The last month or so has seen a number of important developments applicable to the credibility and sustainability of the professional game at EFL Championship level, from the perspective of both the governance of individual clubs and of their compliance with rules designed to protect the sporting integrity of the game.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cSpygate the sequel\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n The latter was notably represented by the surprisingly (in the view of many) robust response of the authorities to Southampton FC\u2019s (SFC) espionage activities \u2013 the media coverage of which made many references to Derby\u2019s related experience at the hands of Marcelo Bielsa\u2019s Leeds. It seems few beyond the immediate environs of St Mary\u2019s Stadium felt SFC\u2019s punishment was unwarranted, but it\u2019s hoped the wider football community will have some sympathy with the Saints\u2019 supporters. Their presumed sense of helplessness as this drama unfolded typifies how the game\u2019s most important stakeholders invariably suffer the most collateral damage when things go wrong.<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the time of writing this particular can of worms remains open. The FA has launched an investigation which may well lead to disciplinary action against the individuals involved and SFC are also likely to take their own action, with the position of the manager under particular scrutiny. It\u2019s also understood that SFC\u2019s players have consulted the PFA in connection with their potential loss of earnings. Saints fans have been reimbursed for their final match tickets, but it has to be asked whether they and some service providers are entitled to recompense for pre-paid travel and other costs that were ultimately incurred unnecessarily. Conspiracy theorists are also questioning the completeness of SFC\u2019s admission of guilt as it relates to just three games, none of which they won, during a period when winning seemed almost guaranteed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The EFL though have dodged a bullet in the form of legal action threatened by Hull City if they had lost the final. Questions remain however about their speed of response and whether the play-offs should have been suspended pending a decision on SFC\u2019s participation. In this regard it would not be a surprise if some in London SE16 and North Wales are asking if there was a case for (say) Millwall to be given a bye into the final with a single semi-final between Middlesbrough and Hull or even for Wrexham to be elevated into the last play-off position. The latter would certainly have increased the level of our final day disappointment!<\/p>\n\n\n\n Positive developments in South Yorkshire<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n The aforementioned concept of supporters as collateral damage is one that will certainly resonate with Derby County fans, so hopefully most of us will have been pleased to see a successful resolution to the potentially catastrophic situation at Sheffield Wednesday (SWFC). The challenges experienced by the respective administrators \u2013 contrary to their initial pronouncements – in finding suitable buyers for both Derby and SWFC demonstrate the need for more rigorous regulation of the game as credible white knights prepared to step in to save ailing clubs are clearly thin on ground.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The acquisition of their club by the Arise Capital Partners consortium led by David Storch, an American with a background in aviation, seems to have been well received by Wednesday supporters, although they were admittedly reaching the \u201canything is better than nothing\u201d stage. He may well further endear himself to the fan base by his decision to offer the supporters\u2019 trust a place on the club board.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The acquisition though has not been free of controversy, with the EFL\u2019s decision not to impose a 15 point deduction for the 2026\/27 season apparently triggering objections from a number of unnamed Championship clubs. This deduction would have been the consequence of failure to settle a minimum of 25% of non-football related debts. However, as Dejphon Chansiri the previous owner, had refused to engage in a negotiated settlement and as Storch has offered to pay 25% of the \u00a364 million Chansiri loaned to the club, contingent on Wednesday being promoted back to the Championship at the first attempt, the EFL agreed to waive the deduction. Storch however is clearly reluctant to pay Chansiri anything due to his mismanagement of the club. As such it is possible the EFL may now review its own rules in this regard as they could well be deemed counter-productive when new owners are being sought, but this will likely not retrospectively assuage the annoyance at this EFL decision of other clubs and their owners \u2013 both current and previous \u2013 with a certain Mr Morris having agreed to substantially waive his loans to Derby County to facilitate David Clowes\u2019 takeover of Derby being one example that comes to mind.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The last month or so has seen a number of important developments applicable to the credibility and sustainability of the professional game at EFL Championship level, from the perspective of both the governance of individual clubs and of their compliance with rules designed to protect the sporting integrity of the game. \u201cSpygate the sequel\u201d…<\/p>\n