Watford and Laurence Bassini's wait for a decision on the Football League's misconduct charge continues
8:20am Tuesday 5th March 2013 in Latest Sport
By Frank Smith, Deputy Group Sports Editor
Picture: Watford FC/Alan Cozzi
Watford were hoping to discover the outcome of their misconduct charge by the end of last week but their wait for the Football League's decision continues.
The Hornets and their former owner Laurence Bassini were charged by the Football League last year and the private hearing began on January 28.
The panel finished hearing evidence from the relevant parties at the end of January, however, a decision has yet to be announced.
Last Monday (25th), Watford's chief executive Scott Duxbury said he was hopeful of hearing the outcome by Friday (1st) but club officials and fans are still none the wiser.
The Football League declined to comment once again last week after being asked when a decision would be made and also refused to comment on whether the announcement would be made public.
Watford and Bassini were charged following alleged breaches of the Football League's regulations relating to two separate transactions between the Hornets and LNOC, a finance company.
One of the allegations relates to two installments following Danny Graham's sale to Swansea City and the other transaction is for two promissory notes worth £1.8m.
In November, solicitors acting for Bassini said the charge would be "defended vigorously" and Watford chief executive Scott Duxbury was "extremely confident of a successful outcome" and does not expect a points deduction.
Click here to read about the misconduct charge in more detail.
Comments(48)
Reginald Dwight
says...
8:46am Tue 5 Mar 13
Does anyone know what Bassini is up to now? Rumours were he'd left the country. Let's hope that isn't true and he is made to face the music. He won't care a jot if WFC are punished but let's hope all those idiots who lent him money are keeping a keen eye on his whereabouts and those of his lawyer Angelo Barrea. Surely someone has applied to get his legal status removed so he can't support Bassini and his alleged illegal activities again
luther67
says...
8:52am Tue 5 Mar 13
Have a bad feeling about this. And the longer the delay the more I feel all this moaning about our loans being unfair may influence the punishment.
corbindallas
says...
8:58am Tue 5 Mar 13
luther67 wrote:They can't take that into account it is not illegal and following their rules! Agree that we have been found guilty and probably right they are stalling on what fine to give, delaying may mean less chance of points deduction, but maybe if they see promotion the fine will be more??? Either way I wish they would hurry up, it is not good having this grinding on for anyone.
Surely they need to administer the punishment - if there is to be one - before they know where we will finish. Otherwise any points deduction will surely be influenced by where it leaves us in the table.
Have a bad feeling about this. And the longer the delay the more I feel all this moaning about our loans being unfair may influence the punishment.
WessexLad
says...
9:09am Tue 5 Mar 13
corbindallas wrote:The delay is inexcusable without a full explanation.
luther67 wrote:They can't take that into account it is not illegal and following their rules! Agree that we have been found guilty and probably right they are stalling on what fine to give, delaying may mean less chance of points deduction, but maybe if they see promotion the fine will be more??? Either way I wish they would hurry up, it is not good having this grinding on for anyone.
Surely they need to administer the punishment - if there is to be one - before they know where we will finish. Otherwise any points deduction will surely be influenced by where it leaves us in the table.
Have a bad feeling about this. And the longer the delay the more I feel all this moaning about our loans being unfair may influence the punishment.
Unfortunately, corbindallas, the FA can take what it likes into consideration. It may not, but it can, ie is able to.
Is it possible to charge the FA with bringing football into disrepute?
hornet88
says...
9:57am Tue 5 Mar 13
Back from Hammerau
says...
10:06am Tue 5 Mar 13
WessexLad wrote:Why mention the FA, when this is a Football League decision?
corbindallas wrote:The delay is inexcusable without a full explanation. Unfortunately, corbindallas, the FA can take what it likes into consideration. It may not, but it can, ie is able to. Is it possible to charge the FA with bringing football into disrepute?luther67 wrote: Surely they need to administer the punishment - if there is to be one - before they know where we will finish. Otherwise any points deduction will surely be influenced by where it leaves us in the table. Have a bad feeling about this. And the longer the delay the more I feel all this moaning about our loans being unfair may influence the punishment.They can't take that into account it is not illegal and following their rules! Agree that we have been found guilty and probably right they are stalling on what fine to give, delaying may mean less chance of points deduction, but maybe if they see promotion the fine will be more??? Either way I wish they would hurry up, it is not good having this grinding on for anyone.
Harry's Bar
says...
10:12am Tue 5 Mar 13
Reginald Dwight wrote:If I was Bassini I would have left the country, they say the Spanish Costas are a nice spot at this time of year.
Absolutely fed up of seeing that disgusting mans face. Have a bad feeling about the outcome on this. Surely if the verdict was 'not guilty' then it would have been announced but the delay must be down to the fact they have found the leech and the club guilty and are undecided on how to apply punishment. Does anyone know what Bassini is up to now? Rumours were he'd left the country. Let's hope that isn't true and he is made to face the music. He won't care a jot if WFC are punished but let's hope all those idiots who lent him money are keeping a keen eye on his whereabouts and those of his lawyer Angelo Barrea. Surely someone has applied to get his legal status removed so he can't support Bassini and his alleged illegal activities again
Unfortunately there will always be a bent brief willing to act on behalf of the Bassini's of this world.
jasonwatford
says...
10:39am Tue 5 Mar 13
Eastsussexhornet
says...
11:15am Tue 5 Mar 13
The "crime" though doesn't seem too serious. What WFC did was legal as long as FL permission had been sought and given - which it wasn't. To me at least, this doesn't warrant a points deduction but it does warrant a fine.
Then there is the moral issue if that is within their power to consider. Two points to this. Firstly, it all took place a long time ago. Surely, any punishment should have been handed out then, not now. A points deduction then wouldn't have affected us more than a points deduction should have done - merely having 10 points less at the end of the season that we would have done. Now, WFC could suffer disproportionately.
The other "moral" point is that the new owners may have not fully understood the status of this when they took over the club and even id they did, they have conducted themselves in an exempluary fashion in all their dealings. It is also clear to WFC and the FL that one man made this decision for his own benefit, not the club's and no one else was involved including anyone else who is still involved in the club.
I just hope that just discretion can be applied here.
WessexLad
says...
11:20am Tue 5 Mar 13
Back from Hammerau wrote:Whoops...but you've answered my question: the FA can charge the Football League!
WessexLad wrote:Why mention the FA, when this is a Football League decision?corbindallas wrote:The delay is inexcusable without a full explanation. Unfortunately, corbindallas, the FA can take what it likes into consideration. It may not, but it can, ie is able to. Is it possible to charge the FA with bringing football into disrepute?luther67 wrote: Surely they need to administer the punishment - if there is to be one - before they know where we will finish. Otherwise any points deduction will surely be influenced by where it leaves us in the table. Have a bad feeling about this. And the longer the delay the more I feel all this moaning about our loans being unfair may influence the punishment.They can't take that into account it is not illegal and following their rules! Agree that we have been found guilty and probably right they are stalling on what fine to give, delaying may mean less chance of points deduction, but maybe if they see promotion the fine will be more??? Either way I wish they would hurry up, it is not good having this grinding on for anyone.
Boosey
says...
11:23am Tue 5 Mar 13
The BestTrip2011
says...
11:26am Tue 5 Mar 13
Eastsussexhornet wrote:Spot on EastSussex and well articulated. I do think it is ludicrous that it has taken so long to determine an outcome. A financial penalty for the club would seem likely, however a points deduction at this stage, so long after the 'event' would be unwarranted.
We, the corporate entity, are definitely guilty. I think that's taken as read. The question is how guilty and therefore what should the punishment be. It seems unfair on the present owners but, as I say, it is the company, not them that has to take the rap. They just happen to own it.
The "crime" though doesn't seem too serious. What WFC did was legal as long as FL permission had been sought and given - which it wasn't. To me at least, this doesn't warrant a points deduction but it does warrant a fine.
Then there is the moral issue if that is within their power to consider. Two points to this. Firstly, it all took place a long time ago. Surely, any punishment should have been handed out then, not now. A points deduction then wouldn't have affected us more than a points deduction should have done - merely having 10 points less at the end of the season that we would have done. Now, WFC could suffer disproportionately.
The other "moral" point is that the new owners may have not fully understood the status of this when they took over the club and even id they did, they have conducted themselves in an exempluary fashion in all their dealings. It is also clear to WFC and the FL that one man made this decision for his own benefit, not the club's and no one else was involved including anyone else who is still involved in the club.
I just hope that just discretion can be applied here.
Eastsussexhornet
says...
11:38am Tue 5 Mar 13
The BestTrip2011 wrote:Yes, I think they have to take into consideration when it would have been reasonable for the facts to have been heard and a judgment made. Some guilt may therefore be attributable to the FL themselves.
Eastsussexhornet wrote:Spot on EastSussex and well articulated. I do think it is ludicrous that it has taken so long to determine an outcome. A financial penalty for the club would seem likely, however a points deduction at this stage, so long after the 'event' would be unwarranted.
We, the corporate entity, are definitely guilty. I think that's taken as read. The question is how guilty and therefore what should the punishment be. It seems unfair on the present owners but, as I say, it is the company, not them that has to take the rap. They just happen to own it.
The "crime" though doesn't seem too serious. What WFC did was legal as long as FL permission had been sought and given - which it wasn't. To me at least, this doesn't warrant a points deduction but it does warrant a fine.
Then there is the moral issue if that is within their power to consider. Two points to this. Firstly, it all took place a long time ago. Surely, any punishment should have been handed out then, not now. A points deduction then wouldn't have affected us more than a points deduction should have done - merely having 10 points less at the end of the season that we would have done. Now, WFC could suffer disproportionately.
The other "moral" point is that the new owners may have not fully understood the status of this when they took over the club and even id they did, they have conducted themselves in an exempluary fashion in all their dealings. It is also clear to WFC and the FL that one man made this decision for his own benefit, not the club's and no one else was involved including anyone else who is still involved in the club.
I just hope that just discretion can be applied here.
There may even be another aspect to this albeit slightly hopeful on my part. From a PR perspective, I wonder how the FL would be viewed if they levied a points deduction. They know that WFC would appeal a points deduction which would then put into the bigger news arena.
A downside to this is that realising that a points deduction may be a difficult political move, the FL may levy a higher than normal fine...
watford1881
says...
12:00pm Tue 5 Mar 13
gloryhornet4
says...
12:17pm Tue 5 Mar 13
corbindallas wrote:Spurs had 12 points deducted changed to 6 on appeal and then no points, as Blaady Lord Sugar had lawyers and cash to make a fuss. Swindon were denied their play-off promotion around the same time for their sins.
Is this a ploy to see if we finish up in automatic promotion place or not? Seems very strange that the verdict has been delayed again, does not bode well to have these things hanging around, just fine us and go away!
Hoping we get pet treatment like Spurs West Ham & QPR.
Poppet Bear
says...
12:19pm Tue 5 Mar 13
johnhornet
says...
12:23pm Tue 5 Mar 13
As they may not even make it public surely they can't be thinking about a points deduction....
Stoney77
says...
12:23pm Tue 5 Mar 13
Hampshire hornet
says...
12:38pm Tue 5 Mar 13
3 points t
Hampshire hornet
says...
12:38pm Tue 5 Mar 13
Boosey
says...
12:41pm Tue 5 Mar 13
johnhornet wrote:My train of thought as well.
.....and also refused to comment on whether the announcement would be made public..... As they may not even make it public surely they can't be thinking about a points deduction....
Boosey
says...
12:42pm Tue 5 Mar 13
Poppet Bear wrote:Just a play on words, chill!
I don't think any punishment of WFC is "fine". The only person guilty is LB himself. If he has been fiddling the books and that is illegal, then take him to court. If not leave us alone. Any retrospective action (points or fine) against the club, affects the fans and that is not correct in any way shape or form. Withholding the verdict just shows what a gutless bunch they are.
It will be fine.
londomollari
says...
12:45pm Tue 5 Mar 13
Eastsussexhornet wrote:Well put! Pretty much covers my feelings on this. One other point to ,make: Remember that Bas is being charged as an individual, which, I believe, is unique in this type of FL case. As such, I would imagine that any verdict and penalty will be heavily scrutinised by the FL legal department. They will not want this part of the case rebounding on them due to dodgy legality. It must be, quite obviously, legal scrutiny that is taking the time. The longer this drags on, the more worried I become. However, gloomy forcasts of up to thirty points have to be over pessimistic. Remember, ten points for administration---sur
We, the corporate entity, are definitely guilty. I think that's taken as read. The question is how guilty and therefore what should the punishment be. It seems unfair on the present owners but, as I say, it is the company, not them that has to take the rap. They just happen to own it.
The "crime" though doesn't seem too serious. What WFC did was legal as long as FL permission had been sought and given - which it wasn't. To me at least, this doesn't warrant a points deduction but it does warrant a fine.
Then there is the moral issue if that is within their power to consider. Two points to this. Firstly, it all took place a long time ago. Surely, any punishment should have been handed out then, not now. A points deduction then wouldn't have affected us more than a points deduction should have done - merely having 10 points less at the end of the season that we would have done. Now, WFC could suffer disproportionately.
The other "moral" point is that the new owners may have not fully understood the status of this when they took over the club and even id they did, they have conducted themselves in an exempluary fashion in all their dealings. It is also clear to WFC and the FL that one man made this decision for his own benefit, not the club's and no one else was involved including anyone else who is still involved in the club.
I just hope that just discretion can be applied here.
ely we won't be rated as badly as that! Looking at the Spurs cased---five or six points, maybe?
Harry's Bar
says...
12:58pm Tue 5 Mar 13
Poppet Bear wrote:Unfortunately the FL don't see it like that. We can't separate ourselves from Bassini's dealings, as unfair as that seems.
I don't think any punishment of WFC is "fine". The only person guilty is LB himself. If he has been fiddling the books and that is illegal, then take him to court. If not leave us alone. Any retrospective action (points or fine) against the club, affects the fans and that is not correct in any way shape or form. Withholding the verdict just shows what a gutless bunch they are.
The FL will have no conscience about the punishment, their own sense of importance, fuelled by feelings of power and control is all that interests them. Delaying the verdict only heightens those senses.
londomollari
says...
1:04pm Tue 5 Mar 13
Harry's Bar wrote:Yup, that pretty much has it nailed. As far as the FL are concerned, The owner of the club IS the club, and any misdeeds of the owner are misdeeds of the club. The one light in this tunnel is the seperate charging of Bas, which does indicate that someone at the FL realises that the guy is a shyster.
Poppet Bear wrote:Unfortunately the FL don't see it like that. We can't separate ourselves from Bassini's dealings, as unfair as that seems.
I don't think any punishment of WFC is "fine". The only person guilty is LB himself. If he has been fiddling the books and that is illegal, then take him to court. If not leave us alone. Any retrospective action (points or fine) against the club, affects the fans and that is not correct in any way shape or form. Withholding the verdict just shows what a gutless bunch they are.
The FL will have no conscience about the punishment, their own sense of importance, fuelled by feelings of power and control is all that interests them. Delaying the verdict only heightens those senses.
Eastsussexhornet
says...
1:12pm Tue 5 Mar 13
Harry's Bar wrote:Dealing with this and londomollari's comments above, I think the fact that they pursuing LB directly is telling and may be relevant. They clearly see this as the actions of one man acting in his own right, in his own interest and outside of the corporate body. That can only help our case.
Poppet Bear wrote:Unfortunately the FL don't see it like that. We can't separate ourselves from Bassini's dealings, as unfair as that seems.
I don't think any punishment of WFC is "fine". The only person guilty is LB himself. If he has been fiddling the books and that is illegal, then take him to court. If not leave us alone. Any retrospective action (points or fine) against the club, affects the fans and that is not correct in any way shape or form. Withholding the verdict just shows what a gutless bunch they are.
The FL will have no conscience about the punishment, their own sense of importance, fuelled by feelings of power and control is all that interests them. Delaying the verdict only heightens those senses.
The longer it drags on I am more, not less, hopeful that a points deduction will not be made.
The suggestions of a 30 point deduction are of course ridiculous.
As for your comments HB, although I share your keeness to inject some realism, I think you are being over pessimistic. I just hope you're wrong! Yes, as I say, it is the corporate entity that is in the firing line but this is not a clear case and the FL are not blameless. WFC would definitely appeal. They know that. Do they really want to make an issue of this to that extent?
mooneysmagic
says...
1:34pm Tue 5 Mar 13
lutondown
says...
1:35pm Tue 5 Mar 13
WessexLad wrote:Football league not FA and QPR were made to wait to end of season.
corbindallas wrote:The delay is inexcusable without a full explanation.
luther67 wrote:They can't take that into account it is not illegal and following their rules! Agree that we have been found guilty and probably right they are stalling on what fine to give, delaying may mean less chance of points deduction, but maybe if they see promotion the fine will be more??? Either way I wish they would hurry up, it is not good having this grinding on for anyone.
Surely they need to administer the punishment - if there is to be one - before they know where we will finish. Otherwise any points deduction will surely be influenced by where it leaves us in the table.
Have a bad feeling about this. And the longer the delay the more I feel all this moaning about our loans being unfair may influence the punishment.
Unfortunately, corbindallas, the FA can take what it likes into consideration. It may not, but it can, ie is able to.
Is it possible to charge the FA with bringing football into disrepute?
They have made their decision, it's just them being the old **** they are
lutondown
says...
1:35pm Tue 5 Mar 13
WessexLad wrote:Football league not FA and QPR were made to wait to end of season.
corbindallas wrote:The delay is inexcusable without a full explanation.
luther67 wrote:They can't take that into account it is not illegal and following their rules! Agree that we have been found guilty and probably right they are stalling on what fine to give, delaying may mean less chance of points deduction, but maybe if they see promotion the fine will be more??? Either way I wish they would hurry up, it is not good having this grinding on for anyone.
Surely they need to administer the punishment - if there is to be one - before they know where we will finish. Otherwise any points deduction will surely be influenced by where it leaves us in the table.
Have a bad feeling about this. And the longer the delay the more I feel all this moaning about our loans being unfair may influence the punishment.
Unfortunately, corbindallas, the FA can take what it likes into consideration. It may not, but it can, ie is able to.
Is it possible to charge the FA with bringing football into disrepute?
They have made their decision, it's just them being the old **** they are
Harry's Bar
says...
1:41pm Tue 5 Mar 13
On a slightly different note. I did a google search on Panos Thomas, or "Doc Pantyhose" as LD referred to him. At a glance do the photos that appear bear a slight resemblance to anyone else?
Loyal Supporter
says...
1:45pm Tue 5 Mar 13
http://www.academia.
edu/172825/Points_de
duction_as_a_sanctio
n_against_English_fo
otball_clubs_a_dysfu
nctional_approach
which includes a list of all the recent points deductions applied by club, division and reason. You need to scroll through it a bit to find it, but worth a look. Note that it doesn't cover the last couple of seasons...but interestingly only one 10 point deduction for "Financial Irregularities" for guess who?!
lutondown
says...
1:46pm Tue 5 Mar 13
Harry's Bar wrote:Think he eloped with ilovbas, somewhere around Pompey area.
Well yes, there may be an element of self preservation at work here.
On a slightly different note. I did a google search on Panos Thomas, or "Doc Pantyhose" as LD referred to him. At a glance do the photos that appear bear a slight resemblance to anyone else?
lutondown
says...
1:50pm Tue 5 Mar 13
Last note, we didn't expect promotion so if we do it's a bonus, their max pts deduction won't put us down, so worse comes to worse, we have another season in the champs. Though I want us to go up, it won't be the end of the world.
They can't stop our juggernaut, they can only slow it down a tad.
Harry's Bar
says...
1:56pm Tue 5 Mar 13
lutondown wrote:LD, who is ilovbas? I am guessing it was the name of a "poster" around the time of the Bas stewardship.
Harry's Bar wrote: Well yes, there may be an element of self preservation at work here. On a slightly different note. I did a google search on Panos Thomas, or "Doc Pantyhose" as LD referred to him. At a glance do the photos that appear bear a slight resemblance to anyone else?Think he eloped with ilovbas, somewhere around Pompey area.
Back from Hammerau
says...
2:54pm Tue 5 Mar 13
Boosey wrote:I imagine that a fine would have to be recorded in the club's accounts when they're published.
johnhornet wrote: .....and also refused to comment on whether the announcement would be made public..... As they may not even make it public surely they can't be thinking about a points deduction....My train of thought as well.
A suspended punishment wouldn't have to be made public.
Any punishment imposed upon LB, rather than upon the club, wouldn't have to be made public.
lutondown
says...
3:00pm Tue 5 Mar 13
Harry's Bar wrote:You missed a treat! Bible thumping nut job madly in love with Bas.
lutondown wrote:LD, who is ilovbas? I am guessing it was the name of a "poster" around the time of the Bas stewardship.
Harry's Bar wrote: Well yes, there may be an element of self preservation at work here. On a slightly different note. I did a google search on Panos Thomas, or "Doc Pantyhose" as LD referred to him. At a glance do the photos that appear bear a slight resemblance to anyone else?Think he eloped with ilovbas, somewhere around Pompey area.
Also a great fan of Panos hence my pantyhose aside.
Do miss him though his rants at me only matched by my old mate Vialli!
It's so dull these days, what with ESHs pontifications and sly accusations, they said it as it was...total respect to my nut job foes! Lol
Tonight's a biggy, my hearts already a racing..lots of John smiths to settle the nerves!
Hampshire hornet
says...
3:20pm Tue 5 Mar 13
JohnnyHornet
says...
3:27pm Tue 5 Mar 13
Loyal Supporter wrote:I think this is more a case of an admin error in failing to gain FL permission at best, or worse case scenario deceit, more than financial irregularities, so in worst case scenario's 10 point or less deduction, I think a few thousand pound fine probably likely.
Very interesting article here:
http://www.academia.
edu/172825/Points_de
duction_as_a_sanctio
n_against_English_fo
otball_clubs_a_dysfu
nctional_approach
which includes a list of all the recent points deductions applied by club, division and reason. You need to scroll through it a bit to find it, but worth a look. Note that it doesn't cover the last couple of seasons...but interestingly only one 10 point deduction for "Financial Irregularities" for guess who?!
Bringe
says...
4:14pm Tue 5 Mar 13
The loans themselves seem to be nothing more than a cash advancement secured on goods already provided so I would inclined to question the validity of the F.L. charges themselves. With no risk to any party this is a million miles away from that particular rule's designated purpose.
Bringe
says...
4:25pm Tue 5 Mar 13
Guy Bov
says...
5:05pm Tue 5 Mar 13
tommy gunn
says...
6:01pm Tue 5 Mar 13
Bringe
says...
6:19pm Tue 5 Mar 13
tommy gunn wrote:If there were you would like to think that they would remove themselves from the process ... any gentleman would but then again I suppose this is football, not cricket and the prize at stake is huge.
Does anyone know who actually sits on the disciplinary hearings,reps. from Palace or Hull ? now that would be bad news wouldn't it.
Back from Hammerau
says...
10:24am Wed 6 Mar 13
tommy gunn wrote:It would be very good news.
Does anyone know who actually sits on the disciplinary hearings,reps. from Palace or Hull ? now that would be bad news wouldn't it.
It would provide strong grounds for an appeal.
G_Whiz
says...
1:21pm Wed 6 Mar 13
Any action by them now would surely allow the Pozzo's to take the League to the cleaners!.... Wouldn't it? - any lawyers in the house?
Back from Hammerau
says...
3:13pm Wed 6 Mar 13
G_Whiz wrote:No. The FL said that the Pozzos were fit and proper owners of a club.
The Football League gave the Pozzo family the all clear to buy the club after these worries were brought up early on. Any action by them now would surely allow the Pozzo's to take the League to the cleaners!.... Wouldn't it? - any lawyers in the house?
This case is about misconduct by the club under a previous owner.
lutondown
says...
4:49pm Wed 6 Mar 13
Back from Hammerau wrote:Sorry, there is no appeal, the decision made is final. That sadly is fact
tommy gunn wrote:It would be very good news.
Does anyone know who actually sits on the disciplinary hearings,reps. from Palace or Hull ? now that would be bad news wouldn't it.
It would provide strong grounds for an appeal.


corbindallas says...
8:34am Tue 5 Mar 13