Sheffield Wednesday have today begun their legal fight with the EFL, with the outcome of their hearing set to have a huge impact on the Championship season.

Following complaints from a number of rival clubs, the EFL charged Wednesday with breaching Profitability and Sustainability rules.

The club’s battle will be heard by an independent panel this week – they had been expected to appear in front of the three-man panel next month, but it is understood the proceedings have been brought forward.

Given the complexity of the case, Yorkshire Live spoke with football finance guru and lecturer Kieran Maguire who runs the well-respected Price of Football website.

Q: Why has the case been brought forward?

KM : I think the likes of Barnsley and Hull have voiced their unhappiness with the slow process to date.

Wednesday were originally charged in November and we’re now in June so it does seem the wheels are turning quite slow on this one.

Q: Does the dropping of individual charges against Chansiri, John Redgate and Katrien Meire bode well for the hearing?

KM : That’s got to be seen as more positive than negative.

Effectively, the integrity of the three people involved, which perhaps was being called into question, doesn’t appear to be the case anymore and therefore that has to increase the credibility of any evidence they provide in terms of the panel.

Q: Nick De Marco is the QC representing the Owls. What do Wednesdayites need to know about him?

KM : I’ve never met Nick but he’s represented many clubs and he’s been successful to date.

He’s very much seen as the go-to man for events of this nature.

He represented QPR when they were charged and they avoided a points deduction.

I thought that was a very successful case. And he’s also represented Tyson Fury and Joey Barton in the past.

Q: What does the EFL charge effectively boil down to?

KM : It’s mainly to do with the valuation of stadia in terms of the sales to other companies owned by the owners.

The EFL changed the rules in 2016 which allowed clubs to do this, so they’ve effectively encouraged it to a certain extent.

If you look at other clubs, Aston Villa have done it and not been charged, Reading too and they’ve not been charged.

It comes down to whether the value is at a market rate.

And the problem is that there is no market rate for a football ground. Because it’s a unique asset.

Trying to get a universal agreement as to the value would be a challenge to anyone.

Q: Could Wednesday have looked into stadium sponsorship to get around this issue?

KM : That may have been an alternative but we’ve seen in the case of Manchester City that there’s been issues.

Their case has ended up at CAS (Court of Arbitration for Sport).

If there’s any transaction between the club and the owner, or another company controlled by the owner, then it’s got to be at a market rate.

Now how we assess what a market rate is, becomes complicated.

Q: There’s been plenty of rumours about the Owls being docked nine, 12 or even 21 points – where do these figures come from?

KM : There is a tariff for points deductions which is linked to the amount of Financial Fair Play limits of £39million loss over three years.

So that part is actually relatively easy to calculate if we know what the fair value of Hillsborough is.

That element of the charge should be able to be calculated with a degree of certainty once they establish the ground is worth X.

For all we know there’s no reason to say it’s not worth the £60m that was paid for it.

I’m not a surveyor. A surveyor did value it at that value.

In respect of potentially going up to 21 points, this is where it gets a bit vague.

The rules say that there are aggravating and mitigating circumstances which can increase the deduction by a further nine points.

So if there’s evidence that Wednesday were not helping the EFL with enquiries then the panel might decide to give an addition penalty.

If you look at Birmingham’s case, because they reported themselves when they realised they’d signed a player when they shouldn’t have done, their points deduction was reduced.

It’s a bit like a judge in a court case, they will have a broad tariff that can be increased or decreased such as ‘has the person turned themselves in’ etc.

So it’s up to 12 points in respect of FFP, and it’s up to a further nine points in terms of how far Wednesday have assisted with the enquiry.

A total of 21 points is the worst-case scenario.

Q: If Wednesday are relegated, then with the amount of big contracts they have and the uncertainty that the pandemic has caused would it be fair to say that it would be a cocktail of chaos?

KM : I don’t think there’s ever been a worse time to be relegated.

The Championship TV deal is worth about £7million and the League One TV deal is about £1.5m.

That’s a big sum of money in differences.

You’ve also got to question whether matches will be taking place in League One, given that clubs are so dependant on matchday income.

Can they physically afford to bring players out of furlough to incur matchday costs to incur additional transport costs?

You can’t get 25 players and a manager under social distancing rules, so you have to look at getting two or three coaches for an away game.

Are clubs going to hire hotels? All of these costs add up and presumably there’ll be testing for players also.

In League One, when you start to crunch those numbers it’s simply not worthwhile in football returning.

In the Championship it’s slightly more complicated with clubs having parachute payments and the better TV deal.

Q: Is there a likely timeline on how long this case will take to come to a conclusion?

KM : They are expecting the submission of evidence to take two or three days.

Then the panel have to reflect on it, go through the small print and there will have been a large number of documents submitted

These decisions don’t tend to be rushed.

I would be amazed if it was announced at the end of the week, but we’re living in an unusual world at present.

The evidence would have to be overwhelming, for one side over the other.

Q: Whichever way it goes, are both sides likely to appeal?

KM : The EFL have got into the habit of appealing for cases they’ve won and lost.

Sometimes they’ve won a charge and they don’t think the tariff has been high enough then they’ve appealed and tried to get it up that way.

So I would anticipate an appeal.