more expertise in this area if I recall him and his posts on accounts in the past.

[elrey]

Exactly. The EFL isn’t fit for purpose!

To be honest, without it, the club might simply have folded. So I wouldn't attack the EFL and their policies of trying, under difficult circumstances, to make a workable system happen when everyone's trying to eak out an advantage.

It’s these governing authorities that cause much of the problem in the first place, particularly the Premier League, which is a prime case of the tail wagging the dog.

Is it though?

Reading's problems are caused because the club was sold to some guy who wanted to use it for money laundering. Then it was sold again and again.

The Premier League has given the club a lot of money and the opportunity to earn a lot. Of which the club squandered the opportunity.

[elrey]

The problem is absolutely the PL dominated by the super rich big 6 and the terror of relegation and not returning from the rest.

The creation of the PL has been a disaster for the integrity of the pyramid.

The thing is, money has gone into the system. Reading need to take a look at how much they can spend in order to stay as a profitable business. A lot of clubs decided to overspend, and this is what causes the problems.

You could spend a little, and HOPE to recoup that by getting into the Premier League, but really you get there, you have to spend loads to try and stay there.

It's about being a sensible business, which we just haven't been post Mr Mad.

[elrey]

Exactly. The EFL isn’t fit for purpose!

To be honest, without it, the club might simply have folded. So I wouldn't attack the EFL and their policies of trying, under difficult circumstances, to make a workable system happen when everyone's trying to eak out an advantage.

Given that we haven't really reduced our debt, and have no prospect of doing so without the owner writing it off, we've hardly been saved.

If the League's reasoning for FFP is to protect clubs, then they should allow owners to write off debt as 'income', e.g. Dai writes off £30 million of the debt, rather than buying the stadium for £30 million.

I'm not sure how 'selling off the family silver' to remain with FFP budgets helps clubs in any way.

Basically say to owners that they can put money in, but that money has to be in the form of personal sponsorship, not 'loans' to the club.

You could then tighten up the amount clubs are allowed to lose each year, so you don't have to get to basketcase level before action is taken.

Yes, it would still mean owners could throw money at clubs to get promotion, but it would be their own money they are gambling with.

But the other scenario is the EFL didn't give a damn, the owners were allowed to do whatever they wanted, and we got so much debt we couldn't survive at all.

You think allowing clubs to write things off is going to solve all the problems? All it will mean is clubs expecting this to happen in the future, putting more clubs at risk.

The reality is, if we did things the German way and had half the club in the hands of the fans and the community, things wouldn't have got this far. People look at the money as the end goal, it's not. It's about the game and the community.

[elrey]

we should have the draft system they have in the MLS. That would sort it.

No, that's an awful idea.

The MLS isn't exactly a league that's even that popular in its own country.

Ownership by the fans and community is the way forwards. Look at Germany. They've got it right, for the most part, except Bayern and Red Bull.

[Snowflake Royal]

The problem is absolutely the PL dominated by the super rich big 6 and the terror of relegation and not returning from the rest.

The creation of the PL has been a disaster for the integrity of the pyramid.

The thing is, money has gone into the system. Reading need to take a look at how much they can spend in order to stay as a profitable business. A lot of clubs decided to overspend, and this is what causes the problems.

You could spend a little, and HOPE to recoup that by getting into the Premier League, but really you get there, you have to spend loads to try and stay there.

It's about being a sensible business, which we just haven't been post Mr Mad.

Because the entire system stacks the deck so that unless you spend ridiculously you have little chance of success

[YorkshireRoyal99]

we should have the draft system they have in the MLS. That would sort it.

No, that's an awful idea.

The MLS isn't exactly a league that's even that popular in its own country.

Ownership by the fans and community is the way forwards. Look at Germany. They've got it right, for the most part, except Bayern and Red Bull.

But if you take Bayern and RB Leipzig out, the rest of the league is pretty poor in quality in respect to the rest of the big leagues. The amount of money in the English game, it would take a very bold (possibly even silly) move to step into that territory. Not to mention that there are a number of German clubs that still aren't run that well either.

[tmesis]

we should have the draft system they have in the MLS. That would sort it.

No, that's an awful idea.

The MLS isn't exactly a league that's even that popular in its own country.

I agree a draft makes little sense (and would probably be illegal under employment laws here) but the league itself isn't doing too bad. 28 teams averaging 21000 is better than all but a handful of countries in the world.

[Snowflake Royal]

Doing things more like America is never the right answer.

[3points]

the return submitted on 1st March will relate to this season. The accounts might not be publicly published for 9 months but would have been available to the EFL much earlier. Don't expect EFL would have agreed all the signings in the summer if we were in breach of the season 21/22 business plan.

As with all football clubs I suspect there are grey areas of interpretation between the club and EFL as there are lots of costs that get removed from what would appear in the published accounts to the EFL's £13m per year / £39m over three years P&S scrutiny

I'm pretty sure the accounts submitted were for 21/22 with a forecast covering 22/23 - as it hasn't finished yet.

Same. Every time I've looked at them in the past the figures were for the previous season, but I think 3 points has vastly more expertise in this area if I recall him and his posts on accounts in the past.

we're both correct. The published accounts, that will hit Companies House by the end of March, will relate to the prior season. They could be published at any point inside the 9 month period though. Like most companies RFC chooses to file them as late as possible.

The club has ongoing dialogue with the EFL about the current season position. The 1 March submission will cover the current season through to 30 June 2023 (and possibly next season's budget - though can't remember precisely if that's the case). 1 March allows all the implications of the Jan transfer window to be played out and a forecast prepared until the end of the season, which is a pretty easy exercise as outgoings are pretty much fixed, and the club has a decent understanding of its incomings (through TV, gate receipts, commercial income) through to the end of the season

[Chairman Mao]

I just want the EFL to do their worst and the transfer embargo lifted for next season. I’ll always support Reading no matter what league we’re in and having watched Chesterfield a few times in the last couple of seasons the quality of football is very good and the fans still turn up in their numbers.

I appreciate relegation would really hurt us financially but I’d love to start enjoying the football again. We have looked decent in only 2 or 3 games in recent years and it wears you down after a while.

relegation would probably see us go out of business

[Chairman Mao]

is there any chance we get off scot-free here?

I've thought this, everyone seems resigned that it will happen and, to be fair, it probably will, but I'm thinking is there someway we get round this somehow. It still doesn't necessarily add up that they are pulling us up on something that they should have checked previously unless we have hidden it from them, in which case then we have no defence.

It's definitely more hope than expectation though.

this isnt true is it


the business plan includes incoming money as well as outgoings. weve ok'd all our outgoings with them.
we also agreed with them on incoming money in the plan, and that money has obviously not happened.
the timing of this, just after the window, suggests that we needed to offload one/several high earning players who dont play very often, for a fee in january, and completely failed to do so for several possible reasons (injury/form/asking price/player agreement)
our only other option there would have been to offload other players who are currently needed to fill out our threadbare squad, which we chose not to do, for obvious reasons

[tmesis]

is there any chance we get off scot-free here?

I've thought this, everyone seems resigned that it will happen and, to be fair, it probably will, but I'm thinking is there someway we get round this somehow. It still doesn't necessarily add up that they are pulling us up on something that they should have checked previously unless we have hidden it from them, in which case then we have no defence.

It's definitely more hope than expectation though.

this isnt true is it


the business plan includes incoming money as well as outgoings. weve ok'd all our outgoings with them.
we also agreed with them on incoming money in the plan, and that money has obviously not happened.
the timing of this, just after the window, suggests that we needed to offload one/several high earning players who dont play very often, for a fee in january, and completely failed to do so for several possible reasons (injury/form/asking price/player agreement)
our only other option there would have been to offload other players who are currently needed to fill out our threadbare squad, which we chose not to do, for obvious reasons

Pisa not signing Puscas, maybe?

[YorkshireRoyal99]

is there any chance we get off scot-free here?

I've thought this, everyone seems resigned that it will happen and, to be fair, it probably will, but I'm thinking is there someway we get round this somehow. It still doesn't necessarily add up that they are pulling us up on something that they should have checked previously unless we have hidden it from them, in which case then we have no defence.

It's definitely more hope than expectation though.

this isnt true is it


the business plan includes incoming money as well as outgoings. weve ok'd all our outgoings with them.
we also agreed with them on incoming money in the plan, and that money has obviously not happened.
the timing of this, just after the window, suggests that we needed to offload one/several high earning players who dont play very often, for a fee in january, and completely failed to do so for several possible reasons (injury/form/asking price/player agreement)
our only other option there would have been to offload other players who are currently needed to fill out our threadbare squad, which we chose not to do, for obvious reasons

Surely they'd have pulled us up on this season last season/over the summer? I know accounts aren't released until the year after, but they will be reviewing our situation on a regular basis. Any chance this points deduction relates even further back than the agreed business plan?

[PATRIQT]

We've made approx. £1m from the FAC. That wouldn't have been taken into account for this seasons incoming. Could that be a lifeline here?

[Chairman Mao]

I've thought this, everyone seems resigned that it will happen and, to be fair, it probably will, but I'm thinking is there someway we get round this somehow. It still doesn't necessarily add up that they are pulling us up on something that they should have checked previously unless we have hidden it from them, in which case then we have no defence.

It's definitely more hope than expectation though.

this isnt true is it


the business plan includes incoming money as well as outgoings. weve ok'd all our outgoings with them.
we also agreed with them on incoming money in the plan, and that money has obviously not happened.
the timing of this, just after the window, suggests that we needed to offload one/several high earning players who dont play very often, for a fee in january, and completely failed to do so for several possible reasons (injury/form/asking price/player agreement)
our only other option there would have been to offload other players who are currently needed to fill out our threadbare squad, which we chose not to do, for obvious reasons

Pisa not signing Puscas, maybe?

puscas, moore, joao etc

[Chairman Mao]

imagine our shrinking gate receipts arent helping matters either

[Snowflake Royal]

Morrison has played 36 games this season.

Dann 8, mostly as a sub.

Good decision by the club there. Could have just not bothered with one of Sarr or Hutchinson.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Morrison has played 36 games this season.

Dann 8, mostly as a sub.

Good decision by the club there. Could have just not bothered with one of Sarr or Hutchinson.

In a division below and he moved from an underachieving club in Portsmouth, to a team who are bang in a relegation fight in L1.

That's not a defence of Dann, but not sure players who are fighting at the wrong end of L1 and not particularly impressing are players we should have been looking to retain.