Macclesfield points deduction reduced from 6 to 4 points.

[Blue Lion]

Sorry, I’m not following what Mr John Nixon‘a benefit from Macclesfield’s demise is. Can someone please clarify?

Apologies, 'demise' was the wrong wording on my part. But the idea is that if Macc 'do a Bury' next season, there is a financial gain for other clubs if Stevenage stayed up instead because they can fulfil their fixtures. So Nixon has a vested interest in preventing us from going bust while we are still in this division, and lobbying for our relegation helps to achieve that.

 

[valefan16]

Surely based on Carlisles season last year letting Macc play the season and go bust may be of better benefit and then one less drop spot?

It’s a mess, Macclesfield situation is pretty dire, never seen us have to section off part of the car park In the Hamil end so the players of the opposition can park as they had no bus laid on!

Stevenage were awful and rightly relegated, Macclesfield did a sterling job on the field in the circumstances and does feel like the EFL want rid of the “problem” rather than protect their clubs. They don’t want other Bury so best to lose them now but it’s a club, with fans and history and could happen to any of us at any time. Also they have a point, where are they getting appealed on when other clubs didn’t get the same sanctions (although IIRC they did appeal Bolton’s)

I hate deductions points wise anyway, makes the competition less about on the field. Hope they get taken over and can move forward in the EFL next season (and no doubt their usual 4 point haul of us!)

 

[Semi-skimmed Silk]

Appeal hearing not to be held until 11th August, month before L2 season set to start.

Good to hear the judge rejected the suggestion of Stevenage's involvement in the hearing, which had been support edseven L2 clubs (with one club withdrawing its support).

 

[Chris FGR]

Why would Stevenage be involved in the hearing? It's got fuck all to do with them.

 

[The_Boss]

Why would Stevenage be involved in the hearing? It's got fuck all to do with them.

Old boys club.

 

[AdamStag]

Why would Stevenage be involved in the hearing? It's got fuck all to do with them.

never heard of Stevenage? Odious little irrelevant club. The away day to Stevenage is right up there with a trip to the dentist

 

[Brox]

Why would Stevenage be involved in the hearing? It's got fuck all to do with them.

I largely agree with this, the outcome of the hearing has absolutely everything to do with us but the charge itself doesn't and in my view we shouldn't be heard. In terms of why there was a possibility of our involvement, it all came down to the interpretation of rule 96.1 in the EFL rules and regulations:

96 Standing

96.1 A person who is not a party to a dispute (which may, for the avoidance of doubt, include the League itself) may not invoke these arbitration provisions in respect of such a dispute, unless that party can show that they are sufficiently affected by the outcome of the dispute that it is right and proper for them to have standing before the League Arbitration Panel.

I believe the club viewed the above rule as sufficient enough reason for us to be heard before the panel although it was decided that this wasn't the case. It doesn't bother me too much but I do find it strange that Barnsley have been granted permission to address the Wigan appeal hearing over their 12 point deduction, but it is what it is.

As I said above I don't think we should be allowed a say and I actually think standing could harm the argument we're trying to make. I mean our argument is if the charge merits a X-point penalty then a X-point penalty should be given regardless of whether it results in a club missing out on promotion, play-offs or relegation, otherwise what's the point? Whilst I totally agree with that argument, you can't ask the panel to view the charge in isolation on one hand and ask to have a say in the appeal on the other. You either want the panel to look at the charge(s) in isolation or you don't.

It's ridiculous that this has been allowed to drag on for so long, I get the club fighting tooth and nail to try and survive, I'm sure if the roles were reversed that Macclesfield would be doing the same but I am little uncomfortable that our survival could lead to the demise of another football club, I get it wouldn't be our fault but doesn't really sit right with me.

 

[AdamStag]

I largely agree with this, the outcome of the hearing has absolutely everything to do with us but the charge itself doesn't and in my view we shouldn't be heard. In terms of why there was a possibility of our involvement, it all came down to the interpretation of rule 96.1 in the EFL rules and regulations:

96 Standing

96.1 A person who is not a party to a dispute (which may, for the avoidance of doubt, include the League itself) may not invoke these arbitration provisions in respect of such a dispute, unless that party can show that they are sufficiently affected by the outcome of the dispute that it is right and proper for them to have standing before the League Arbitration Panel.

I believe the club viewed the above rule as sufficient enough reason for us to be heard before the panel although it was decided that this wasn't the case. It doesn't bother me too much but I do find it strange that Barnsley have been granted permission to address the Wigan appeal hearing over their 12 point deduction, but it is what it is.

As I said above I don't think we should be allowed a say and I actually think standing could harm the argument we're trying to make. I mean our argument is if the charge merits a X-point penalty then a X-point penalty should be given regardless of whether it results in a club missing out on promotion, play-offs or relegation, otherwise what's the point? Whilst I totally agree with that argument, you can't ask the panel to view the charge in isolation on one hand and ask to have a say in the appeal on the other. You either want the panel to look at the charge(s) in isolation or you don't.

It's ridiculous that this has been allowed to drag on for so long, I get the club fighting tooth and nail to try and survive, I'm sure if the roles were reversed that Macclesfield would be doing the same but I am little uncomfortable that our survival could lead to the demise of another football club, I get it wouldn't be our fault but doesn't really sit right with me.

Stevenage should prepare for their place in the conference on the hopeful assumption they never return

 

[The_Boss]

I largely agree with this, the outcome of the hearing has absolutely everything to do with us but the charge itself doesn't and in my view we shouldn't be heard. In terms of why there was a possibility of our involvement, it all came down to the interpretation of rule 96.1 in the EFL rules and regulations:

96 Standing

96.1 A person who is not a party to a dispute (which may, for the avoidance of doubt, include the League itself) may not invoke these arbitration provisions in respect of such a dispute, unless that party can show that they are sufficiently affected by the outcome of the dispute that it is right and proper for them to have standing before the League Arbitration Panel.

I believe the club viewed the above rule as sufficient enough reason for us to be heard before the panel although it was decided that this wasn't the case. It doesn't bother me too much but I do find it strange that Barnsley have been granted permission to address the Wigan appeal hearing over their 12 point deduction, but it is what it is.

As I said above I don't think we should be allowed a say and I actually think standing could harm the argument we're trying to make. I mean our argument is if the charge merits a X-point penalty then a X-point penalty should be given regardless of whether it results in a club missing out on promotion, play-offs or relegation, otherwise what's the point? Whilst I totally agree with that argument, you can't ask the panel to view the charge in isolation on one hand and ask to have a say in the appeal on the other. You either want the panel to look at the charge(s) in isolation or you don't.

It's ridiculous that this has been allowed to drag on for so long, I get the club fighting tooth and nail to try and survive, I'm sure if the roles were reversed that Macclesfield would be doing the same but I am little uncomfortable that our survival could lead to the demise of another football club, I get it wouldn't be our fault but doesn't really sit right with me.

The bit that infuriated us was that it was reported that Stevenage had "been invited to the hearing" as if to say the EFL wanted you there! The fact they've appealed an independent commissions decision says it all that they want us out, so I fully expect us to be screwed over in a few days time.

 

[AdamStag]

The bit that infuriated us was that it was reported that Stevenage had "been invited to the hearing" as if to say the EFL wanted you there! The fact they've appealed an independent commissions decision says it all that they want us out, so I fully expect us to be screwed over in a few days time.

I still don’t understand how any chairman/board (however dodgy he might be) is currently expected to give a detailed breakdown of turnover/budget plans etc when no-one has a clue themselves. Given there was talk of fans back in the grounds in October maybe / but with things flaring up again in areas, and hospitals already warning of potential chaos in autumn/winter then its nigh on impossible

 

[The_Boss]

Statement from the club last night announcing Amar Alkadhi has stepped down as acting chairman. Most definitely linked to the business plan we had to submit by the end of July, so hopefully goes some way to appeasing the EFL and their justified dislike of him.

Statement reads:

"Macclesfield Town can confirm that Amar Alkadhi has stepped down as the Club's Acting Chairman with immediate effect.

A new Chairman is expected to be named shortly, with Mark Blower overseeing the management of this transitional period.

Going forward, all financial and operational decisions will now be made at a local level by the new Chairman - together with the Senior Management Team of Bob Trafford, Caroline Hall, Julie Briggs and Patrick Birch.

It is intended that through prudent and diligent financial management, the Club will no longer be reliant on the receipt of overseas funds and as a result, the logistical difficulties often faced previously will no longer be an issue.

To support the Chairman and guide the SMT, Macclesfield Town continue to actively seek a Chief Executive at the Moss Rose.

This is a key role and it is important that the chosen candidate has the right profile. Therefore, this is not a process that will be rushed - but we promise to keep you informed as matters progress.

Mr Alkadhi will remain as majority shareholder until the sale of his stake in the Club is finalised and he remains committed to concluding this at the earliest possible opportunity.


As a Club, we recognise how important it is to rebuild bridges and regain the trust of both our stakeholders and fans.

This will enable us all to unite as a truly community-based Club in the future.

Further updates will be provided in due course."

Doesn't exactly mean much other than he hopefully can not touch the clubs finances any more. A small step in the right direction, but nothing more than that I would say at this point.

 

[Semi-skimmed Silk]

Doesn't exactly mean much other than he hopefully can not touch the clubs finances any more. A small step in the right direction, but nothing more than that I would say at this point.

Obviously a positive step, but as yea only a small one. As you say hopefully it prevents him taking the money out of the club, which was the cause of the failure to pay players, into his other accounts. A stipulation of people (including the Supporter's Trust) continuing to put effort in to save the club was that AA was not involved in the running of the club, so partially a response to this I expect. However, he was perfectly capable of being a disaster for the club before he made himself chairman and until he's gone completely the club cannot move forwards, with people (including local sponsorship etc.) certain to steer clear until that day.

Sadly don't think it'll do anything to stop the EFL attempting to be rid of us on its own.