NcnsBcfc

I think the linesman was probably admiring the save from Martin by Fulham's excellent keeper.

As others have said he seemed to forget all about the 3 City players offside.

Great finish from KP though. He's lethal from 2 yards out. Just like his debut.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/every-championship-club-profit-loss-25066373

Blimey, we've wasted so much money haven't we?

3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

This is a relief- the Reading situation confused me over the summer!

I remember when they were released from a soft embargo under the ahem 'governance' of Shaun Harvey in Summer 2019, they proceeded to add the following- as per Wiki:

For fees

1. Joao
2. Puscas

On a free

1. Adam- released from Stoke who were surely high payers.
2. Rafael- from Sampdoria, probably not tiny wages?

Unsure if they got Morrison from Birmingham before or after.

On loan

1. Miazga- though Chelsea help with the wages as we know.
2. Boye- from Torino, again Serie A
3. Pele- Monaco

Loan to buy

Ejaria

They've had it coming for sure.

I did wonder as well, based on a random Twitter post that I read whether it might be a case of they can sign their 6 players on EFL imposed limits and take the points or they can sign nobody at all in lieu of the points hit and just fill up the team with youth players when injuries hit- emergency GK aside, ie a full on embargo in lieu of points or their current embargo allowing for 6 but with a deduction.

@Mr Popodopolous

We had a few good chats on the FFP thread with regards to Reading.

I think of all the clubs that have fallen foul so far; they are the most contemptuous.

At each stage, they have knownthey are in the wrong over the last few seasons. But have continually thought stuff it, we'll push it a little bit more.

Cue last month's transfer window, and the signings of Holliett, Drinkwater, Baba, Hallovic, Dann and others. They knew they were going to get penalised anyway. I can't believe the EFL let them get away with it for so long.

Reminds me a bit of Luton Town years ago.

Didn't they get hit with -30 point deduction in L2.

Only just missed out from being relegated to non league by a couple of points as well.

With no salary cap in operation. Maybe L1 is the best place for Derby to sort their finances out.

It certainly looks like it's worked out for Sunderland, Portsmouth, Bolton and others. They've all been able to find new owners a lot easier away from the rigours of FFP.

Very difficult in the championship to get yourself out, if you're in a financial hole.

I'm sure they'll be back in the next few seasons, financially refreshed again.

The word i would use for tonight is "Frustrating".

In all four home games we have had chances to win the games, but of course have ridden our luck as well at times.

We are a team in evolution. Sometimes it'll work, sometimes it won't. Performances like Cardiff, will be offset; by performances like tonight.

We are in 12th, with a 0 goal difference, and a mid table feel to the side.

The difference tonight for me, is that there was a huge howler by our keeper at the end to gift them a point, and rob us of two. Up until that point he had however, kept us in the game in the first half, and ahead in the second.

In the Blackpool game, it was good play by them that got them that 93rd min equaliser. Tonight feels like a much more bitter pill to swallow.

That said you can't legislate for individual errors, and our captain will be feeling it acutely i'm sure. It was the type of error that up until today we had managed to generally eradicate from our play. As opposed to last season, when it seemed to happen every game.

There were a lot of players off tonight, and you could see why NP made the changes after 45 mins.

As an aside. How poor was Wells tonight?

You can see why he's not an NP player in terms of what he is being asked to do. Very poor on the press, and his general work rate is poor.

He was given 60 mins tonight, and in my eyes failed to show NP that he has to consider him for a starting role.

Vyner must also be a bit of a dead man walking, with Tanner breathing down his neck.  Expect to see Tanner on the bench at the weekend, as it wasn't ideal to take Kalas out of the centre, to cover for his deficiencies.

For me though  no indication that we need to panic. The home win will come eventually, and will probably be followed by a number soon afterwards.

I see that he has stopped his customary "We will definitely get promoted 100% mantra" after a defeat.

He really is the Donald Trump of League 2; believing in his greatness; above and beyond all others.

So far their two league wins, have been both narrow 1-0 home wins against arguably two of the worse teams in the league; and even those results could have easily gone the other way.

Wait until they play the likes of Forest Green, Harrogate, Orient, Rochdale, Bradford etc. They are really going to struggle.

They won't go down of course. There are teams in L2 that are even more of a car crash (Oldham springs to mind). But Barton is completely deluded if he thinks that they are going up.

And then What?

Replace 15 players, with another 15 players??? You're not going to build a team employing 36 & 37 year olds on 1 year contracts are you? It's just all really bizarre in the extreme.

The thing that gets me about these, and a number of their signings this summer; is how Barton thinks they are better than what he already has?

He seems to think just getting any new players in, will address their slide (They were 4th In League 1, 20 months ago when Coughlan left).

Whereas the reality, is a settled team/formation/ethos is the best way forward through progression; and the team getting used to playing with one another. You're not going to get that with constant chopping and changing.

The main question is who signs off on these transfers? He can only field 11 players + subs, and Rovers are out of the Carabo cup now. There's no point bringing players in, if you're not going to play them.

The majority of the players coming in, have also not played regularly; and are generally without a club. They won't be either match or physically fit enough to cope with the demands of professional football for at least a few weeks. It's very different to bringing in players that are currently playing week in, week out for their clubs.

It's just a bizarre, really bizarre way to manage. I can only think that a number of the signings this summer, must be thinking "Oh, my god what have i signed on to". Barton probably promised them this, or that; and then went out and bought more players in their position.

It's all leading up to a complete car crash of a season.

Christ this guy makes Pitman look like a teenager. Really scraping the barrel now aren't they. How is this guy any better that what they already have?

@Mr Popodopolous

This whole Chelsea/Reading tie up has got me thinking.

Haven't the two clubs both got Russian owners?

It's got a slightly unethical, underhand feel to it all.

Something isn't right, that's for sure.

Has Barton lost track of how many players he signed/got rid of?

I'm sure Bristol Live a few weeks ago, announced their 15th signing. So an extra 5, would take it to 20(not 18). Also transfermarket has 20 leaving, not 28. Is he thinking 8 will leave this week? That would probably have to include some of his signings from the summer.

Of the players leaving now, they are having to pay up contracts (Baldwin the latest example). No clubs are paying fees for their players. The Hanlan money from Wycombe just covered, the money the tribunal said they had to pay Gillingham. Their finances must be all over the place. Relegation would have hit them hard anyhow (Tv money, attendances etc).

Plus aren't the gas at the limit of their over 21 allowance( only 20 allowed)? I thought they were 3 over (according to BL), but Baldwin, and Hanlan have gone; so maybe only 1 over now.

What a mess. December 2019 they were 4th in League 1, when Coughlan left.That is one mighty drop in 20 months.

53 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I doubt he’s got £60k p.w. this time around

Indeed.

But still a decent wage, and Reading are well over then FFP threshold, plus on some sort of embargo i think? @Mr Popodopolous?

It just makes a bit of a mockery of us, playing by the rules.

Just like Derby signing Baldock, because of an injury to Kasim-Richards. Just deal with injury like we had to last season.

Either you are on a hard embargo or you're not.

And now Reading sign Junior Hoillett on a free as well.

I guess they're taking their cost cutting seriously.

11 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

It's a weird one @NcnsBcfc thanks btw, do try- it's interesting stuff.

All these cases are similar yet different and I'll try and offer a little on each.

Birmingham

2018 one, the EFL did move relatively quickly- the question is why. I make the timeline Accounts to 30th June 2018 ie Projected and a Soft Embargo to hold their position in place, before any Transfer Revenue to offset the Projections. Said Revenue did not arrive, but the updated or finalised Draft Accounts did maybe a week into July 2018- EFL Statement 2nd August 2018, possibly the final charges on 14th August 2018- they can move quickly and set the ball rolling. Still need to do better but this as a starting point is positive.

They got -9 points, a soft Embargo into EFL approval needed and an EFL Business Plan for 2018/19 and perhaps beyond.

Derby

Where to begin? The EFL seemed not to substantially challenge their Amortisation policy or Stadium Sale under Shaun Harvey- whereas under Rick Parry, doubtless nudged by Gibson and post Bury collapse, the EFL now seemed to take a different stance hence the charges in January 2020...Covid seems to have made an impact of course into speed of Hearings etc? There have been lengthy Embargoes and restrictions but the EFL are oddly slow off the mark at times. Would have failed had the Stadium Profit rule not weirdly changed in 2016 and only been adjusted out again in 2021.

Reading

This is a big mystery to me. Their losses in 2018, 2019 and 2020- 2020 and 2021 are added and halved and Covid losses stripped as well as the usual deductions, one period so it's 2018, 2019 and then 2020 and 2021 combined average. Their P&S losses looked pretty terrible in 2018, 2019 and 2020 and this was despite sale of Stadium and sale again under new Parent presumably, sale of old Training Ground, sale of land around the Stadium and Aluko £3m loan fee counting as Revenue- they must have breached to 2021...indeed their Embargo conditions are due to this- it explicitly states due to Breach of Profit and Sustainability Regulations- therefore Charges must follow, whether it's an overspend, a breach in other ways or maybe more than one issue. Would have failed had the Stadium Profit rule not weirdly changed in 2016 and only been adjusted out again in 2021. Rot started under Harvey's tenure at the EFL and a lack of early intervention probably made matters worse...

Sheffield Wednesday

Failed and was clear they had failed to Summer 2018- they planned to sell and leaseback Hillsborough but under tough embargo conditions as lack of Accounts etc- not quite tough enough though. EFL launch investigation in Summer 2019- after Harvey departs- charged in November 2019 under Parry. Between times bits came out, such as asked to explain why discrepancy on Land Registry, Company formation and date it was suitable for the Accounts. There is an argument that they shouldn't be allowed to include it at all for FFP and it disappears after this season anyway, all depends then on how the FFP between League 1 and the Championship should join up.

Stoke

Odd one. On the one hand there is a significant Impairment in 2019/20 Accounts attributed to Covid- about £30m in Player Registrations but on the other hand there clearly were from 2019/20 efforts at downsizing beginning...see the loans out and especially from Jan 2020 onwards- Covid came at a very good time for them however and I'd be surprised if the EFL aren't looking very closely at each and every player whose value was Impaired yet there could be some justification for their claims as I believe that in a non Covid world their plan was to loan and loan and loan...and then sell final year of contract, and given a number of their players are based or went to 2nd tier European Leagues I have a certain amount of sympathy for their argument in some ways. Selling Collins for £12m absolutely helped as well- of course if they've sold the Ground on top of this, then the dial can move badly.

I have to say though, as a collective their fans are up their own arse- a lot of them, Derby I mean- weird sense of entitlement, pretty loathsome lot like Mel Morris and was he even seriously unwell or was this a figment of imagination- you can tell he's one of their own. Vile club too.

Thank you.

As to my points around the sustainability of the whole FFP process though, given that the PL, L1 & L2 seem to have given up? What's your take on it?

Plus are the rules around FFP actually legally applicable? As per the points around HMRC,VAT,NI.

In my view, it boils down to probably a bullying culture by Derby behind the scenes. The EFL itself is probably not a big organisation in terms of finance. If the billy big QC's of this world (engaged by Derby). They throw a load of legal arguments at the EFL, who themselves have to engage expensive legal counsel.

It's all reminiscent of the Ashton Vale fiasco. Where Bristol City Council cocked up. The judicial review found against them (not City). But the Council couldn't afford to find the legal ruling; so folded like a pack of cards.

Either FFP is rigorously applied fairly across the division or it's not fir for purpose in my book. 

@Mr Popodopolous and @Hxj many thanks for your updates on this thread.

You are both it appears specialists, and I enjoy trying to understand both of your rationales of quite complex situations.

My issue with the whole issue of FFP is thus.....

There appears to be a block of clubs within the Championship who either seem from an ethical or moralistic point of view that FFP  is merely some form of an advisory concept; and the full ramifications of what it entails doesn't apply to their particular club (Derby, Birmingham, Reading, Sheff Wed; when they were in the league). Even Stoke have posted a £54m loss for last season alone.

Then there are others that stick to the rules, in particular Gibson at Boro; and of course our own Lansdown.

The aforementioned clubs feel that they can drag out the process for eternity, and that the EFL are toothless. My question in a way is either the EFL are strong enough/able enough to withstand these legal challenges or they're not.

Clubs are obviously gambling on getting promoted, and then being governed by a different board (PL). They then do a deal with the EFL in the background to pay off any fine that they would have incurred if they hadn't been promoted with the vast riches from the PL.

I see that in L1 & L2 they seem to have have done away with all salary caps this season, after the legal challenge. Is that still the case moving forward? A number of clubs (Of which Ipswich of course, and Wigan are good examples). Seem to be taking the opportunity to spend vast amounts of money on whole new squads. It's no surprise that a number of players that you thought would be playing in the Championship have gone to L1 clubs therefore.

From my own viewpoint. Clubs appear to be punished for trying to do the right thing, and stay within the £39m threshold; and with regard to us, this is of course having a huge impact on our club at the moment. Whilst others, flout the rules; and are willing to take the risk of charges coming years down the line.

If the FFP can't be enforced on a rigorous basis, within a set period of time. Then is it fit for purpose? The parachute payments afforded to relegated clubs, already make it a completely unfair playing field anyhow.

Do clubs have to sign a set of rules, that require them to adhere to FFP? I would think that as a Ltd company they of course have obligations around tax, NI; and VAT and these are governed by laws. What is the FFP governed by? A hypothetical set of rules that more conscience owners abide by, or something more concrete.

Apologies for the numerous questions. But the whole FFP debate, when the PL, & L1 & L2 seem to have abandoned any protocols seems completely futile.

NP wants to work with a smaller group of players, and that is great in practice.

The only downside is if he only has 2/3 players per position, then if we sell one of those players; they will have to be replaced.

This is the situation we find ourselves with in regard to Kalas. If we sell a CB at present, we will first have to replace him like for like; before spending money on a forward. I don't know if Wells is off (I'd be surprised). But I can't see him being an NP player moving forward. His general work rate just isn't there. For his size he is also not particularly quick. He's the type of player that thrives off wingers/wide men that create loads of chances with their crosses or dribbles. We just aren't that team at the moment. At QPR he had Eze, Osayi-Samuel etc. His signing has to go down as one of the strangest in recent times. 

Looking at our full back position. Where in all honesty we need strengthening on both sides; but financially we're just not in a place where we can do that. I think we're going to struggle if JD or Vyner get injured. Got to be looking for some cover there maybe before the end of the month (another loan?)

The sole position in the team where we can afford to lose players at present (other than sending out some of the youth on loan) is at CM. Even without Nagy's request, he was on a sticky wicket. High wages, entering his last year of contract. By no means in the starting 11; and unlikely to get a similar contract from the club again. I think he's made the decision easy for the club. I think i'm right in saying that if he asks to be released as well, we don't have to pay up his contract? (one for @Davefevs and @Mr Popodopolousthere.

I can only think that we will take offers for a number of players at present; and then look to replace them with loans. In that way, the general reset in regards to the squad won't be affected beyond the end of this season.

What's amazing now is that the coffers are bare, we have very little room on our FFP; and are struggling to spend £1m on a player by the look of it. But look at the squad and the money spent on it:-

Wells - £3.5m

Kalas - £8m

JD - £2m

Palmer - £3.5m

Weimann - £2.2m

Nagy - £2.25m

COD - £1m

Baker - £3.5m

Williams - £1.25m

Moore - £1.5m

Bentley - £2m

Massengo - £2m (possibly more?)

Bakinson - £500k

A long hard struggle ahead this season I fear.

7 hours ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

 

Thank You both for your insight.

1. As it has been bothering me since the original Bristol Rovers statement, can either one of you confirm that their suggestion (statement) that the JB incident was a victimless crime (rather than a victimless prosecution) was a crass error? 

2. Given that the forthcoming trial will be be held in a magistrates court, rather than Crown Court, i.e. no jury, obviously our comments on this thread as to JB's character and potential guilt are not subject to the usual constraints (possible libel notwithstanding), but are either of you able to advise why JB was granted bail? As @NcnsBcfc says, JB was already on Crown Court bail following the Stendel case and, presumably, there were conditions attached to this bail.

I think @Fordy62 has covered the bail aspect.

In some ways, Mrs B not supporting hasn't helped him on this matter. She has injuries(head injury, bloody nose). If she had seen a doctor, or allowed them to be documented evidentially; then it probably would have been a S47 ABH (actual bodily harm). 

That is an either way offence (ie can be heard in Crown or magistrates, at the discretion of the defence).

Because of her position. He was charged with a Common assault by beating (Battery), as the nature of the injuries can't be ascertained. This is a summary only offence (Magistrates only). As i said in the original post, i can see a DJ (District judge sitting in on it). Lynne Matthews is the main one in Bristol, and she, like others nationwide doesn't suffer fools ( check out her rioters comments).

The aspect of libel is still relevant regardless, of the nature of the Court. People posting on this, need to be careful; and to double check that they are either quoting a media piece, or something that has been published already.

Mods will probably have to keep an eye on this topic unfortunately.

44 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

Although a prosecution can be victimless, I don’t think you can have a non willing restraining order. It wouldn’t work because there’d be no applicant. 

Although a prosecution can be victimless, I don’t think you can have a non willing restraining order. It wouldn’t work because there’d be no applicant. 

Before the advent of body worn video, these cases very rarely made it to court( still seldom now).

Without knowing the full details of the case of course, that will come out later. What is known, and captured evidentially is:-

The call to the Police was made by Mrs B, asking Police to turn up and remove him from the address. She may have made disclosures about what has happened.

When the officers have turned up, she has injuries, and the people present would have probably spoken about what has happened. This is captured on the video.

It appears that Barton was arrested at the location (quoted arrested on the same day). So there was obviously a necessity for the officers to make that arrest at that point.

She, obviously doesn't want to make a complaint; and the other witnesses don't want to get involved. Probably as they know he's already got a court case hanging over him already. 

In some ways this is similiar to the Caroline Flack case. In that the boyfriend had injuries, and probably said what had happened. But didn't want her arrested/charged.

Ultimately, it's a question of positive action by the Police on that day. @Fordy62 and i have been involved in too many cases; where in the past the Police have walked away as no complaint. Only to be called back later to the same address to deal with something far more serious. Police officers would be done by the IOPC for such actions nowadays.

The CPS have a massive backlog of cases, and will only take to court; the cases where they feel the evidence is strong enough for a realistic prospect of conviction (his bad character also plays a big part here).

I think if she had made a complaint, he wouldn't have got bail, as he's already on Crown court bail for the other assault matter.

Whatever happens with these victimless cases. It at least highlights the violent nature of the defendant concerned. It won't help him that it's in front of a magistrates (aka no jury) either. They see these incidents day in,day out; and generally see through the legal nonsense put up by defence counsels.

6 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

His wife is on social media saying that there has been no accusation from her or anyone else that JB has been physical or violent towards her.

Indeed it will be a treated as a victimless prosecution. As she has decided not to support the investigation by supplying a victim statement.

However the circumstances around the incident, and how the emergency services came to be at the address; allow for these prosecutions to take place.

It's there to protect vulnerable, intimidated victims that form the majority of DA victims.

47 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

1. Look up the meaning of Straw Man Argument - I suggested this to a previous poster, but it would seem it applies equally to you.

2. Look up the meaning of ‘Assault by Beating’, the offence with which JB has been charged.

There is no suggestion or allegation that JB has beaten a woman, his wife or any other woman - apart from in The Sun and from some ill-informed posters on this thread.

So would I, but I don’t think you need to worry.

I consider it unlikely JB will be found guilty of ‘beating a woman’.

The correct offence is one of Battery.

Ultimately she has injuries, and this will be a case based no doubt, on the 999 call to emergency services; and the accounts of the ambulance and Police officers when they turned up. Backed up bybthe Body worn video they wear.

The fact that he was bailed, and subsequently charged means that the CPS by their own guidelines consider this is a case of a "realistic prospect of a conviction".

Given his previous convictions, which will form a part of a bad character application with the details of those offences read out in court. I find it highly likely that JB will in fact be found guilty.

The real question is why is he out on bail at present? He is currently on Crown Court bail for the other trial matter. That is under a surety that he won't commit other offences (thus removing the need for a remand in prison awaiting trial).

It will be interesting what position the Judge takes tomorrow.

2 hours ago, Wiltshire robin said:

Lots of news outlets have said it’s his wife

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/15682876/football-manager-joey-barton-charged-attacking-wife/

I don't think they would publish this, without it being his wife.

1 minute ago, Wiltshire robin said:

Yeh any normal member of the public would be put back in prison so it shouldn’t be any different for him

Technically he committed this offence whilst on Crown Court bail for the other Stendal assault. The jufge could refuse to give him bail again.

Looking at the Sun article i think, like Simpsons DA case; its going to be a victimless prosecution(ie she won't support).

However she has injuries, and no doubt the 999 call, plus bodyworn footage from the attending officers will be damning.

He has so much bad character against him now. But the nature of this offence is a step too far...

2 minutes ago, Wiltshire robin said:

So is that two assault cases for him at court including the Barnsley manager, what’s the bet he just gets a slap on the wrist 

He has previous assault convictions, and has had prison sentences. 

On that basis, any sentencing judge in either case would be hard pressed; not to give him another custodial sentence for either offence.

Domestic violence is quite rightly not accepted nowadays, and the Giggs situation shows what the club really should do in this situation (suspension or gardening leave pending the trial).

However the Gas have know about this since the 2nd June; and of course employed him in the first instance when he had a court case outstanding against him.

In my eyes they are morally redundant here. Unfortunately, the Gas have so much invested in the "Barton Project", that i think they're blinded as to how bad this man is for their club.

At least with our Simpson situation, it was years ago, and the matter had been dealt with.

Assaulting your partner, may well be the final straw for him though. Plenty of parties/Sponsors/Fans won't tolerate that.

https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/embargoes

A fairly lengthy list for Swindon & for Derby.

So no management team in place. No players, and now no pre season training.

Reminds me of Blackpool a few seasons ago.

6 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Think Barton has brought in 6 new players now, many of them are Scousers & a fair few from Fleetwood or elsewhere in the North.

I consider myself a bit of a football anorak at times but I have never heard of any of them.

I can't quite get his strategy on this.

He says he knows how to get out of L2, and that you need a certain type of player.

He'then basically bought a load of ex-fleetwood town players to the party. As well as bit part L2 cast offs. Rather than players that have had been there, and done well in that division.

Every year the Gas are just changing over large amounts of frankly awful players. There seems to be no consistency to their approach, and they are obviously hoping that one of them turns into the next JCH.

With the market the way it is. Decent players are holding out on numerous offers from other clubs; and will then make a decision.

Rovers just appear desperate at the moment, and are probably over paying to get these players in early doors. I bet some of them can't believe the contracts they've been offered.

It's all got the feeling of another impending car crash on the horizion there.