Home
An independent disciplinary commission will meet today to decide whether Wanderers face extra punishment for failing to fulfil fixtures against Brentford and Doncaster Rovers.
A judgement is expected to be made public by Friday – meaning Keith Hill’s side will finally know what they are up against in their fight to stay in League One.
The panel was supposed to meet last Thursday but a clash with an EFL board meeting left officials with no choice but to reschedule.
Wanderers are faced with misconduct charges after a player strike forced the cancellation of a Championship fixture against Brentford in April, which was eventually awarded to their opponents by a 1-0 scoreline.
Attempts to play the game at a later date were cancelled after a prohibition notice was placed on the University of Bolton Stadium by the Safety Advisory Group.
At that stage, club sources expected a three-point penalty would be imposed on top of the 12 points which were deducted at the start of this season for going into administration.
The matter has since been complicated after a home game against Doncaster, originally scheduled for August 20, was postponed at late notice after Wanderers cited “welfare concerns” over young players in their squad.
The EFL had given their blessing for Bolton to start to the season while still in administration – the first time such a decision had ever been made under the current set of rules – but complications in the takeover process left the club unable to sign senior players and forced to field some of the youngest line-ups in their history.
Citing the Premier League handbook rules, which govern academy games, players on scholarship contracts are advised not to play more than one game in a week.
Wanderers claimed they made the decision based on consultation with their medical team and then-manager Phil Parkinson is thought to have raised potential problems in conversations with the EFL prior to the Doncaster game.
The EFL said at the time it “would have expected the Club (Bolton) to have first interfaced with the EFL, giving it an opportunity to consider the application to postpone, and consulted with the club’s opposition, Doncaster Rovers before making a public announcement.”
Source
A judgement is expected to be made public by Friday – meaning Keith Hill’s side will finally know what they are up against in their fight to stay in League One.
The panel was supposed to meet last Thursday but a clash with an EFL board meeting left officials with no choice but to reschedule.
Wanderers are faced with misconduct charges after a player strike forced the cancellation of a Championship fixture against Brentford in April, which was eventually awarded to their opponents by a 1-0 scoreline.
Attempts to play the game at a later date were cancelled after a prohibition notice was placed on the University of Bolton Stadium by the Safety Advisory Group.
At that stage, club sources expected a three-point penalty would be imposed on top of the 12 points which were deducted at the start of this season for going into administration.
The matter has since been complicated after a home game against Doncaster, originally scheduled for August 20, was postponed at late notice after Wanderers cited “welfare concerns” over young players in their squad.
The EFL had given their blessing for Bolton to start to the season while still in administration – the first time such a decision had ever been made under the current set of rules – but complications in the takeover process left the club unable to sign senior players and forced to field some of the youngest line-ups in their history.
Citing the Premier League handbook rules, which govern academy games, players on scholarship contracts are advised not to play more than one game in a week.
Wanderers claimed they made the decision based on consultation with their medical team and then-manager Phil Parkinson is thought to have raised potential problems in conversations with the EFL prior to the Doncaster game.
The EFL said at the time it “would have expected the Club (Bolton) to have first interfaced with the EFL, giving it an opportunity to consider the application to postpone, and consulted with the club’s opposition, Doncaster Rovers before making a public announcement.”
Source