[Archived] Could it get worse ?

[BuckyRover]

I don't think anyone has a desire to see Venky's fail. We all want Rovers to succeed. However, the Rao family are clearly out of their depth and have made one bad decision after another. They need some guidance and some support but, ultimately, it was their choice to use Kentaro as their main advisor and it was their choice to replace Allardyce with Kean. One win in the best part of four months suggests that their decision making, like that of Kean, isn't the best.

Their decisions look likely to have kept us in the league (not bad for total novices).

The 'Experts' have landed us with a potential FA investigation.

Go figure.

[RevidgeBlue]

Unless Beasley has a lot more in his "dossiers" the Sun claim they've sent to the FA than we've seen so far in print, the original story could easily have read

"Gullible Premiership star fleeced by con man"

Nothing whatsoever to do with Blackburn Rovers, nor a matter for the FA.

IF and I stress "if" anyone from The Venky's group or BRFC gave the quote in the second article then they want shooting. Unless of course there is more to this than so far we've been made privy to.

[Kelbo]

Their decisions look likely to have kept us in the league (not bad for total novices).

Go figure.

If you really believe Venkys decisions kept us in the league, I dont throw insults at people, thats not my nature, so please dont insult other peoples intelligence!

[TimmyJimmy]

"Venky's are not surprised about the revelations in The Sun and would not be surprised if there are further revelations of wrong-doing prior to our purchase and ownership of the club."

What an astonishing statement from Paul Agnew.

In my opinion, Venky's are idiots:

mmmmmmmm, this all begins to smell like a deliberate leak. Something rotten is going on behind the scenes IMO.

Taken at face value there are many ways to explain away the Givet 'facts'.

- Perhaps he was door stepped by the Sun saying that they were going to expose him for being involved in a bungs conspiracy.

- Maybe Givet gets advice from the club and/or his agent who say it's best to give an interview and clear the air.

- Givet 'fesses up to the journo that he's been mugged but there was nothing untoward going on except a plain scam on him and he presents the paperwork to prove it.

- The interview and the receipts become a 'dossier' which is used to create a paper selling headline of 'BUNG' by sending the 'Dossier' to the FA who in turn are honour bound to say 'we'll look into it'.

Or a thousand other interpretations ... all a classic non sequitur with none of the premise supporting the inference/conclusion.

However Philip, as you say, this follow up statement by Venkys is astonishing! Talk about pouring petrol on the flames.

You would have expected any comment to be limited to the case in hand but to widen the statement to "... would not be surprised if there are further revelations of wrong-doing..." is a stunning voluntary statement that seems to be preparing the way for something much bigger. What could it be?

The club is has an indepedent legal personas. It is the club that cops it not the owners (unless they have done something illegal personally). So if the FA deems that there was an offence under their rules then it is academic who was the owner/officer of the club at the time. Think Wham, think biscuit baron, think Tevez.

Statements/leaks/situations like this don't emerge into the public domain by accident in my experience. Somethings afoot.

[47er]

I can't believe they forgot to ask if we had been paying bungs to unregistered agents.

Idiots.

It shows a lot of posters on here to be completely unreasonable. When I first saw the headline, I thought to myself "I cannot defend Venky's if they have been paying bungs, it's indefensible".

Other people seem to have concluded that they can still blame Venky's for it. Intimating that because they have commented on it (Why on earth would they not comment?) it's now their fault for dropping the previous owners in it.

The logic there is that they have dobbed them in (forgetting the sun evidence that has been passed to the FA) so it's their fault.

WTF?

Get a grip

You should be getting a grip. I have not blamed Venkys for anything to do with this. I haven't commented on their statements about it in the press.

Can you remember back to a week ago? QPR were fined for rule infringements on player signings which occurred 3 years before the present owners took over.

Who will be held responsible if "bung allegations" are proved in Givet's case-------Venkys will. Not because they were involved but because they are the successors to those who were. Get it? The club will be liable to penalties if proved.

Anyone who argues nothing can be done because Walkers, Sam, JW or whoever aren't here anymore are totally missing the point! The legal position is that it was up to Venkys to discover any irregularities and walk away. Once you assume ownership you

assume resposibilities for what you've bought----all of them.

[BuckyRover]

If you really believe Venkys decisions kept us in the league, I dont throw insults at people, thats not my nature, so please dont insult other peoples intelligence!

I'll try and make this simple for you.

If we had been relegated this season it would have been Venky's responsibility. Likewise if we stay up it's Venky's responsibility.

Whether or not their decisions made it more likely we would be relegated (they obviously made bad decisions), if we are still in the league it is their decisions that kept us there. They took the decision when they sacked Sam that we wouldn't get relegated (worse case scenario).

That looks like happening.

[RevidgeBlue]

Oh well, on the bright side, at least this has stopped us worrying about the result on Sunday for a while!

Is there anything about this story in today's LT, they don't seem to be too excited by it at all on their website, just a brief mention yesterday the story was being investigated by the FA.

A comment made me chuckle on the LT website - "Guess Givet will be receiving notification of a lot of Nigerian Lottery wins from now on!"

[jim mk2]

Their decisions look likely to have kept us in the league (not bad for total novices).

The 'Experts' have landed us with a potential FA investigation.

Go figure.

Venky's decisions have landed us in an unnecessary relegation battle.

There is no proof the previous administration were involved in this or that they have done anything wrong.

Your figures are wrong as usual.

[alexanders]

A comment made me chuckle on the LT website - "Guess Givet will be receiving notification of a lot of Nigerian Lottery wins from now on!"

Thanks for sharing. Made my dag

Can't believe all the fuss about this article and also the continously effort to beat Venky's no matter what the size the stick.

[RevidgeBlue]

There is no proof the previous administration were involved in this or that they have done anything wrong.

Agreed. But only the other night you were defending and praising the Sun for printing the story.

You can't have it both ways.

[jim mk2]

Agreed. But only the other night you were defending and praising the Sun for printing the story.

You can't have it both ways.

Nothing wrong with the story because clearly there's something been going on.

If that having it both ways ?

[Mercer]

Could it get worse, yes it could and now it probably will.

IMO, the Givet thing is either down to his naivety or there was something fishy going-on with at least one person within the previous organisation - I'd put it at 20/80 chance.

If the statement in The Sun is correct, then the Raos and / or their advisers are, IMO, guilty of gross crassness - absolutely unbelieveable. Unwisely, maybe they think it's a smokescreen to hide something else ?

Whatever, IMO, it all stinks and clearly someone is stirring the murky waters and there would not be many names on my shortlist!

[Kelbo]

I'll try and make this simple for you.

If we had been relegated this season it would have been Venky's responsibility. Likewise if we stay up it's Venky's responsibility.

Whether or not their decisions made it more likely we would be relegated (they obviously made bad decisions), if we are still in the league it is their decisions that kept us there. They took the decision when they sacked Sam that we wouldn't get relegated (worse case scenario).

That looks like happening.

Make things simple for me, how about I make things simple for you, through foolish decisions, the owners put the club at a huge risk of relegation, they have made our football club the laughing stock within the Premier League,

are operating without a Chairman of the club, which I am pretty sure within English law, where there are a board of Directors, is illegal, have paid out more in agents fees in 6 months than has been paid in the last decade and have overseen the worst set of results for over thirty years and you tell me that their decisions kept us there? Their decisions have put us in an unneccessary peril and even now, we still have the possibility of relegation.

[PAFELL]

It does stink but until Venky's said what they did, nothing in the Sun linked back to the previous ownership and their management.

Correct. If these quotes are from Venkys, then in my view they have declared war on the previous owners. They have basically accused the Walker Trust of 'possible illegal dealings in the transfer market'. If these quotes are not from venkys - then it is nothing but a non-story and the sun own both an appology and a rebuttal. Either way, there is trouble ahead.

Yes exactly, the people who were in charge when this happened, who else would they have a pop at ?

I'm not saying that the previous owners or manager were involved but it happened right under there noses.

Why did it happen ? How on earth did this chancer get involved in a transfer involving our club ?

As for Venkys, yes they have made some daft decisions since they took over but to use this as a stick to beat THEM with is wrong in my opinion.

Would not things like this be shown up during the due dilligence stage of a takeover?

[Kelbo]

Correct. If these quotes are from Venkys, then in my view they have declared war on the previous owners. They have basically accused the Walker Trust of 'possible illegal dealings in the transfer market'. If these quotes are not from venkys - then it is nothing but a non-story and the sun own both an appology and a rebuttal. Either way, there is trouble ahead.

Would not things like this be shown up during the due dilligence stage of a takeover?

Bingo!!

Thats why the due dilligence, Venkys/Rovers are responsible for everything about the club now, The Walker Trust/SA/JA have simply nothing to do with the situation, Venkys bought the clubs assets, debts and all that goes with the club, really there is nothing that can be done about it, though from what I understand it is more like Givet was duped by this third party without knowledge of the club!!

[PAFELL]

This story does seem to be having a pop at the previous manager, John Williams and the Walker trust.

Which I hope is blessing in diguise. The Walker Trust would not and should not like that. If these quotes are from Venkys, it is a disgrace.

[RovertheHill]

Bingo!!

Thats why the due dilligence, Venkys/Rovers are responsible for everything about the club now, The Walker Trust/SA/JA have simply nothing to do with the situation, Venkys bought the clubs assets, debts and all that goes with the club, really there is nothing that can be done about it, though from what I understand it is more like Givet was duped by this third party without knowledge of the club!!

That's not true. It is highly unlikely that any type of illegal bung or payment would show up in due diligence. In fact, and I think this highly unlikely because I don't believe there were any, if there is proved to be any illegal activities then I suspect that Venkys would have recourse through the law.

Or we could just all blame them anyway ...

[alexanders]

Make things simple for me, how about I make things simple for you, through foolish decisions, the owners put the club at a huge risk of relegation, they have made our football club the laughing stock within the Premier League,

Are you sure?

- Relegated. Giving fatmac a huge wage. Brawl at seasonends party. Banner from their rivals on the last day of the season. Least charismatic manager in the whole PL. Dont think its us.

[philipl]

What would have happened in due diligence is that all the directors and the manager will have signed a statement that would have stated explicitly that they had no knowledge whatsoever of any transaction breaching FA, PL etc rules. In effect they are exposed to personal liability if it is shown subsequently that they had lied and did in fact have knowledge of such a transaction.

At the same time during due diligence, the buying party will have been expected to have examined all transactions so that they, their lawyers and accountants were themselves satisfied that there was no risk of illegal or irregular transactions having taken place. Due diligence therefore protects the club, and the directors and management at the time of the sale from any come back unless Venky's can prove they were knowingly lied to.

The ramifications of the Venky's quote given the existence of the due diligence process and signed statements are therefore very severe if not retracted. Anyone who signed the due diligence pack has every right to point to those documents and ask some very pointed questions about what the underlying intent ad meaning of this statement from Venky's is.

I only hope they are able to do so in confidence.

[Seggie]

That's not true. It is highly unlikely that any type of illegal bung or payment would show up in due diligence. In fact, and I think this highly unlikely because I don't believe there were any, if there is proved to be any illegal activities then I suspect that Venkys would have recourse through the law.

Or we could just all blame them anyway ...

Payments are not going to show up in due dilligence because they were made from Givets bank account.

As for the liability of the new owners they would be responsible for any actions of the previous owners, this is why due dilligece is carried out. As for the previous owners/management/agents involved in the deals they would probably be in theory still be liable for sanction from the FA on an individual basis also if there is sufficient proof in any wrongdoing.

I have a bigger fear than all this, that this could be potentially a set up for the Sun's sister rag the NOTW on sunday to really lay the boot into us on the biggist day in recent memory, its either that or it was a slow news day yesterday.

[RevidgeBlue]

The ramifications of the Venky's quote given the existence of the due diligence process and signed statements are therefore very severe if not retracted. Anyone who signed the due diligence pack has every right to point to those documents and ask some very pointed questions about what the underlying intent ad meaning of this statement from Venky's is.

It is strange how you assume that the previous regime are automatically blameless even though the allegations relate to a period when they were in charge.

And how you automatically assume Venky's are at fault by virtue of an unattributed quote.

I don't think there's anything in the story either way myself based on what I've read so far but we'll wait and see.

[den]

If Venky's have said this, then it's disgraceful. They should either make no statement, or offer facts.

[RevidgeBlue]

That's not true. It is highly unlikely that any type of illegal bung or payment would show up in due diligence.

Are you sure? It's actually standard question 56.3( b ) on any reasonable due dilligence questionnaire.

"Does your manager use any driver to pick new players up from the Airport who unbeknown to anyone then go round at a later date trying to demand £50k off said player for a £70 fare from Liverpool?

It's so obviously forseeable, I can't see how it could have been overlooked prior to purchase!

[RovertheHill]

Payments are not going to show up in due dilligence because they were made from Givets bank account.

As for the liability of the new owners they would be responsible for any actions of the previous owners, this is why due dilligece is carried out. As for the previous owners/management/agents involved in the deals they would probably be in theory still be liable for sanction from the FA on an individual basis also if there is sufficient proof in any wrongdoing.

I have a bigger fear than all this, that this could be potentially a set up for the Sun's sister rag the NOTW on sunday to really lay the boot into us on the biggist day in recent memory, its either that or it was a slow news day yesterday.

Again not true. The new owners are not responsible for the actions of the previous owners at all, due diligence or not. I guess what you mean is they will have to accept the consequences of them if any of this is true (which I don't believe it is). It's an important distinction.

But I do fear you are right - this has all the hallmarks of a sunday rag sting being set up

[roversmum]

Don't forget there have allegedly been problems with Givet's taxes and understanding of his contract involving his agent - it could simply be that Venky's are referring to.