Vaughan’s Chester & The Authorities: Can You Guess Who Blinked First?

Ian

Ian began writing Twohundredpercent in May 2006. He lives in Brighton. He has also written for, amongst others, Pitch Invasion, FC Business Magazine, The Score, When Saturday Comes, Stand Against Modern Football and The Football Supporter. Ian was the first winner of the Socrates Award For Not Being Dead Yet at the 2010 NOPA awards for football bloggers.

You may also like...

17 Responses

  1. Simon Cope says:

    “The FA and Football Conference have, ultimately, made a decision which is spineless, a cop out and an insult to anybody that believes that football clubs should abide by rules that are in place in the greater interests of the game”

    I wholeheartedly agree.

  2. Paul Rhodes says:

    Below is the Conference Rule 2.7 which it is alleged they broke and were fined £5,000, and below that is the FA rule 3(g). I am not a legal council but how come the FA have not broken their own rules by approving the affliation of Chester City?

    BSP RULE 2.7

    “2.7 In the event that any Club which is an unincorporated association resolves to transfer its membership of the Competition to a company or in the event that a Club which is a company resolves to transfer its membership to a different company the Board will use the following minimum criteria in deciding whether to approve that transfer:

    2.7.1 The shareholders or members of the Club have voted to agree the transfer of the Club’s membership to the new entity

    2.7.2 All Football Creditors in the Club must be satisfied in full or transferred (with the creditors’ consent) to the new entity, and evidenced as such.

    2.7.3 All other creditors in the Club must be satisfied and evidenced as such.

    2.7.4 The proposed new entity has provided financial forecasts showing its ability to fund the Club for the next 12 months or to the end of the Playing Season following transfer (whichever is the longer) and that evidence of funding sources has been provided.

    2.7.5 The FA has given approval for the transfer to take place.”

    FA RULE 3 (g) AFFLIATION OF CLUBS – Transfer of Membership

    Council will use the following criteria, and any other conditions in Council’s absolute discretion, in deciding whether to approve the transfer of membership by a Full Member Club or an Associate Member Club:

    (i) the shareholders or members of the existing Full Member Club or Associate Member Club have voted to agree the transfer of the membership to the proposed future member;
    (ii) all Football Creditors of the existing Full Member Club or Associate Member Club must be fully satisfied;
    (iii) all other creditors of the existing Full Member Club or Associate Member Club must be satisfied and evidenced as such;
    (iv) the proposed future Full Member Club or Associate Member Club must provide financial forecasts showing their ability to fund the Full Member Club or Associate Member Club for the next 12 months or to the end of the season following (whichever is longer); and
    (v) evidence of funding sources will be required.

  3. Martin says:

    I suspect the FA and Conference are rather hoping HMRC and the fraud squad will do their job for them.

    You can’t really blame them TBH.

  4. alun says:

    After reading all the articles I am amazed and shocked that the FA and Conference have re-instated Chester.The owner is a Crook and should be dealt accordingly.

  5. Colin says:

    An utterly ridiculous situation, first they give in to Bates at Leeds and now Vaughan at Chester. The FA and the Conference are unfit to run Football.

  6. James Loxten says:

    There’s not a single one of you that wouldn’t have jumped at the chance of keeping your club playing football and in effect in existence. You speak from a cold, disspassionate point of view because it’s not your club.

    You may well be right about SV and clearly he needs replacing within Chester but don’t punish the fans on the terrace who turn up in rain and shine regardless of what league we’re in.

  7. James Humes says:

    The only way it seems Vaughan will leave the husk of our once proud little club is feet first in a wooden box.

    RIP Chester City.

  8. Mick Chagnet says:

    Firstly, brilliant work and bless you for having the courage and energies to report this properly and fairly.

    And there in lies the problem. No one is really prepared to tackle Vaughan. The Police and HMRC lost out when Vaughan was charged but found not guilty of carousel fraud / VAT fraud.

  9. ejh says:

    I think James Loxten is essentially right in his first paragraph. My problem is that I don’t see how the second is to be achieved without letting off the crooks and shysters.

  10. Martin says:

    James, what did you do when the other forty-or-so clubs went into administration, bust or got franchised over the last decade?

  11. Ralph says:

    Chester City 2 Cambridge United 4 (1757).

    Mmm, one would assume there would be more than that at Chester’s first game of the season, perhaps there were a few Chester supporters staying away in protest at what Vaughan has done.

    I hope so, and can’t say I would blame then.

    Ralph
    Kiwiland and Barrow supporter

  12. dan James says:

    This is an absolute disgrace, not a lot more can be said really. To the fans who think this is good, think about the other teams that have already gone, or teams that could have gone, because to a far lesser extent those in charge wouldn’t give a small bit of leway to teams who needed it. Nobody wants to see small clubs go but rules are meant to be rules. Chester don’t deserve a reprieve, the same as many teams already gone didn’t. Where is the justice?

  1. August 14, 2009

    [...] Hundred Percent has a typically quality piece on Chester City’s travails under the disreputable ownership of Steven Vaughan. “So, Steven Vaughan wins and the game of [...]

  2. August 14, 2009

    [...] Re: Chester City Football Club (multi-merge goodness II) A very interesting article about Chester, the Conference and the F.A. after the agreement to allow Chester to carry on playing this year. Vaughan’s Chester & The Authorities: Can You Guess Who Blinked First? | Twohundredpercent [...]

  3. August 18, 2009

    [...] offers a thorough review of how their regulations have been ‘applied’ (2). Perversely, one outcome has been the FA ruling that Conference regulations need to be reviewed [...]

  4. November 28, 2009

    [...] Those Running Chester City Football Club, For The Sixteenth Time This Season… Chester City, Vaughan’s Chester & The Football Authorities – Can You Guess Who Blinked First?, Minus Twenty-Five For Chester, Chester City – The Tax Man Strikes Back, Chester’s [...]

  5. February 9, 2010

    [...] club is surely the only way forward for the supporters of Chester City” or that they would be unlikely to survive the season in the Blue Square Premier this season. We know that they knew that they were making the wrong [...]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>