{ the forum }
 
An independent supporters' website dedicated to Mansfield Town FC

Macclesfield ... now wound up

Discuss all things Stags and Football League Two, and share stuff using our BBCodes.
Forum rules
Please read the Posting Rules before participating. Posting on the forums is subject to adhering to these.
Also, see the Guidelines for Posting. Moderators may sometimes tidy posts which do not follow these customs.

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby adamstag » Wed May 13, 2020 9:56 pm

Well barrow apart to make up the numbers you can’t have promotion but not relegation or visa versa, would be madness.
adamstag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 8277
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:20 am

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby Sandy Pate Best Stag » Wed May 13, 2020 10:00 pm

adamstag wrote:Well barrow apart to make up the numbers you can’t have promotion but not relegation or visa versa, would be madness.


Exactly but you can't promote Barrow without one promotion to league 1 or you would have 25 clubs in league 2 next year. So if no relegations no promotion from the national league either.
Who are you calling pedantic? I resemble that remark!
Sandy Pate Best Stag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 3711
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 4:37 pm

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby NorthLondonStag » Wed May 13, 2020 11:18 pm

Sandy Pate Best Stag wrote:
adamstag wrote:Well barrow apart to make up the numbers you can’t have promotion but not relegation or visa versa, would be madness.


Exactly but you can't promote Barrow without one promotion to league 1 or you would have 25 clubs in league 2 next year. So if no relegations no promotion from the national league either.


There’s no reason though why you couldn’t increase league 2 to 25 teams (I accept that you would never be able to have a ‘full’ fixture list). You would then (say) have 3 relegation spots for next year.

I heard they were thinking of bumping the premier league up to a bigger number as well (ie some up from championship but none down) and then gradually lowering the teams (eg 4 or 5 down and then 3 up).

If we ever do get going then 25 in league two in for one year wouldn’t be terrible.
NorthLondonStag
Subs Bench
Subs Bench
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 9:46 pm

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby adamstag » Wed May 13, 2020 11:39 pm

Sandy Pate Best Stag wrote:
adamstag wrote:Well barrow apart to make up the numbers you can’t have promotion but not relegation or visa versa, would be madness.


Exactly but you can't promote Barrow without one promotion to league 1 or you would have 25 clubs in league 2 next year. So if no relegations no promotion from the national league either.


Of course you wouldn’t, 4 would go up as normal but only 3 would come down as bury were chucked out, so barrow in essence might not be “promoted” but invited to participate as the highest ranked side out of the EFL. Or however the hell they go about dressing it up
adamstag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 8277
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:20 am

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby Sandy Pate Best Stag » Thu May 14, 2020 9:43 am

adamstag wrote:
Sandy Pate Best Stag wrote:
adamstag wrote:Well barrow apart to make up the numbers you can’t have promotion but not relegation or visa versa, would be madness.


Exactly but you can't promote Barrow without one promotion to league 1 or you would have 25 clubs in league 2 next year. So if no relegations no promotion from the national league either.


Of course you wouldn’t, 4 would go up as normal but only 3 would come down as bury were chucked out, so barrow in essence might not be “promoted” but invited to participate as the highest ranked side out of the EFL. Or however the hell they go about dressing it up


I think you missed the bit where I said if there were no promotions or relegations as that would count for league 1 as well. So none up or down from the two leagues and promote Barrow equals 25 in league 2 and 23 in league 1. If you want to balance it out you are back with the problem of deciding how to fairly work out who goes up and down between the leagues.
Who are you calling pedantic? I resemble that remark!
Sandy Pate Best Stag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 3711
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 4:37 pm

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby gazza1988 » Thu May 14, 2020 10:37 am

When Chester left the conference their results were expunged and a relegation space was saved. Bury went before this season started and league one went with a reduced number and 1 less relegation spot.

Looks like clubs are saved from relegation before additional promotion spots are given.
post meanings:
I know what I'm doing
Just guessing
You're an idiot and I'm poking you with a stick
User avatar
gazza1988
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 6988
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:23 pm
Location: Beeston, Nottingham

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby adamstag » Thu May 14, 2020 10:50 am

Sandy Pate Best Stag wrote:
adamstag wrote:
Sandy Pate Best Stag wrote:
adamstag wrote:Well barrow apart to make up the numbers you can’t have promotion but not relegation or visa versa, would be madness.


Exactly but you can't promote Barrow without one promotion to league 1 or you would have 25 clubs in league 2 next year. So if no relegations no promotion from the national league either.


Of course you wouldn’t, 4 would go up as normal but only 3 would come down as bury were chucked out, so barrow in essence might not be “promoted” but invited to participate as the highest ranked side out of the EFL. Or however the hell they go about dressing it up


I think you missed the bit where I said if there were no promotions or relegations as that would count for league 1 as well. So none up or down from the two leagues and promote Barrow equals 25 in league 2 and 23 in league 1. If you want to balance it out you are back with the problem of deciding how to fairly work out who goes up and down between the leagues.


The EFL have already stated that promotion and relegation will happen and the leagues will be completed on PPG or some weird PPG weighted with home and away games.

As such league 1 will have 24 teams next season, barrow will come up in place or bury and Harrogate in place of Stevenage. That’s the gist we got from the latest update from the EFL.

As the FL will return to its compliment of 92 teams - the conference have already stated that only 3 would go down from their division due to the knock on effect of bury.

So there wouldnt be any leagues with 23/25 next season.
adamstag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 8277
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:20 am

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby NorthLondonStag » Thu May 14, 2020 11:56 am

adamstag wrote:
Sandy Pate Best Stag wrote:
adamstag wrote:
Sandy Pate Best Stag wrote:
adamstag wrote:Well barrow apart to make up the numbers you can’t have promotion but not relegation or visa versa, would be madness.


Exactly but you can't promote Barrow without one promotion to league 1 or you would have 25 clubs in league 2 next year. So if no relegations no promotion from the national league either.


Of course you wouldn’t, 4 would go up as normal but only 3 would come down as bury were chucked out, so barrow in essence might not be “promoted” but invited to participate as the highest ranked side out of the EFL. Or however the hell they go about dressing it up


I think you missed the bit where I said if there were no promotions or relegations as that would count for league 1 as well. So none up or down from the two leagues and promote Barrow equals 25 in league 2 and 23 in league 1. If you want to balance it out you are back with the problem of deciding how to fairly work out who goes up and down between the leagues.


The EFL have already stated that promotion and relegation will happen and the leagues will be completed on PPG or some weird PPG weighted with home and away games.

As such league 1 will have 24 teams next season, barrow will come up in place or bury and Harrogate in place of Stevenage. That’s the gist we got from the latest update from the EFL.

As the FL will return to its compliment of 92 teams - the conference have already stated that only 3 would go down from their division due to the knock on effect of bury.

So there wouldnt be any leagues with 23/25 next season.


Adam, if we ever get to go again I will bet you a cold lager at a suitable venue that won’t happen and we won’t end up with even leagues like you suggest.
NorthLondonStag
Subs Bench
Subs Bench
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 9:46 pm

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby Sandy Pate Best Stag » Thu May 14, 2020 12:25 pm

adamstag wrote:
Sandy Pate Best Stag wrote:
adamstag wrote:
Sandy Pate Best Stag wrote:
adamstag wrote:Well barrow apart to make up the numbers you can’t have promotion but not relegation or visa versa, would be madness.


Exactly but you can't promote Barrow without one promotion to league 1 or you would have 25 clubs in league 2 next year. So if no relegations no promotion from the national league either.


Of course you wouldn’t, 4 would go up as normal but only 3 would come down as bury were chucked out, so barrow in essence might not be “promoted” but invited to participate as the highest ranked side out of the EFL. Or however the hell they go about dressing it up


I think you missed the bit where I said if there were no promotions or relegations as that would count for league 1 as well. So none up or down from the two leagues and promote Barrow equals 25 in league 2 and 23 in league 1. If you want to balance it out you are back with the problem of deciding how to fairly work out who goes up and down between the leagues.


The EFL have already stated that promotion and relegation will happen and the leagues will be completed on PPG or some weird PPG weighted with home and away games.

As such league 1 will have 24 teams next season, barrow will come up in place or bury and Harrogate in place of Stevenage. That’s the gist we got from the latest update from the EFL.

As the FL will return to its compliment of 92 teams - the conference have already stated that only 3 would go down from their division due to the knock on effect of bury.

So there wouldnt be any leagues with 23/25 next season.


The EFL have also said that the season will be finished no matter what but that's not going to happen is it?, they have altered their stance on that so it doesn't follow that relegations/promotions will definitely follow either.

If the EFL think they can get agreement from all clubs over who goes up/down then they should go and negotiate a Middle East peace agreement. The only way to avoid mass litigation is to cancel the season and expunge the records so that everyone is in the same position and treated equally.
Who are you calling pedantic? I resemble that remark!
Sandy Pate Best Stag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 3711
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 4:37 pm

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby adamstag » Thu May 14, 2020 12:52 pm

North London stag it would be nice for us all to have a nice cold beer after this

the “plan” for when all this has settled down is to have 72 clubs in the football league, which will happen in the way mentioned above unless anything changes. I’d be very nervous if I followed the likes of Macclesfield and Oldham for instance.

Of course whether all clubs etc make it who knows, there will be a big change for all after this without a doubt possibly in ways none of us have even thought about.
adamstag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 8277
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:20 am

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby geoffhill » Sun May 17, 2020 1:48 pm

I personally would like both Notts County and Chesterfield to be in our league as they are all local derbies and make for exciting games to go and watch.Not forgetting that they are all good for revenue.Pretty sure if you asked The Radfords they would like them to play.
geoffhill
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 2242
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 2:21 pm

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby bellwhiff » Sun May 17, 2020 2:35 pm

geoffhill wrote:I personally would like both Notts County and Chesterfield to be in our league as they are all local derbies and make for exciting games to go and watch.Not forgetting that they are all good for revenue.Pretty sure if you asked The Radfords they would like them to play.


Only if they’re there on merit. If not, no. No loss
Every man thinks meanly of himself for not having been a soldier...

Samuel Johnson
User avatar
bellwhiff
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 15170
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 8:14 pm

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby adamstag » Mon May 18, 2020 11:18 am

geoffhill wrote:I personally would like both Notts County and Chesterfield to be in our league as they are all local derbies and make for exciting games to go and watch.Not forgetting that they are all good for revenue.Pretty sure if you asked The Radfords they would like them to play.


I bet their fans were wishing that as well :lol: :lol: :lol:

I think the vast vast majority of mansfield fans would want them both to have at least another few seasons before they came back up.

Last thing we’d want is the stick that it took us 5 years and how they both did it so fast!
adamstag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 8277
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:20 am

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby yellowstagsfan » Mon Jun 01, 2020 4:32 pm

Macclesfield charged again with failing to pay players !
User avatar
yellowstagsfan
First Team
First Team
 
Posts: 859
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2014 2:01 pm
Location: Just over border (Derbyshire)

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby I am Spartacus » Mon Jun 01, 2020 6:44 pm

Out of curiosity, did either side mount a challenge or attempt on goal in the penalty areas of the game at Moss Road this season to warrant a shout of ‘Penalty’?

If memories serves me right, it was a cold, wet, uninspired waste of a Saturday.
I am Spartacus
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 2144
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2015 5:56 am

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby victor A block » Mon Jun 01, 2020 9:59 pm

The game that changed the opinions of many fans that were still undecided about Dempster .
victor A block
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 1558
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 11:25 pm

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby Tippy Tappy Football » Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:14 pm

Macclesfield Town have been issued with further misconduct charges by the English Football League, relating to the payment of salaries due in March. The League Two club say they will be "appealing these charges vehemently".

Macclesfield have already been deducted 11 points this season as a result of previous charges, leaving them three points clear of bottom side Stevenage. League Two clubs have indicated they wish to end the regular season at its current point because of coronavirus. If Macclesfield are found guilty of the latest charges, they could be at risk of incurring another points deduction which may drop them to the bottom of League Two and leave them at risk of relegation to the National League.

On 8 June, clubs are set to vote on the EFL's recommended framework of how to conclude a season if teams decide to curtail the season early. The framework includes promotion and relegation between divisions.

Macclesfield have twice been deducted points during the 2019-20 campaign:

December 2019: A 10-point deduction, with four suspended, for non-payment of salaries and failing to fulfil a fixture against Crewe. In March, this was reduced to a seven-point penalty with three suspended after Macclesfield appealed.
May 2020: A seven-point deduction for failing to play a match against Plymouth and non-payment of wages, including the suspended three points from the first case being applied to the second punishment.
An EFL statement said: "Macclesfield Town has been issued with further misconduct charges for alleged breaches of EFL regulations and will be referred to an independent disciplinary commission.

"The club has been charged with failing to pay a number of players on the applicable payment dates due in March 2020, whilst also failing to act with utmost good faith in respect of matters with the EFL and for breaching an order, requirement, direction or instruction of the league."

Macclesfield said in a statement that they are "deeply surprised" by the charges. The club also pointed to part of the independent panel's findings from their most recent hearing, which stated: "The commission should make it clear that it does not consider MTFC's tardiness (yet again) to pay the players' remuneration for March on time necessarily requires a further charge. Given its reasoning and conclusions as above, it would require strong persuasion to impose a yet further points deduction for any such breach."

Last week, the Silkmen Supporters' Trust confirmed it had provided a loan of £10,000 to help towards the payment of players' wages for April.

BBC Radio Manchester reports that wages for May were paid in full and on time.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52880611
Tippy Tappy Football
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 7787
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 5:44 pm

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby adamstag » Tue Jun 02, 2020 6:03 pm

Looks like the EFL are trying to conveniently shaft them to not have the same issue they had with bury this term.

I agree that they, like all clubs should have to provide evidence on how they plan to fund the season and provide assurances they’ll be no problems - but it stinks a bit that the EFL seem to be trying to shovel them off for a fabricated reason.
adamstag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 8277
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:20 am

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby oldweststander » Tue Jun 02, 2020 7:14 pm

adamstag wrote:Looks like the EFL are trying to conveniently shaft them to not have the same issue they had with bury this term.

I agree that they, like all clubs should have to provide evidence on how they plan to fund the season and provide assurances they’ll be no problems - but it stinks a bit that the EFL seem to be trying to shovel them off for a fabricated reason.




What could be less "fabricated" than not paying your players?
oldweststander
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 3682
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2013 12:17 pm

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby eggy » Tue Jun 02, 2020 7:20 pm

oldweststander wrote:
adamstag wrote:Looks like the EFL are trying to conveniently shaft them to not have the same issue they had with bury this term.

I agree that they, like all clubs should have to provide evidence on how they plan to fund the season and provide assurances they’ll be no problems - but it stinks a bit that the EFL seem to be trying to shovel them off for a fabricated reason.




What could be less "fabricated" than not paying your players?


Was just about to say exactly the same thing myself. They've been behind on wages all season. There's plenty of time for arguments on what the percentage/cap on wages in the other thread, but not paying wages is the clearest example of living beyond your means.
User avatar
eggy
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 4191
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 3:17 pm

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby bobbystagsfan » Tue Jun 02, 2020 7:21 pm

oldweststander wrote:
adamstag wrote:Looks like the EFL are trying to conveniently shaft them to not have the same issue they had with bury this term.

I agree that they, like all clubs should have to provide evidence on how they plan to fund the season and provide assurances they’ll be no problems - but it stinks a bit that the EFL seem to be trying to shovel them off for a fabricated reason.




What could be less "fabricated" than not paying your players?



Their owner constantly didn't pay wages on time, and has not really made an attempt to sell the club either. I feel sorry for the playing staff and everyone else who works for the club, they're the ones who really suffer. And of course the fans.

The EFL will allow this to happen again and again, they couldn't be arsed helping Bury at all and it doesn't look like they want to help Macc either.
bobbystagsfan
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 6672
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 10:47 pm

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby cerfjaune » Tue Jun 02, 2020 8:53 pm

But they obviously want to help Stevenage.
But there again, they’re a southern club, aren’t they!
cerfjaune
Reserve Team
Reserve Team
 
Posts: 331
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 11:34 am

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby one f in mansfield » Tue Jun 02, 2020 10:24 pm

cerfjaune wrote:But they obviously want to help Stevenage.
But there again, they’re a southern club, aren’t they!



Like Luton ?
Don,t believe everything you read on the internet --William Gladstone 1872
User avatar
one f in mansfield
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 1786
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 1:51 pm

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby adamstag » Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:54 pm

eggy wrote:
oldweststander wrote:
adamstag wrote:Looks like the EFL are trying to conveniently shaft them to not have the same issue they had with bury this term.

I agree that they, like all clubs should have to provide evidence on how they plan to fund the season and provide assurances they’ll be no problems - but it stinks a bit that the EFL seem to be trying to shovel them off for a fabricated reason.




What could be less "fabricated" than not paying your players?


Was just about to say exactly the same thing myself. They've been behind on wages all season. There's plenty of time for arguments on what the percentage/cap on wages in the other thread, but not paying wages is the clearest example of living beyond your means.


Which is a fair point, but the latest punishment is for them not paying wages in full and on time in may, which they have. Both the club and the supporters trust have provided evidence of so and the supporters club provided a loan to help ensure it happened.

So in essence the EFL have currently charged them for not doing something they have.
adamstag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 8277
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:20 am

Re: Macclesfield Penalty

Postby oldweststander » Fri Jun 05, 2020 9:42 am

adamstag wrote:
eggy wrote:
oldweststander wrote:
adamstag wrote:Looks like the EFL are trying to conveniently shaft them to not have the same issue they had with bury this term.

I agree that they, like all clubs should have to provide evidence on how they plan to fund the season and provide assurances they’ll be no problems - but it stinks a bit that the EFL seem to be trying to shovel them off for a fabricated reason.




What could be less "fabricated" than not paying your players?


Was just about to say exactly the same thing myself. They've been behind on wages all season. There's plenty of time for arguments on what the percentage/cap on wages in the other thread, but not paying wages is the clearest example of living beyond your means.


Which is a fair point, but the latest punishment is for them not paying wages in full and on time in may, which they have. Both the club and the supporters trust have provided evidence of so and the supporters club provided a loan to help ensure it happened.

So in essence the EFL have currently charged them for not doing something they have.


If there is no case to answer there will be no penalty.
oldweststander
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 3682
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2013 12:17 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Stagsnet Main Discussion Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: acasman, M E, naanbread2, old ram stag, Son Of Sherwood and 22 guests