That blows a hole in some interpretations, as some have said, with it being a transaction in the UK the Indian government can’t get involved.

There’s an appeals process (either party can instigate). The appeal can also be appealed (again by either party) I think (and hope!!) that’s as far as things can go.

Assuming they give them, say x3 financial penalty (or any other punishment), is that the end of the court case completely?

Thanks, my most recent post reveals why whether it’s sold or not doesn’t matter (I should have read the law more carefully before asking the question!!)

Further little update… On top of the up to 3 x financial penalty: The Adjudicating Authority can also impose that any property related to the contravention be confiscated to the Indian Government. So if they’ve still got Alexander House this could be seized, and if they’ve sold it the proceeds of the sale could be seized. This would obviously require an English Court to issue an order to this effect. Personally I hope the Authority squeeze until the pips squeak.

No worries. I just checked on Twitter and Rory mentions Alexander house going on the market in April 2024. Not sure if it’s sold though.

No idea sorry. I’ve read the relevant law and it says the convening of the Adjudicating Authority will be announced in the Official Gazette. I’ve found the website for this but it doesn’t seem possible to search by ‘the accused’. I was prepared to read through the last few weeks to see if I could find Venkys but when I click on a file nothing happens.

Any idea when a decision will be made?

It was ‘live on Norwegian TV’, ergo all the Scandinavian advertising. It was all very exciting!

The model of having to appeal to a court, to allow them to send funds, without a bond model, isn’t one I’m not familiar with, from any other club. It must be unique to Rovers this, as surely it is one that has never come up before.

Remember this Game like yesterday,a Liverpool side including Rush and Barnes we tore them a new one!

Never knowingly undersold…

Any model whose main objective is to save money will always lead to ruin eventually. There may be times when they strike it lucky and get a good manager or sign a hidden gem, but the overall direction of travel will be downwards. This has clearly been the sticking point with our good players who are running out of contract. They have done well and understandably expect to be paid accordingly and the club refuses as its overriding objective is to scrimp and save. When does it stop? Today is Travis and Tronstad, but in 5 years will we be competing with Accrington to meet the demands of a league 2 plodder? They may try to advertise it as a Brentford model or a Sunderland model but in actual fact it’s a Venkys model of degradation. Those models take proper planning and some decent strategy and investment to it pull off. They need a strategy with a genuine desire for improvement as the main objective and not money saving. A completely flawed model that raises the ultimate question, why on earth do they bother?

Exactly that. Putting the blame onto the player via the media is a tactic I'm sure they already use.

They'll spin it as 'we need to work within our wage structure' or some rubbish. Then some fans incapable of critical thought will blame the player for being greedy. Rinse and repeat.

Hopefully Glen and the Coalition have something up their sleeves, because the 25% cut in wages (in real terms versus inflation) is killing us. The only way we will head on the current model in non-league.

The below formed part of the last court order: At the time I didn’t think much of this, but I’ve since discovered the Adjudicating Authority are who the Directorate of Enforcement (respondent no.2) refer a case to once they’ve gathered their evidence of a violation. That authority then hears the case and decides if and what penalty to impose. Maybe things are about to move forward… Edited to add: I’ve also just discovered the maximum penalty that can be imposed is three times the sum involved in the breach. (Unfortunately I don’t think the provision in the law imposing a jail sentence of up to five years will be applicable).

Yep, this is how I believe they operate as well. Keep players on less money for as long as possible. Then offer them a new deal on similar terms, if they sign it, then great. If not, try and shift them out or let them walk for free at the end of the deal. If they need to source a replacement, it's a player on less than the outgoing one or at best, same terms. It's all about cost cutting, nothing more.

The fact that there isn't even a contract offer on the table for Trav, Tronstad or Hyam tells you everything you need to know about the clubs intentions. More than likely hoping to offload all 3 and replace with a cheaper alternative from some relegated Belgium 2nd division team

The situation with Travis just like one or two others is engineered a year or 18 months in advance by the club so they don't have to commit to bigger longer contracts, bonuses and signing fees it's rather obvious now. Yes the players and their agents play a part but i'd suggest that is often once they realise nothing or nothing worthwhile is coming from Rovers. Once the wheels are put into motion well in advance the players are on their way it's just a matter of when not if and it's mostly by design. Ewood bean counters care not a jot to lose good players it's all about finding cheaper replacements and you could argue in this case that we will get a decent fee but we know were that will go. Venkys have long since blown every opportunity to mould the Brentford model instead having a benefactor we need their money just to survive to now a sell to survive model, we need sales money just to survive and continue the managed decline a bit longer. A player on a better contract commands a better fee, gets a better signing on fee from that as well but if it was signed 12 months ago it might have cost the club an extra 5k a week. They don't want that, can't be arsed with it so just leave things to chance till it's too late then shrug the shoulders. 'He wanted to go' 'We did all we could' and the age old chestnut 'But we offered to make him the highest player' - a month before he knew he'd get more or the same elsewhere.

I'll start worrying if England begin to lose qualifying games. Until then it's the old cliché of 3 points, job done, on to the next game. I'm not defending a moribund performance by England yet playing Andorra in no way resembles preparation for France or Spain. Andorra know what they can and can't do. They have only conceded 5 goals in 3 games. Terrible teams are able to better frustrate superior opposition in today's game due to them receiving more money witch leads to better coaching and organisation. Other results over the weekend had Bosnia beating San Marino 1-0 and Wales beating Lichtenstein 3-0, at home. England fans spent years and years deriding Southgate for his supposed lack of tactical acumen. Nobody is doubting Tuchel's talent (yet) so let's hope that in the next 12 months he gets England qualified easily and is able to form the players available to him into a unit capable of winning the World Cup.

When you read a LT sub headline of "Wrexham flex financial muscles", when they are coming after our captain. Of all our downfalls, I never ever thought getting strong armed by Wrexham would be one of them. I think Trav was excellent last season, and would be very good at pretty much any team in the league. He would also highly likely be seen as a steal by clubs with more than our 50p budget.

I would be very surprised if we hold onto him, as it is looking increasingly likely that the latest request for funds, is not happening. As, we saw with the court hearing, the owners were attempting to have the need for a bond removed, but it was only reduce to 50%. I have a feeling they are worried that the bond will be lost, as well as the seized properties and assuming that is the way they are thinking, then the only way to keep us afloat is to sell.

The way the Rovers are being run, we are a million miles from a professional football club.