... as Bury are thrown out of the league
Nice to see the fit and proper person tests doing their job
How so? Bury were issued a 2 week expulsion notice about three weeks ago, failed to get a takeover agreed despite an extension to that notice and were expelled from the league. Bolton were issued the expulsion notice on Tuesday, got their takeover confirmed on Wednesday, so there's no need to continue with the process. I don't see any difference in how they were treated by the league, one met the requirements to stop the expulsion process, one didn't.
Both were given a deadline before the season to prove their financial viability. Bolton did so, based on having a takeover in progress. Bury were still looking for a buyer and didn't provide the necessary evidence. Bolton's situation seemed to have changed this week when it looked like they were going to be liquidated. It's probably a moot point whether the league would have suspended their fixtures until the notice period ended had they ceased to exist - there wouldn't be a club to play them anyway.mrblackbat wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 9:59 amHowever, Bolton have not been prevented from playing matches; I've not spent much time looking into why and how Bury's matches were postponed and the circumstances that meant Bolton's were not.
But that in and of itself would vastly impact the likelihood of being able to demonstrate financial viability. It's difficult to do so when you're not allowed to peddle your product (i.e. play games and sell match tickets).