wilsdenrover

No, it’s definitely been implemented - the hearing you’re referring to was 20th May, the hearing when the reduction was applied was 26th May.

Did you tell him to keep an eye on this thread and we’ll keep him updated? Back to front I know but needs must 😁😁

Add in how Rovers is now run and I’m guessing that probability drops even further.

Yep, bankruptcy is a disqualify event.

No it doesn’t hinge solely on that but one of the ‘lists within the list’ covers convictions for various offences. Bankruptcy is on a different part of the list (in with such things as being subject to an IVA).

There’s a very long list but I’m not sure the current action against them is covered by any of the things on it. There’s one or two I think could ‘catch them’ but I’m far from certain.* It was reported that Reading’s owner was disqualified for his business interests in China, has anyone checked whether there’s a Bejing (or Moscow) branch of a Venkys xprs? 😁😁 * these hinge on whether the ‘charges’ being proven would constitute a conviction - I don’t think they would as FEMA (the law in question) is a civil one.

I’ve looked at the EFL disqualifying criteria and am not hopeful of this happening.

That’s very kind of you to say so. Thank you.

Even that argument should end with them blaming Venkys.

What’s a circa £80 million exaggeration between friends.

I was proud of that one 😁😁

Thank you. As a long term non-attender I don’t really feel able to contribute to discussions on whether player a b or c would improve us etc. I won’t always get everything right when trying to help on this thread but I do hope what I do share is at least of some use and interest to others on here.

It’s staggering really, not one player going down as if he’d been shot either.

Why aren’t they waiting 5 minutes for a twat with a tele to confirm the goals should/shouldn’t stand?? …and don’t get me started on this 1-11 shirt number bollocks.

I know! Did you see Le Saux make a tackle? Ridiculous. And only three subs on the bench, how on earth are you supposed to completely disrupt the second half?? Thank god things have progressed.

What was that nonsense with Mimms catching the ball?

No need to be sorry. If I can help I will, if I can’t I’ll say so. 👍

1 yes (role reversal can be fun 😁) 2. the job I did have involved the need to understand ‘legalese’ (or overcomplicated bollocks intended to make lawyers richer as I call it 😁😁).

They needed (wording in the law) a ‘reason to believe’ a contravention had taken place to do this. How high a bar this is is anyone’s guess.

Just to add to my earlier reply. During the last hearing the judge said something along the lines of ‘if there has been serious wrongdoing things will be different’. I took that as meaning if the investigation goes against the Venkys he’ll put a stop to allowing funds being sent. (I still don’t know how an appeal would affect this).

You quoted my post as I hid it 😁 (decided wasn’t worth going over old ground). I’m hoping they’re found guilty and don’t pay the penalty. I hope that as if they don’t pay it a prison sentence comes into play.

Probably! There’s a limit for how long you have to lodge an appeal but I don’t think there was one for it being heard (I’ve opened a bottle of wine since reading it 😁😁). I don’t know the answer re the blocker, sorry.

It would but I think it would only cover ‘dodgy’ funds. Lets hope they’ve found plenty.

There’s a treaty between the UK and India which covers this. Still needs a UK court order but the UK judge would consider the said treaty in coming to their decision.

Up to 3x just relates to the funds transferred. Seizing the property (or sale proceeds) is on top of this. I assume the judge would have to justify adding the latter for there to be any chance of the court in England issuing the necessary order.