Buzzer
Languidly Clinical
- Oct 1, 2006
- 26,121
Ultimately, Archer was the owner and if he wanted to sell up and the club to go out of existence then he could legally do so as far as I'm aware. Even the changes to the constitution were legal under Company Law, it just contravened FL rules which have no legal bearing except on its members.
Legally, Archer and Bellotti did nothing wrong re the sale. I'm aware of a number of illegal things they did do but these were minor and related to the protests and protestors. For instance, Bellotti told the Gillingham stewards that it was illegal for Albion fans to have banners protesting. He said that Gillingham could get into trouble with the police. They also used all sorts of trivial and spurious reasons for banning people from the Goldstone.
I'd say that the FA and FL should have banned Bellotti and Archer. I think it's clear to any informed outsider - such as journalist Paul Hayward who fought desperately for our cause - that what Bellotti and Archer did was not in the interests of the club. They didn't - and only a few years ago the Football League were still accepting sponsorship money from Bill Archer's companies. Coincidence? You tell me.
Getting back to your first point, in my opinion - Yes. Bellotti was specifically brought in to oversee the sale of the Goldstone Ground. Everything else was irrelevant to those two, especially results on the pitch. I think the worst result that Bellotti could have imagined was us staying up against Hereford.
Legally, Archer and Bellotti did nothing wrong re the sale. I'm aware of a number of illegal things they did do but these were minor and related to the protests and protestors. For instance, Bellotti told the Gillingham stewards that it was illegal for Albion fans to have banners protesting. He said that Gillingham could get into trouble with the police. They also used all sorts of trivial and spurious reasons for banning people from the Goldstone.
I'd say that the FA and FL should have banned Bellotti and Archer. I think it's clear to any informed outsider - such as journalist Paul Hayward who fought desperately for our cause - that what Bellotti and Archer did was not in the interests of the club. They didn't - and only a few years ago the Football League were still accepting sponsorship money from Bill Archer's companies. Coincidence? You tell me.
Getting back to your first point, in my opinion - Yes. Bellotti was specifically brought in to oversee the sale of the Goldstone Ground. Everything else was irrelevant to those two, especially results on the pitch. I think the worst result that Bellotti could have imagined was us staying up against Hereford.