fbpx
Connect with us

Championship

What the EFL have said on Sheffield Wednesday situation in meeting with Supporters Trust

We take a look at what the EFL have said on the worrying situation at Sheffield Wednesday in a meeting held with the club’s Supporters Trust.

Representatives of the EFL met with Sheffield Wednesday Supporters Trust to discuss the club’s ongoing issues, including transfer embargoes, disciplinary proceedings, funding problems, and divestment.

Sheffield Wednesday faces embargoes due to unpaid liabilities, with no further details disclosed due to confidentiality. The club failed to provide secure funding by March 2025, leading to payment defaults.

According to a report by the Daily Mail on Thursday 16th of October, Sheffield Wednesday could be hit with a winding-up petition by HMRC in ‘the coming days’.

It is reported that an outstanding tax bill remains unpaid. As a result, Dejphon Chansiri may have to put the club into administration.

Rob Staton, BBC Radio Sheffield reporter, said: For the last week we’ve been working on this story alongside the Sheffield Star. It isn’t a surprise and has been on the cards.

So what does it mean? A winding-up petition is a formal court application, filed by a creditor, to force an insolvent company into compulsory liquidation. With HMRC owed £1m they are believed to be ready to take that step.

It could mean administration for the club, although that is not guaranteed, but it also means a distinct possibility that Chansiri’s time at Sheffield Wednesday is close to coming to an end.

What the future holds is unclear and no fan will rejoice at the words “liquidation” being brought up. But it could mean the opportunity for a fresh start.

Short-term pain for long-term gain, that must be the hope.

A hearing for charges from June is set for 2025. New breaches will be addressed separately to avoid delaying the initial proceedings. Future breaches may be handled by the Club Financial Reporting Panel for faster resolution.

The EFL oversees the club’s business plan but has limited power to enforce changes due to existing commitments, reduced income from a fan boycott, and unpaid HMRC debts. Owner Dejphon Chansiri must fund the club or sell it, but the EFL cannot force divestment without a disqualifying event.

No new funding is entering the club beyond its own income, EFL distributions, and Premier League solidarity payments. Past funding sources are irrelevant to the current crisis.

The EFL cannot compel Chansiri to sell unless a creditor triggers administration. No disqualifying event has occurred.

The Trust outlined their boycott, lobbying, and planned protests. The EFL clarified they do not fund extra stewarding and warned that disruptive protests could harm the club’s league status.

The EFL plans no immediate statements but will maintain dialogue with the Trust, and made clear the need for the Trust to prepare for potential insolvency and focus on the club’s future stability.

Attendees

Sheffield Wednesday Supporters Trust representatives
Ian Bennett
Otto Brookes
Rob Brookes
Steve Chu

FSA Representatives
Jane Hughes
Ashley Brown

EFL Representatives
Trevor Birch – Chief Executive Officer
Nick Craig – Chief Operating Officer
Mark Rowan – Chief Communications Officer
John Nagle – Director of Corporate Affairs
Andrew Pomfret – Head of Fan Engagement

Introductions

EFL outlined the purpose of the meeting was to give an update on current matters relating to Sheffield Wednesday.

It was noted that the Trust had submitted in advance an agenda with some detailed questions in five themes:

● Transfer embargoes and regulatory breaches

● Disciplinary proceedings

● The EFL imposed business plan and club funding

● SWFC’s sources of funding

● The divestment process

The EFL said they would answer the Trust’s questions subject to any confidentiality provisions that may prevent them from doing so.

The EFL also noted that some of the issues that have been raised previously by the Trust and again this week that focused on historical matters were not necessarily a priority and the most important issue was to concentrate on the current situation.

The EFL said that if these issues need to be reviewed in the future, then that should take place at the appropriate time. However, right now, the only thing that matters is finding a way to enable Sheffield Wednesday to move forward to a positive future.

The EFL asked whether the Trust are taking appropriate actions to be ready, in the event that they are needed to help rescue the Club for example from an insolvency event if HMRC proceeded down that route. RB responded that the Trust has a workstream which is exploring all relevant actions. The EFL stressed the importance of the Trust being prepared for this eventuality.

Transfer embargoes and regulatory breaches

The EFL explained that while they have the power to publish the specific regulation(s) a club has breached which results in a transfer embargo, the same regulations also say that the EFL cannot provide further narrative or detail about the reasons for the embargo but a key focus is always on the club’s ability to pay its liabilities to creditors, and more generally to fulfil its financial obligations.

As previously advised, the League confirmed that SWFC’s obligation to provide evidence of secure funding under P&S rules was not required until March 2025. This evidence was then supplied by the club, but it is now clear to all parties that owner funding has not been supplied hence the defaults on payments.

The EFL clarified that while a club may be subject to multiple embargoes under different rules, the practical impact is the same: all embargoes must be cleared before restrictions are lifted, and the reason for each embargo does not affect the overall embargo status.

Disciplinary proceedings

The EFL confirmed that a hearing date has been set in respect of the disciplinary charges from June and it is expected to be heard before the end of 2025.

The Trust asked whether new charges in respect of more recent breaches would be added to these charges. The EFL explained that subsequent breaches must be dealt with after the first set of proceedings is resolved, as factors for any repeated breaches would need to be considered, which may result in more severe sanctions, so the outcome of the first set of breaches would need to be known.

The EFL said it is possible to amend the current proceedings to add new breaches, but the EFL has chosen not to because of the risk it would delay the outcome of the initial proceedings. Additionally, the process has changed in recent months and in future some regulation breaches would be heard under the jurisdiction of the Club Financial Reporting Panel (CFRP) and away from independent Disciplinary Commission process. This could result in achieving a more expedited outcome for the second set of proceedings due to the processes involved.

The EFL said that in the event of a change of ownership it is possible to appeal a fee restriction, but they cannot comment on the potential outcome. Any appeal would be heard by an independent panel which would take into account three core principles when considering sanctions, which are:

1) To act as a deterrent

2) To vindicate compliance by other clubs

3) To impose a sanction on those that transgress the rules

Imposed business plan and club funding

The EFL confirmed that they are continuing to oversee the club’s business plan but the scope for them to impose changes is extremely limited because:

● The club has existing spending commitments that can’t easily be reduced

● The club’s income is being impacted by the Trust’s boycott action

● There are questions as to how the club’s existing commitments can be met – they will require the owner to put in fresh funding. The club’s income from its own sources and from monthly EFL distributions cannot meet spending commitments

● HMRC is owed money

The EFL’s view is that Mr Chansiri needs to fund the club or divest to someone else who can do so. The EFL has met Mr Chansiri recently to stress this to him. As no disqualifying event has taken place however, the EFL is limited in what it can do to escalate this and there no regulatory basis to compel divestment.

Sources of funding

The EFL is not currently seeing any funding coming into the club apart from club-generated income, EFL monthly distributions and the bi-annual Premier League solidarity payments.

There was a discussion about the club’s previous sources of funding, where it came from, and the extent to which the withdrawal of this funding has resulted in the club’s current predicament. The EFL said that previous sources of funding are not relevant to the current position because no funding is currently coming into the club now.

There is no evidence that previous funding has been from sources other than Mr Chansiri, and the EFL would need evidence that demonstrates past sources of funding were not from him in order to investigate. Even then, investigations take time and resources and the EFL’s focus is on the club’s current and future situation.

Divestment process

The Trust asked whether the EFL has any powers to force Mr Chansiri to divest from the club. The EFL confirmed that there was no evidence to show that Mr Chansiri was subject to a disqualifying event, so they cannot force him to divest his interest in the club.

The decision to sell is in Mr Chansiri’s hands, unless a creditor comes forward to seek to place the club into administration. The EFL also then explained the steps that would need to be applied in the event of an insolvency event and the resulting impact of such action.

Planned protests

The EFL asked the Trust about the plan for future protests. The Trust said there are three strands to their action – the defunding/boycott campaign, lobbying of key stakeholders such as the EFL, and physical protests in and around the stadium. The Trust emphasised that they have been responsible in their protest action to date but are coming under increasing pressure from the supporter base to engage in more direct and confrontational action.

The Trust noted there was a significantly increased stewarding presence at the Coventry game last Saturday and some fans believed that the EFL had contributed to the funding of those extra stewards. The EFL said this was incorrect and that funding to all 72 Clubs is provided on a monthly basis via its basic award payments.

The EFL added that they remain engaged with the Club’s safety personnel and it is the Safety Advisory Group’s responsibility to undertake a risk assessment of all home fixtures. It’s the League’s view however, that any actions that threaten the postponement or abandonment of games will be counter-productive, due to the negative impact on other Clubs, which could in turn ultimately threaten the Club’s
ability to participate in the League.

The EFL asked the Trust to keep them informed as to planned protest action.

AOB

The Trust asked the EFL whether any imminent statements are planned about Sheffield Wednesday. The EFL said it is a moving situation but there is nothing currently planned.

The EFL stressed they are committed to keeping dialogue open with the Trust.

This is how fans reacted to what the EFL have said on the Sheffield Wednesday situation in a meeting with the Supporters Trust…

@mark_robbo1966: Insolvency and start again like Glasgow Rangers did seems the most possible and sensible outcome from reading this?? That way we have a club on a sounder financial footing where a new owner can invest sensibly through the lower leagues until we hit the Championship again.

@GoalShort: We’d end up in about the 10th tier…… insolvency is the end of the road. If HMRC apply for a winding up order, admin normally follows. But the club must have funds to carry on until a buyer is found. This could be fans bailing us out. Maybe an administrator sticks ST up for sale

@grayso72: Sounds like the EFL are expecting HMRC to bring the winding up order. Advising the Trust to make plans to run the club

@parkinbower: Lets call it straight. The Efl are weak and powerless. They aren’t bothered about the future of Sheffield Wednesday and to be honest they would be happy for DC to continue aslong as the fixtures are completed. Their embargos are shackling us to a sinking ship

@DanielLairdSWFC: The EFL are basically playing the role of the Titanic band, happy to play their merry little tune while our ship sinks

@BurnXowl: So basically we’re shafted. Our only hope is the IFR and to be honest I don’t think they will do anything this year if at all.

@fighthewrongs: Someone explain how not being able to provide a funding plan, proof of money to fund the club to the EFL , 5 embargoes, and never paying players or staff on time shows he’s fit and proper. Nowt to disqualify him? I just Cba

@WainwrightTM: In short, they can’t remove him, he has no funding plan, HMRC could issue a winding up order & the ST need to find a plan for that eventuality, the boycott is drying up revenue making his current business plan unrealistic, charges/points deduction hearings imminent (in 2025)

@OwlSheffield: Basically #Chansiri not going anywhere this season ☹️ and alot of players by looks of won’t be ere NXT season as either sold or out of contract

@daniel_hall85: They can’t do anything the clubs finished

@tonyjroper: That’s an absolute shocking read @EFL useless

@wellbeaten1977: So in summary we are in the 💩 because the clubs on its arese has no player’s and if someone rescued us they’d not be allowed to rebuild. Well done @EFL for nailing coffin shut on @swfc

@OwlPricey: So in short the @EFL couldn’t give a toss if we went bust or not. Wankers.

@Dronowl66: Anyone who still advocates abandoning matches should take a look at this , also If you think the EFL are saving us think again #swfc

@kburton95: See this baffles me. 1. Proved he could fund the club in March ’25, same month wages didn’t get paid and then the shit followed. He’s essentially gone “Here’s what’s in my bank”, passed the tests then gone “Like fuck this clubs seeing it though”. 2. Despite on continuous occasions he’s proven to not do right by the club, or those involved with it on a daily basis and essentially abusing our livelihood, and treating it like the toy of a brat they still cannot disqualify him. 3. EFL Haven’t got a fucking scooby on what to do with this situation, and have now shown their cards and can do fuck all else. So essentially as a club, we’re on our own. We’re fucked. We either beg for someone to get us put into administration, or this prat of a ‘businessman’ can just continue running us the way he is, regardless of repercussions because the EFL have fuck all in place stopping such shit from happening, other than punish the fans, than punishing the culprit. This bollocks about the IFR “Change is coming” and so forth, I take this with a pinch of salt and I will happily fall on my sword the day I see they do anything. Although this was ruled law, and they were given powers they’re just Politician’s in another role throwing endless promises around while collecting their salary each month.

@Jay_Blogs: My whistlestop take on the meeting with the trust: EFL stressed the trust need to be ready to rescue the club should the HMRC make the club insolvent. Initial hearings to be heard by the end of the year. Any new owner could appeal the fee restriction; obviously the outcome is unknown. No funds are coming into the club other than club generated income including EFL monthly distributions and bi-annual Premier League solidarity payments. As we are already aware Chansiri currently has not committed disqualifying event, so the EFL cannot force him to divest his interest in the club. As far as the EFL are concerned it is currently in Chansiri’s hands. The EFL warned that any actions that lead to abandonment/postponement of games could threaten the clubs ability to participate in the league. #swfc

Related Topics
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

More in Championship