Disgruntledgoat
Player Valuation: £50m
I understand all that. I also admit that I am not an expert in football ownership and financing, yet I can't help relate and question it to against other circumstances.
If I want to own a house and need a mortgage to support my ownership, then the mortgage provider has a duty of care to ensure that ultimately I can afford it.
They do due diligence and many financial checks; if they didn't do checks and I couldn't afford it, then yes I would lose my home akin to Bury getting expelled.
Yet, the mortgage lender itself would face legal questions and in some cases compensation. How is the EFL not completing the due diligence any different?
They have allowed someone to purchase the club without proof they can fund it, regardless of whether he was a charlatan who wanted to asset strip them.
When you add that into the equation, well it is even more damming. It might not have stopped him anyway - if he did show funds - but there's legal responsibilities.
Did the EFL meet them? That's my question.
The EFL's responsibilities aren't legal, they only have to satisfy themselves that a club can fulfill their fixtures. As important as we all think football is, it is essentially a members club of private businesses.
This is why there are a number of other chairman today demanding that the rules be overhauled. It's a minefield and there have been various proposals in the last few years to tighten it up, none of which came close to being agreed by all members. Leeds were run by somebody with an actual conviction for fraud for a time.
I am agreeing with you that the current set up is insufficient because it is based on the assumption that people who buy football clubs actually want to run a sporting enterprise successfully. Off the top of my head one solution would be to have the prospective owner place an amount equal to the first years fixed costs in a bond to be held by the FA and released on invoice by the club throughout the season.