See Birmingham and Coventry have been hit with transfer embargo's due to not filing last years accounts.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17232625
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17232219
Does this mean we have and if so why hasn't anything been announced? Plus notice Birmingham have signed a number of players recently just to get round this "anticipated" move. Shouldn't the league have looked at this sooner?
Accounts
posted on 2/3/12
Shouldn't have been allowed to get those players just before transfer embargo
posted on 2/3/12
If we'd have transgressed i'm sure we'd have been front page news and would've had the obligatory -15 points issued to us .....
posted on 2/3/12
Thought we had been hit by a transfer embargo for the last few years
posted on 2/3/12
What with all the loanees we've had can't have had an embargo
posted on 2/3/12
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 2/3/12
All companies don't post their accounts on the same date as each companies financial year ends to suit them. As long as accounts are posted by the deadline date theres no problem. Last year our accounts were not visible on-line, so many assumed they hadn't been posted in time. They had, but as many companies leave it to the last day, it can take up to 8-weeks to have them verified, and once verified are visible on-line. In other words if were were late we'd be hit with an embargo, but are ok
posted on 2/3/12
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 2/3/12
Self-imposed transfer embargo at Leeds United, no need for FL to impose one.
posted on 2/3/12
no wonder brum rushed into 3 or 4 loans last week,they knew this was coming but should not of been allowed.
posted on 2/3/12
just goes to show what a good job our ken is doing. ken bates for a knighthood.