NearlyDead wrote:If you haven't come across it already, then this Guardian piece is a real eye-opener!

The nub of the problem is perfectly summarised here

"Dominic Martinez, who with a small group of supporters has tried to sound the alarm for years about Bury’s financial state, says it is distressing to see them in such straits again.

“This is a cautionary tale, for Bury and other smaller clubs,” he said. “We can’t live beyond our means and rely on some benefactor to fund it; we are seeing the risks again now.” "

wattsville_boy wrote:

NearlyDead wrote:If you haven't come across it already, then this Guardian piece is a real eye-opener!

The nub of the problem is perfectly summarised here

"Dominic Martinez, who with a small group of supporters has tried to sound the alarm for years about Bury’s financial state, says it is distressing to see them in such straits again.

“This is a cautionary tale, for Bury and other smaller clubs,” he said. “We can’t live beyond our means and rely on some benefactor to fund it; we are seeing the risks again now.” "

I agree with your view i n its entirety.

I'll be interested to see if Bury fans now want this to be rushed through and rubber stamped by Tuesday. Surely that would mean a very sketchy fit and proper persons investigation. The very thing that they were claiming was not done in the case of Dale. My guess is that the EFL has given them an impossible time line to work to, possibly because of the statement (which she maybe made in haste) that maybe they could extend the deadline by one or two days. Perhaps the buyers will withdraw their offer. That would then be the end of Bury.

I see that Bury are requesting volunteers to spruce the ground up from Tuesday morning. I like their optimism.

And I see Bolton now have the same deadline as Bury, though with a slightly different wording given their more advanced sale proceedings. So, not beyond the bounds that there will be no relegation from L2 this season.

Yes, the deadline for Bolton is to lift 'the suspension of the notice of withdrawal'. That would mean that at 5pm on Tuesday, the EFL would/could impose a notice of expulsion. I'm guessing that would be about two weeks, as was given to Bury. They have created a rod for their own backs by extending that deadline. This Debbie Jeavons lady doesn't seem to be steering this very well. I think she may have now stated that Tuesday 5pm could be extended if the deal is 'almost done'. Whatever that means.

C&P from the Guardian:

"Bury, formed in 1885, are in financial ruins, with a company voluntary arrangement (CVA) needing finance to pay “non-football creditors” 25p in the pound out of £4m they are owed, around £750,000 to current and former players and other football creditors, and expected £1.5m losses for the season.

Dale has said that a further £1.75m must be paid under the CVA to a company, RCR Holdings Ltd, which bought an apparent £7m debt owed by Bury for £70,000, and now wants a quarter of the full £7m alongside other creditors. RCR Holdings was formed two days before the club’s 18 July creditors meeting at which it voted to pass the CVA, and the sole owner and director, Kris Richards, 41, is Dale’s daughter’s partner."

The bit that jumped out at me was that they anticipate losing a further £1.5m this season - when they are starting with pretty much a clean sheet in terms of players. They could save themselves a chunk of that by signing non-league part-timers, given starting the season with a 12 point deficit already made relegation so likely.

Would a competition with Bury getting hammered every week have any less integrity than one where L2 just plays the season with 23 teams?

George Street-Bridge wrote:C&P from the Guardian:

"Bury, formed in 1885, are in financial ruins, with a company voluntary arrangement (CVA) needing finance to pay “non-football creditors” 25p in the pound out of £4m they are owed, around £750,000 to current and former players and other football creditors, and expected £1.5m losses for the season.

Dale has said that a further £1.75m must be paid under the CVA to a company, RCR Holdings Ltd, which bought an apparent £7m debt owed by Bury for £70,000, and now wants a quarter of the full £7m alongside other creditors. RCR Holdings was formed two days before the club’s 18 July creditors meeting at which it voted to pass the CVA, and the sole owner and director, Kris Richards, 41, is Dale’s daughter’s partner."

The bit that jumped out at me was that they anticipate losing a further £1.5m this season - when they are starting with pretty much a clean sheet in terms of players. They could save themselves a chunk of that by signing non-league part-timers, given starting the season with a 12 point deficit already made relegation so likely.

Would a competition with Bury getting hammered every week have any less integrity than one where L2 just plays the season with 23 teams?

No George it wouldn't. But neither would it have any more integrity. And a football club is part of the community and the EFL are doing all that they can to keep Bury alive.

Knowing as those of us of a certain age just how devastating losing the local team can be I am sad that some seem so keen to punish supporters who are in the same position as we were thirty years ago.

Yes, George, I think it would, because without Bury, every team would be on the same footing. A league including a basket case team could be decided by how many goals are scored against Bury. One thing that must happen if they limp on, is that suspended matches should be played ASAP, five in the next five midweeks would be best. Bury can't delay this in an attempt to build a squad. Doncaster might gain an advantage by filling their boots on Saturday. They certainly must play them before the January transfer window. I don't think they will get that far.

I would argue that a competition where one team gets hammered every week over 46 games has much less integrity than one which runs one team short. And if they do run a wage bill big enough to field a competitive team in L1, they'd be repeating last year's scenario.

They may actually find it's more enjoyable taking a season out to start a new club and start again in the Northern Premier or North West Counties.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

George Street-Bridge wrote:C&P from the Guardian:

"Bury, formed in 1885, are in financial ruins, with a company voluntary arrangement (CVA) needing finance to pay “non-football creditors” 25p in the pound out of £4m they are owed, around £750,000 to current and former players and other football creditors, and expected £1.5m losses for the season.

Dale has said that a further £1.75m must be paid under the CVA to a company, RCR Holdings Ltd, which bought an apparent £7m debt owed by Bury for £70,000, and now wants a quarter of the full £7m alongside other creditors. RCR Holdings was formed two days before the club’s 18 July creditors meeting at which it voted to pass the CVA, and the sole owner and director, Kris Richards, 41, is Dale’s daughter’s partner."

The bit that jumped out at me was that they anticipate losing a further £1.5m this season - when they are starting with pretty much a clean sheet in terms of players. They could save themselves a chunk of that by signing non-league part-timers, given starting the season with a 12 point deficit already made relegation so likely.

Would a competition with Bury getting hammered every week have any less integrity than one where L2 just plays the season with 23 teams?

No George it wouldn't. But neither would it have any more integrity. And a football club is part of the community and the EFL are doing all that they can to keep Bury alive.

Knowing as those of us of a certain age just how devastating losing the local team can be I am sad that some seem so keen to punish supporters who are in the same position as we were thirty years ago.

They are in the same position in as much as they look likely to lose their club. However, when it happened to us it wasn't against a background of a successful season gained by very dubious means and undoubtedly at the expense of others in League Two. We were firmly rooted to the foot of the conference after two consecutive relegation.

excessbee wrote:Yes, George, I think it would, because without Bury, every team would be on the same footing. A league including a basket case team could be decided by how many goals are scored against Bury. One thing that must happen if they limp on, is that suspended matches should be played ASAP, five in the next five midweeks would be best. Bury can't delay this in an attempt to build a squad. Doncaster might gain an advantage by filling their boots on Saturday. They certainly must play them before the January transfer window. I don't think they will get that far.

As it's the same Bury how are teams not on the same footing?

To follow your logic if Bury building a better team is unfair is it not unfair say on a team who plays Newport County after the January transfer window if we were to make a major signing as opposed to a team who plays us in December?

Promotion and relegation ate the lifeblood of our game. Teams going bust because of greedy or more often incompetent administrations is something I hate to see. The EFL doing all it can to help clubs in trouble is something I am all in favour of.

George Street-Bridge wrote:I would argue that a competition where one team gets hammered every week over 46 games has much less integrity than one which runs one team short. And if they do run a wage bill big enough to field a competitive team in L1, they'd be repeating last year's scenario.

They may actually find it's more enjoyable taking a season out to start a new club and start again in the Northern Premier or North West Counties.

I think we are both agreeing about this, which wasn't how I read your original hypothetical question.

excessbee wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

George Street-Bridge wrote:C&P from the Guardian:

"Bury, formed in 1885, are in financial ruins, with a company voluntary arrangement (CVA) needing finance to pay “non-football creditors” 25p in the pound out of £4m they are owed, around £750,000 to current and former players and other football creditors, and expected £1.5m losses for the season.

Dale has said that a further £1.75m must be paid under the CVA to a company, RCR Holdings Ltd, which bought an apparent £7m debt owed by Bury for £70,000, and now wants a quarter of the full £7m alongside other creditors. RCR Holdings was formed two days before the club’s 18 July creditors meeting at which it voted to pass the CVA, and the sole owner and director, Kris Richards, 41, is Dale’s daughter’s partner."

The bit that jumped out at me was that they anticipate losing a further £1.5m this season - when they are starting with pretty much a clean sheet in terms of players. They could save themselves a chunk of that by signing non-league part-timers, given starting the season with a 12 point deficit already made relegation so likely.

Would a competition with Bury getting hammered every week have any less integrity than one where L2 just plays the season with 23 teams?

No George it wouldn't. But neither would it have any more integrity. And a football club is part of the community and the EFL are doing all that they can to keep Bury alive.

Knowing as those of us of a certain age just how devastating losing the local team can be I am sad that some seem so keen to punish supporters who are in the same position as we were thirty years ago.

They are in the same position in as much as they look likely to lose their club. However, when it happened to us it wasn't against a background of a successful season gained by very dubious means and undoubtedly at the expense of others in League Two. We were firmly rooted to the foot of the conference after two consecutive relegation.

We went bust because of incompetent management in the heyday of the club. Five figure crowds were not unheard of. European football, big name players. All gone in the blink of an eye. The best Bury can hope for is fourth tier football next season. I suspect that their fall will not end there.

I also think that they won't be the last club to go. Stockport, Chester, Halifax, Southport have all plummeted.

I don't know what our wage bill for the season is, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was fairly close to the sum Bury anticipate losing THIS season. How on earth is that fair given non-football creditors will have to settle for a small percentage of what they are owed?

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

excessbee wrote:Yes, George, I think it would, because without Bury, every team would be on the same footing. A league including a basket case team could be decided by how many goals are scored against Bury. One thing that must happen if they limp on, is that suspended matches should be played ASAP, five in the next five midweeks would be best. Bury can't delay this in an attempt to build a squad. Doncaster might gain an advantage by filling their boots on Saturday. They certainly must play them before the January transfer window. I don't think they will get that far.

As it's the same Bury how are teams not on the same footing?

To follow your logic if Bury building a better team is unfair is it not unfair say on a team who plays Newport County after the January transfer window if we were to make a major signing as opposed to a team who plays us in December?

Promotion and relegation ate the lifeblood of our game. Teams going bust because of greedy or more often incompetent administrations is something I hate to see. The EFL doing all it can to help clubs in trouble is something I am all in favour of.

Stan, you don't seem to understand the structure of fixtures in the EFL. We will play every team once before the end of December and once in the second set of 23 matches. Other than a possible 'weather postponement' no team will have to play a Newport team strengthened in the January transfer window other than those who have had the same level playing field of being able to likewise strengthen their team.