DarloRich
Veteran Member
yes - perhaps less of a bond but still a good behaviour bond.Including the fans who own Exeter and Wimbledon?
I don't care about the shenanigans behind the ownership. Everyone involved in the consortium to buy should be disclosed publicly, along with thier business history, dealings, business performance and records ( including insolvency, administration and delays to filing) along with the history of any past involvement with football at any level. Frankly they should also have to declare if they have ever returned a library book late!And would it apply to the director of a club or the owners - Morecambe's owner isn't a director - if it's the owners it might well just bring forward the problems because if you can't afford to pay the wages you aren't going to be in a position to pay a bond. And that's before we get into what happens to that money before and after the "bad behaviour".
As for the money - give it to the fans group to help them run the club when the inevitable happens and they have to take over. We are the ones who invest time, money and effort in supporting a club for years and is us who often have to pick up the mess when these chancers finally do one
Why are you sticking up for these people?
everyone knows it as the "fit and proper" test regardless of what the dull FA blazers call it.It's called the Owners and Directors Test and it's easy to look up and see what's involved.
there is lots that can be done. The FA haven't the balls to do it. Much easier to punish fans than suits.Maybe, but I doubt there is anything that can be done that allows a rogue owner to actually be removed.
Saved your club? Well done. We will now demote you, dock loads of points, make you change your name and play in a town miles from your base.
Messed up a club as an owner? Behaved in a vastly unacceptable way and ruined a club? no problem. Fancy another go?
Last edited: