Appeal to EFL

[Sweaty Gussets]

4 minutes ago, phili said:

The relegation clauses etc in the player contract were all agreed and submitted with the initial deal submission.

The issue according to Nixon was that the deal made no mention of what happened if we were relegated to L1 this season. I believe we argued that's covered in not gaining promotion but the EFL wanted specific terms added to the loan to cover if we are relegated to L1.

Rovers should sue if that is true. It's completely irrelevant. The obligation to buy is only triggered if they get promoted to the Prem. It's got nothing to do with relegation. 

[wilsdenrover]

8 minutes ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

Do the EFL always request player contract details when a player signs somewhere? If clubs are legally bound to submit player contract clauses based on hypotheticals to the EFL then Rovers won't have a leg to stand on. But if this is something the EFL have asked for on a whim and it isn't legally binding then the EFL could possibly be sued by Rovers. 

In the case of a loan with an option/ obligation to buy - the EFL regulations require the submission of the terms agreed - nothing more, nothing less.

It may well be sensible to have a wage reduction clause,  but it isn’t a requirement 

[wilsdenrover]

7 minutes ago, Displaced Rover said:

If that's truly the case then it's complete nonsense because we wouldn't be obligated to buy him. It's such a stupid point that I can't believe it's the reason it was held up?

It would still be nonsense if it was to do with getting promoted and immediately being relegated 

i also can’t believe this is the reason for the hold up

[wilsdenrover]

8 minutes ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

So Rovers have missed a 'key part' of the contract submission? I wonder why they are saying it's irrelevant? Think it was referred to as a 'moot point' by Waggott?

 I’ve no idea if we submitted the agreed terms - but that’s all we would have to had submitted 

[arbitro]

If there was no agreement to buy him other than us getting promoted then why would the EFL reject the deal because the contract hadn't been agreed factoring in relegation. In simple terms if we don't get promoted then surely it's a straightforward loan. My understanding was there was no contract agreed to cover promotion because then we are obliged to buy him and this was why the transfer was originally rejected and subsequently late. Another question then is how a contract was agreed in the ten minutes or so between 22.50 and just after 11. I understood these contracts to be complex and needed the eye of a legal person.

[Dreams of 1995]

Well, well, well

I'll continue to wait for the full details, but this update - if true - really does put a whole new perspective on things

[wilsdenrover]

6 minutes ago, arbitro said:

If there was no agreement to buy him other than us getting promoted then why would the EFL reject the deal because the contract hadn't been agreed factoring in relegation. In simple terms if we don't get promoted then surely it's a straightforward loan. My understanding was there was no contract agreed to cover promotion because then we are obliged to buy him and this was why the transfer was originally rejected and subsequently late. Another question then is how a contract was agreed in the ten minutes or so between 22.50 and just after 11. I understood these contracts to be complex and needed the eye of a legal person.

How do you agree an obligation to buy (with Forest) without also agreeing the ‘future’ contract (with the player)

What would happen if we were promoted, and therefore were obliged to complete the signing, but we couldn’t then agree terms with the player?

 

[Dreams of 1995]

7 minutes ago, arbitro said:

If there was no agreement to buy him other than us getting promoted then why would the EFL reject the deal because the contract hadn't been agreed factoring in relegation. In simple terms if we don't get promoted then surely it's a straightforward loan. My understanding was there was no contract agreed to cover promotion because then we are obliged to buy him and this was why the transfer was originally rejected and subsequently late. Another question then is how a contract was agreed in the ten minutes or so between 22.50 and just after 11. I understood these contracts to be complex and needed the eye of a legal person.

Because, within 10 minutes, it would be more than possible to insert a line into a Contract which states:

"In the event of relegation to League 1 the Club are under no obligation to sign the player Lewis O'Brien"

I'd say it sounds a lot more likely this was done, ratified, signed and sealed in ~10 minutes than it does to then agree a contract to cover promotion, and indeed wages/clauses/fees etc with it, in that same timeframe

[wilsdenrover]

3 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

Because, within 10 minutes, it would be more than possible to insert a line into a Contract which states:

"In the event of relegation to League 1 the Club are under no obligation to sign the player Lewis O'Brien"

I'd say it sounds a lot more likely this was done, ratified, signed and sealed in ~10 minutes than it does to then agree a contract to cover promotion, and indeed wages/clauses/fees etc with it, in that same timeframe

But we haven’t agreed to sign him if we’re relegated to league 1 so that clause in the contract is unnecessary (and the regulations don’t call for it either) 

Edited February 10, 2023 by wilsdenrover

[wilsdenrover]

Should there be a further clause for if we ‘go straight through’ league one and into league two as well…

[RoversClitheroe]

What everyone's forgetting is that we also fucked up on the Rochdale lad.

So take everything you read with a pinch of salt.

[wilsdenrover]

6 minutes ago, RoversClitheroe said:

What everyone's forgetting is that we also fucked up on the Rochdale lad.

So take everything you read with a pinch of salt.

A very big pinch…

[wilsdenrover]

A players contract has to be in the form of a ‘Standard Contract’ - I may be missing it, but I can’t see reference to a clause to cover relegation pay decreases (or promotion increases for that matter)

I think they’re covered, when agreed, under the clause ‘Any Other Provisions’

[Sweaty Gussets]

9 minutes ago, RoversClitheroe said:

What everyone's forgetting is that we also fucked up on the Rochdale lad.

So take everything you read with a pinch of salt.

Nobody is forgetting that. They are two separate incidents, with apparently two separate set of circumstances. 

My hope is that full details are released of both Appeal submissions/results, by both the club and the EFL. This has to be transparent. 

[Dreams of 1995]

34 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

But we haven’t agreed to sign him if we’re relegated to league 1 so that clause in the contract is unnecessary (and the regulations don’t call for it either) 

Exactly.

Which is why the EFL's back and forth, on the face of it, appears wrong.

[tomphil]

32 minutes ago, RoversClitheroe said:

What everyone's forgetting is that we also fucked up on the Rochdale lad.

So take everything you read with a pinch of salt.

Exactly

Such a remarkable coincidence two failed at the same time with one of those being a perfectly straightforward transfer.

[The Gull]

Assume there was no rush with the Rochdale lad as he would have stayed with them until the summer anyway, ala Pickering with Crewe, and all focus was on the O'Brien deal, which on the face of it seems the EFL made it more complicated and caused panic and loss of time.

If that is right then the EFL are ####s and the transfer should go through, but they won't allow it so we will lose out.

[Hasta]

6 minutes ago, The Gull said:

Assume there was no rush with the Rochdale lad as he would have stayed with them until the summer anyway, ala Pickering with Crewe, and all focus was on the O'Brien deal, which on the face of it seems the EFL made it more complicated and caused panic and loss of time.

If that is right then the EFL are ####s and the transfer should go through, but they won't allow it so we will lose out.

As far as I am aware the Rochdale move was permanent with him coming to Rovers immediately. 

Edited February 10, 2023 by Hasta

[ben_the_beast]

I think the fact there is still no decision shows that it is touch and go. I imagine the EFL are weighing up being sued by Rovers or other clubs should they contest the ruling. Damage limitation. 

In terms of relegation clauses when relating to contracts. I may be wrong in saying this but I'm pretty sure there is no obligation for a club to include a wage reduction clause in the event of relegation. It's foolish but not a requirement, though the rules on this may have changed. 

1. If the sticking point regards the obligation to buy if we are relegated that's a moot point and a mistake on the EFLs part.

2. If its a wage reduction in the event we are promoted and then relegated back to the championship after a single season, is this within the rulebook that clubs have to include this. 

3. The only other option I can see is the wage reduction relegation clause had wording which stated it would kick in if Rovers were relegated from the Premier league. Which has led to the question, what if you were relegated again to league 1. Again is a wage reduction upon relegation a legal requirement. 

The longer this drags on the more I see a glimmer of hope. 

[eire3382]

It’s the hope that kills you

[MarkBRFC]

Bare in mind it took 2 days for the EFL to reject there "test case" involving Forest a few years back, the fact that it's dragging on means nothing.

It will be all thrown out by tea time today I'm sure of it.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

15 minutes ago, The Gull said:

Assume there was no rush with the Rochdale lad as he would have stayed with them until the summer anyway, ala Pickering with Crewe, and all focus was on the O'Brien deal, which on the face of it seems the EFL made it more complicated and caused panic and loss of time.

If that is right then the EFL are ####s and the transfer should go through, but they won't allow it so we will lose out.

The lad Brierley hasn’t been training this week at Rochdale. He doesn’t want to get injured if the deal goes through.

[lraC]

19 minutes ago, ben_the_beast said:

I think the fact there is still no decision shows that it is touch and go. I imagine the EFL are weighing up being sued by Rovers or other clubs should they contest the ruling. Damage limitation. 

In terms of relegation clauses when relating to contracts. I may be wrong in saying this but I'm pretty sure there is no obligation for a club to include a wage reduction clause in the event of relegation. It's foolish but not a requirement, though the rules on this may have changed. 

1. If the sticking point regards the obligation to buy if we are relegated that's a moot point and a mistake on the EFLs part.

2. If its a wage reduction in the event we are promoted and then relegated back to the championship after a single season, is this within the rulebook that clubs have to include this. 

3. The only other option I can see is the wage reduction relegation clause had wording which stated it would kick in if Rovers were relegated from the Premier league. Which has led to the question, what if you were relegated again to league 1. Again is a wage reduction upon relegation a legal requirement. 

The longer this drags on the more I see a glimmer of hope. 

If they were worried about being sued by other clubs, surely they would have just kept quiet if this was something minor. I can't imagine for one minute, they would bring it out into the open, unless it was something major.

Imagine if we found out that two of Wigan's signings who played on Monday has not been properly completed and could then claim two extra points. The game is going to be played out in the courts, if we aren't careful not on the pitch, with the way this week and last week have gone.

[RoversClitheroe]

The thing we are forgetting.

EFL won't pass it. 

If they do then it opens the view from Rovers that we would have won on Monday if we had O'Brien.

A situation they wouldn't ever allow happen - hence rejection.

[lraC]

1 minute ago, RoversClitheroe said:

The thing we are forgetting.

EFL won't pass it. 

If they do then it opens the view from Rovers that we would have won on Monday if we had O'Brien.

A situation they wouldn't ever allow happen - hence rejection.

Imagine if you apply that to City. Do they go back all them years and adjust all their results and promote and relegate teams, based on City losing all their games, due to them cheating?

This is a hell of a mess and it will be interesting to see the outcome, come what may.

Common sense needs to prevail somehow, but who knows how.