EFL Agreed Decision - an assessment

[3points]

http://bit.ly/STAR-EFL-Decision

STAR’s analysis of the points deduction and what it all means for the club going forward

[Green]

Was expecting something slightly more critical tbh.

How has it come to this? And are we really (in some small part) blaming the women's team?

[Stranded]

http://bit.ly/STAR-EFL-Decision

STAR’s analysis of the points deduction and what it all means for the club going forward

Interesting.

So if we sign Player from L1, we could pay a fee but also his wage wouldn't count to next season's wage budget if he has not played 3+ games at Champ Level? Or does he become a permitted player for next season as soon as he hits that milestone?

[Nameless]

Was expecting something slightly more critical tbh.

How has it come to this? And are we really (in some small part) blaming the women's team?

No. It’s clear the reverse is the case. Our overspend is reduced by the amount that it costs to run the Women’s team. They are effectively neutral in this debate. Likewise the cost of running the Academy is off set against the headline loss.

[Green]

Was expecting something slightly more critical tbh.

How has it come to this? And are we really (in some small part) blaming the women's team?

No. It’s clear the reverse is the case. Our overspend is reduced by the amount that it costs to run the Women’s team. They are effectively neutral in this debate. Likewise the cost of running the Academy is off set against the headline loss.

It wasn't clear to me having read the link.

tbh still isn't, with a secondary glance over the article. "effectively neutral", why? And if it's not relevant to the overall P&L why mention it at all?

[Green]

Was expecting something slightly more critical tbh

Seems the Athletic have done the honours

[Nameless]

Was expecting something slightly more critical tbh.

How has it come to this? And are we really (in some small part) blaming the women's team?

No. It’s clear the reverse is the case. Our overspend is reduced by the amount that it costs to run the Women’s team. They are effectively neutral in this debate. Likewise the cost of running the Academy is off set against the headline loss.

It wasn't clear to me having read the link.

tbh still isn't, with a secondary glance over the article. "effectively neutral", why? And if it's not relevant to the overall P&L why mention it at all?

Read the 4th paragraph. The losses of Renhe were reduced as a result of the allowances for running the Academy and Women. Because we can take the cost of running those away from the debt they are not making the situation worse, they are neutral in terms of the amount we have overspent.