Mixed ex­pec­ta­tions have been giv­en ahead of Sun­day’s Emer­gency Gen­er­al Meet­ing (EGM) of the T&T Foot­ball As­so­ci­a­tion (TTFA) with an ur­gent need for the as­so­ci­a­tion’s au­dit­ed fi­nan­cial state­ment to be ap­proved, if monies from FI­FA are to be forth­com­ing.

East­ern Foot­ball As­so­ci­a­tion (EFA) pres­i­dent Ke­iron Ed­wards be­lieves the ac­counts will be ap­proved while two oth­er mem­bers Lee Davis of the T&T Su­per League (TTSL) and Sel­by Browne of the Vet­er­an Foot­ball Foun­da­tion of T&T (VF­FOTT) are un­sure that ap­proval will be grant­ed.

Both men are de­sirous of re­ceiv­ing more in­for­ma­tion on the rea­sons why a $42 mil­lion price-tag for the piece of land hous­ing the con­tro­ver­sial Home of Foot­ball in Bal­main, Cou­va was left out of the au­dit­ed state­ments, and why Robert Hadad, the chair­man of the Nor­mal­i­sa­tion Com­mit­tee, did not ap­proach the rel­e­vant au­thor­i­ties to achieve a cer­tifi­cate of ti­tle for the au­di­tors, ahead of the EGM.

Ac­cord­ing to Davis, ques­tions will have to be asked to for­mer pres­i­dent David John-Williams about why the land has no deed, say­ing: “The thing about it is, who has the deed for the land? And what ac­cess does the TTFA have to do what­ev­er they need to do to con­vert the land to any busi­ness.

"The last thing I would have heard is that no­body could re­al­ly say who has the ti­tle to the land, which is a se­ri­ous is­sue since we've gone and build as­pects of the TTFA on the land, and that’s a se­ri­ous thing. Who re­al­ly owns the ti­tle to the deed or prop­er­ty, that needs to be clar­i­fied.”

Davis, who re­cent­ly got the nod over Ed­wards and Ryan Ot­t­ley for the pres­i­den­cy of the Su­per League, not­ed: “We have to won­der what Mr David John-Williams was do­ing and the kind of con­sid­er­a­tions might have gone his way for cer­tain things to go how they went.

"We know in T&T a lot of the in­sti­tu­tions are lit­er­al­ly al­most cor­rupt­ed. Peo­ple could do things and hope for the best down the road. The mere fact that the au­di­tor doesn’t have that to present as to the ex­act ti­tle and deed, for me it should be even more dis­con­cert­ing.

"All this was done and we still don’t have no state­ment or no deed or no let­ter of com­fort to say that we have ac­cess to this prop­er­ty. I am won­der­ing now if the land is re­al­ly ours or be­cause of some ad­min­is­tra­tive is­sue we don’t have the ti­tle or the deed or they play­ing smart."

Browne, on the oth­er­hand, was one of two mem­bers who wrote to the Nor­mal­i­sa­tion Com­mit­tee re­quest­ing an­swers to the fi­nan­cials and the land. Browne al­so told Guardian Me­dia Sports that ques­tions of why a cer­tifi­cate of ti­tle was not re­quest­ed, was al­so not re­spond­ed to or act­ed up­on.

The VF­FOTT boss said Hadad’s re­cent state­ment that the TTFA is in­sol­vent has fur­ther com­pro­mised his po­si­tion.

“What I ex­pect is that, as I stat­ed in my let­ter, the sit­u­a­tion as is would sug­gest that the NC would be pre­pared to give a de­c­la­ra­tion to the mem­ber­ship that, should the mem­ber­ship ap­prove the 2019 au­dit­ed state­ment, the NC would not en­ter­tain any ques­tion of solv­ing the is­sues of the TTFA.

"Sub­se­quent to that an an­nounce­ment by Mr Hadad that the TTFA is in­sol­vent, has brought fur­ther con­cerns on his abil­i­ty to hold the ap­point­ment that was made of him by FI­FA.

"The TTFA is owned by the mem­ber­ship of the TTFA. I think that our ini­tial ex­pec­ta­tion to have Mr Hadad and the NC do that de­c­la­ra­tion in the ef­fort to move for­ward am­i­ca­bly, has now been com­pro­mised and it would re­al­ly be left in to the del­e­gates to de­ter­mine whether they ac­cept or re­ject any pro­pos­al from Mr Hadad or the NC."

Mean­while, Ed­wards is call­ing for the ap­proval of the au­dit­ed fi­nan­cials, be­liev­ing that all will be sort­ed out with the TTFA once ap­proval has been grant­ed for fi­nan­cial state­ment to be sent to FI­FA.

"I think the au­di­tors would ad­here to the ques­tions the mem­ber­ship would’ve asked and I think the au­dit would be ap­proved. I think every­body un­der­stands the im­por­tance of the au­dit be­ing ap­proved in terms of fi­nances."

He added: "It’s a sim­ple mat­ter of the deed not be­ing fi­nalised, if it is not fi­nalised, they can­not put it on the fi­nan­cial state­ment. It’s a process that the nor­mal­i­sa­tion com­mit­tee, now do­ing what is re­quired to en­sure that the deed is fi­nalised and once that hap­pens then it will be placed back on the fi­nan­cial state­ment to be au­dit­ed in a year to come.

"I’m not see­ing that as a ma­jor prob­lem. It was a con­cern for mem­bers see­ing that it was not fi­nalised in to­tal­i­ty. I think the jus­ti­fi­ca­tion be­hind it is clear right now, so they would ap­prove the au­dit and that would be sort­ed out in time to come.

"How­ev­er, what the mem­ber­ship would have to do is to get an un­der­tak­ing by the nor­mal­i­sa­tion com­mit­tee to en­sure that they would sort out the sit­u­a­tion,” Ed­wards ex­plained.