2 hours ago, wilsdenrover said:

I promise this is the last time I’ll bring this up but…

The EFL agreed that a fully executed loan agreement was submitted to them (as per the timeline)

Surely fully executed = legally binding? 

Part of me wants Forest to ‘give it a go’ just so we can all find out!

 

 

There is normally a clause stating the loan agreement is enacted upon league registration and is null and void without league approval. So there will be no claims from Forest. If that was the case multiple claims would be going through court now including against Forest last year for missing the deadline by 7 seconds.

However I still do not understand why the EFL are not using the Premier League system where you have 2 hours to submit final paperwork once the deadline has passed so long as the deal sheet has been submitted by 11pm deadline.

Looking at the timeline and the missing hour, we can safely assume Waggot/Pasha had to be consulted for approval which being towards the end of the Birmingham match they would have been busy being entertained by the Birmingham hierarchy so would have been difficult to contact. Also I have no idea why Silvester wasn't at Brockhall with the players and Greg, as they were all busy doing interviews and marketing material. So would have been pretty easy to sort the last few things out.

28 minutes ago, roverandout said:

I just don't think with the time left he will be worth putting all this effort into getting 

I think taking it forward to a arbitration panel is not necessarily about getting the player but about showing the EFL that they have a problem and getting the process reformed.

If we look at it no club has ever taken it this far. 

I think we are the first club to take it this far to an independent arbitration panel. Either way it goes I think the EFL need to overhaul their appeals process and go straight to an independent panel. 

We had 3 clubs deciding on our appeal and 2 of them were playoff competitors in Millwall and Middlesbrough, so they are hardly going to look at the case in an objective manner.

5 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I am also giving Broughton the benefit of the doubt and no blame in regards to the farcical Brereton situation, allowing him to run his deal down. That like Rothwell is clearly a decision above his head.

I think behind the scenes he has done a lot. Transfers are just one area he is responsible for.

But he has managed to have most of the training gear and tech upgraded, upgrade medical department and gear, expanded analytics side and scouting and he is improving a lot of things at the academy. For once since our relegation or probably since Sam's sacking we are investing and replacing on things we should be doing. So I see a lot of positives from his appointment.

It's just the January window was very poor. It just looks like the evening of the 30th of January, Venky's gave them a bit more cash and they unfortunately couldn't get things sorted. I think if there is a repeat of this then it's probably time for a change.

I think we really need to change club secretary however as this is not the first time he has come up short. 

1 hour ago, JHRover said:

Another struggling, town Championship club attracting foreign investment?

Can't be true I keep getting told Venkys are the only show in town and that nobody would ever be interested in buying such clubs.

If we were put up for sale there would be a lot of interested parties willing to buy us.

Our problem is that Venky's never sell their businesses but close them down when they lose interest or don't want to invest anymore in them. 

Sadly I think we are stuck with them

1 minute 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?

Which is why we believe we have a case to appeal. 

17 minutes ago, Displaced Rover said:

I might have misunderstood, but wasn't the EFLs point, "what happens to the player and his outrageous Premier League wages if you go up, sign him and then subsequently get relegated from the Premier League?" 

Now a wage reduction on relegation is fairly normal but they'd have to then agree the terms with the player before going back to the EFL no?

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.

36 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

Entirely as predicted when we signed the player. Exactly why we needed a striker. Thomas may prove pointless without one.

I think when they signed Thomas, they were convinced they had a striker joining who would benefit. I think if we signed, Thomas, O'Brien and a Striker we would have finished 3rd.

1 hour ago, yeti-dog said:

I take your point - if we somehow went up then obviously you roll with it and accept that the following season will, in all probability, be like slowing down to rubberneck at a car crash.. 

To be honest with the issues in India and the Adani fallout etc, I would be very happy to have our financial situation sorted for the next few years and not have any fear of Venky's deciding to liquidate us.

Just now, JoeH said:

It's just such an over the top reaction in my view. But hey ho. Thoughts on the GB interview?

He comes across very well, and you could tell he is itching to tell us whose fault it really was.

So they are using the same process that was put in place since Silvester arrived. That's several we have lost now due to this process. 

Hopefully now the process will be changed. I wonder who the striker they had lined up is?

Just now, Groundhog said:

I can't seem to find it anywhere, were we going to be paying his wages or not? 

All of his wages

Just now, Mashed Potatoes said:

What would be the motive ?

Make sure we don't go up. Everything is reviewed and more oversight in Premier League than EFL.

Although reading the leaked Football white paper I am not sure we would get a license at the moment to compete 

It seems we forgot to send the player registration form for both players.

2 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

Qualified for what? As far as I can find he never held a job in senior football until we appointed him. The manager is more qualified than him he had 15 year playing career at the top of the club and international game. And as a manager he has won league titles and competed in the Champions League.

Coaching wise, I think GB is the highest qualified coach we've had at the club for over 10+ years

Just now, Fraserkirky said:

Did we do an interview and pics with the lad? 

I wonder if he will take legal action, 24 years old should be getting looked after by the governing boards. It's pretty disgraceful.

I dont understand the motive from the EFL, I get there is deadlines to adhere too but if its minor paperwork issue and everything else is done, why would they hurt the two clubs and more importantly the player. Dont get it.

Everything is complete, pics, interviews, social all completed before 11pm on Tuesday.

1 minute ago, roversfan99 said:

 

Why did the owners not sack Silvester when DJ Campbell didn't sign that time due to a fax issue?

A good question? With his links to SEM he should have been the first out really but it does make you wonder that they haven't left.

I really don't know why he hasn't been sacked on multiple occasions.

Just now, Hasta said:

What if Sylvester is being thrown under the bus here? Read between the lines.

From the guidelines, the only people who can register players with FA are club secretary and CEO. Same with submitting squad lists etc.

Just now, Hasta said:

How do we know this? Other than someone has leaked this info to Nixon?

He is club secretary, so it is his job.

Just now, roversfan99 said:

Surely that is Broughton done on the Rovers gravy train.

But Venkys have never cared for making employees accountable for their actions.

Why, he doesn't look after the paperwork.

He got the deal sorted etc, Sylvester had to submit and didn't.

5 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

Zzzz look at the numbers. There is drop off if you draw a line from 1996 until Venkys turned up. Venkys seasons in the PL were actually similar to the messiah, Hughes average attendances!

Going down creates the most noticeable drop. Which is exactly my point.

When we were relegated under Kidd we lost a small % of fans.

When we were relegated under Venky's it went of a cliff. 

I am not sure you can say it was the relegation that caused attendances to drop, it was rank mismanagement as well as the fans not being listened to.

1 minute ago, goozburger said:

Broughton will not be sleeping well! Whether or not we get O'Brien is now quite small in the grand scheme of things. It's far more concerning that Broughton has seemingly allowed a schoolboy error to happen at a critical moment. Broughton is surely responsible for this mistake, even if it is an admin error from one the troopers.

My impression is that Tomasson is unimpressed by Broughton's efforts, so far. I don't know about anybody else, but I sense a discord between the two when Tomasson discusses recruitment. I've noticed a few off-hand remarks about it in both transfer windows, now. The club can't operate if there is discontent between the two. I would argue Broughton's sins are bigger than Tomasson's, and if push came to shove, I would consider replacing Broughton and bring in somebody who can carry out the role competently.

It is Silvester that looks after that side of things, ensures paper work is in order, everything signed and submits to all relevant authorities. As Glen pointed out yesterday, Silvester still has very close ties to SEM. 

2 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Might be, who knows.

If he wasn't physically present at the negotiations for a particular player though, it would seem to be an unnecessary duplication to have to send the paperwork to him for him then to send into the EFL.

And, he has been at the Club some time and this issue hasn't arisen in the past as far as I'm aware.

There has to be something more to it as it's meant to be a full online system now we use to register deals on

10 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

We'll see.

According to Sharpe BOTH deals were in doubt. If that's true it completely blows the "bit unlucky, single document accidentally overlooked" excuse in the O Brien case out of the water. If both deals fail then whoever was dealing with them is clearly completely incompetent.  

If the outward deal for Markanday and the cheap deal for  the kid from Rochdale that no- one cares about  go through but the potentially expensive deal for the player we desperately need for the first team fails then attempts are made to apportion blame to the EFL then they really must think we were all born yesterday.

Either way, Broughton should be sacked. The football side of the Club is now his responsibility.

Wouldn't it be Silvester as he is responsible for paperwork and registering deals with the league being club secretary.

Just now, roversinmyblood said:

Is that to comply with next years FFP or because they can’t or won’t put as much money in to support the club. 

Both I would expect.

Just now, islander200 said:

Yeah but the swede was never leaving for £3 million 

I still think he'll go for less than £8m but we'll see if he gets sold which one of us is right.

If only we could buy him , our forward issues would be solved.