Relegation - it’s not all over yet!

[Hxj]

55 minutes ago, Super said:

In fairness the obsession about Derby everything on here is weird.

Just edited that for you!

[Hxj]

The decision seems to be:

1.   You can use non-straightline amortisation and stay within the Accounting Standard.

2.  However the methodology used by Derby in using an expected resale value is not acceptable.

The implications being:

1.  The FFP calculations need to be reworked using a straight line method (as this is the default and no alternative was suggested at the original hearing).

2.  If Derby then breached FFP a points sanction will be applied, that can be appealed.

3.  There may be other less serious sanctions for other offences.

[downendcity]

1 hour ago, Super said:

In fairness the obsession about Derby on here is weird.

In fairness, not necessarily so.

When ffp was introduced SL recognised the implications and put in place the strategy for the club to become more self sustainable i.e. able to live within it’s financial means and stay within ffp. This meant that in order not to compromise ffp spending limits, we had to sell players like Reid, Bryan, Webster etc. and thereby compromised our on field competitveness.

Why then should we be happy to see other clubs basically putting two fingers up to the EFL, as far as ffp rules were concerned?  Spending beyond the limits to maximise their on field advantage and then, when this failed to give them the reward of promotion, and when the day of financial reckoning arrived used  jiggery pokery with “stadium sales” to circumvent the same rules to which we, and most other championship clubs had adhered.

In simple terms it’s cheating.

That’s why many on here are “obsessed”, as you put it, with Derby. 

 

 

[TBW]

On 10/05/2021 at 13:06, The Gasbuster said:

This appeal should have been wrapped up BEFORE the season ended. Too late now I fear. The fact the season is now over only strengthens Derby’s position, IMO.

It's not over though. Playoffs haven't happened.

[lenred]

1 hour ago, Super said:

In fairness the obsession about Derby on here is weird.

Not sure it’s ‘weird’ to want all teams to play by the same rules as everyone else? Surely that’s just wanting fair play and is in effect sticking up for our club and all the others that play by the book no? 

 

[Davefevs]

38 minutes ago, Hxj said:

The decision seems to be:

1.   You can use non-straightline amortisation and stay within the Accounting Standard.

2.  However the methodology used by Derby in using an expected resale value is not acceptable.

The implications being:

1.  The FFP calculations need to be reworked using a straight line method (as this is the default and no alternative was suggested at the original hearing).

2.  If Derby then breached FFP a points sanction will be applied, that can be appealed.

3.  There may be other less serious sanctions for other offences.

I had not appreciated their amortisation method included a resale value, I just thought they were back-ending the amortisation.  Wow!  Cake and eat it.

[ExiledAjax]

And they've just lost their appeal so have to do the £2.3m pay out to Keogh. Couldn't happen to a nicer club could it

[downendcity]

Simon Jordan makes an interesting point, that I hadn't considered previously.

The successful appeal was with regard to accounting practices - in Derby’s case the way they amortise players' value. The point SJ makes is that as a result of the appeal their methodology was incorrect and recalculated correctly will mean they compromised ffp limits in 2018.

If so, then it’s not just the accounting methods that require sanction is the resulting breach off ffp.

Jordan’s question is, in the light of all of this, whether the EFL has the balls to apply points penalty this season. 

[Rudolf Hucker]

I truly hope that the EFL aren’t excessively harsh on Derby and therefore don’t impose a points deduction either in this season or next. 
 

I think that instead, it would be fair and reasonable to simply relegate them two divisions, order them to extend Romney’s managerial contract to a minimum ten year term and insist that in future, the letter ‘O’ be removed from their club name.

[downendcity]

1 minute ago, Rudolf Hucker said:

I truly hope that the EFL aren’t excessively harsh on Derby and therefore don’t impose a points deduction either in this season or next. 
 

I think that instead, it would be fair and reasonable to simply relegate them two divisions, order them to extend Romney’s managerial contract to a minimum ten year term and insist that in future, the letter ‘O’ be removed from their club name.

So it would then be Wayne Roney’s Derby County FC? 

[Rudolf Hucker]

Just now, downendcity said:

So it would then be Wayne Roney’s Derby County FC? 

Nearly right!

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Hxj said:

The decision seems to be:

1.   You can use non-straightline amortisation and stay within the Accounting Standard.

2.  However the methodology used by Derby in using an expected resale value is not acceptable.

The implications being:

1.  The FFP calculations need to be reworked using a straight line method (as this is the default and no alternative was suggested at the original hearing).

2.  If Derby then breached FFP a points sanction will be applied, that can be appealed.

3.  There may be other less serious sanctions for other offences.

A few on their forum seem to think it would be immoral as it was signed off...of course they would say that.

They are suggesting perhaps a fine and restatement to straight line but no deduction- cake and eat it x 2 as straight line (or straight line and contract extensions), would help them moving forward- of course said restatement would see them fail at least two periods I suspect.

FWIW, Jordan did say he was stunned about the Decision to Appeal last September, said it was a pointless exercise or words to that effect? Small deduction, -2 for this season maybe for breach of Good Faith and then restatement for the last 5-6 years and use the Tariff to punish or otherwise.

Jordan in Sept 2020.

https://www.facebook.com/127256559100/videos/596563687700328

[Hxj]

10 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

A few on their forum seem to think it would be immoral as it was signed off...of course they would say that.

The original decision put paid to that argument quite conclusively.

I also suspect that it was highly relevant that Derby did not have any expert accountancy evidence at the iniial hearing, maybe they couldn't find someone 

[downendcity]

1 hour ago, Hxj said:

The original decision put paid to that argument quite conclusively.

I also suspect that it was highly relevant that Derby did not have any expert accountancy evidence at the iniial hearing, maybe they couldn't find someone 

They had an expert there, lined up  ready to go  but she couldn't find her way out of the toilet!

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, Hxj said:

The original decision put paid to that argument quite conclusively.

I also suspect that it was highly relevant that Derby did not have any expert accountancy evidence at the iniial hearing, maybe they couldn't find someone 

I think they relied on (as they might put it) though there is some guesswork, strength of their case and their Auditors? Andrew Delve was certainly cited in that 123 page doc, believe he gave evidence?

On a side note, that Nick De Marco eh...

1. Represented SWFC- -12 albeit defended personal charges and fell to -6. That -6 took them down!
2. Heard somewhere but happy to be corrected on this, that he represented Derby vs Keogh? That went well if he did! 
3. Wonder if he is representing/did represent Derby in their Appeal vs the EFL? Impossible to find out for sure but if they have lost- that went well!

I suppose on the flipside, he did significantly reduce the risk in some ways for SWFC, kicked the Keogh can down the road to try and buy time for a more opportune moment if he was involved there and could yet save them from it this year if they are punished but it's next season if he was involved. Only so much a lawyer can do for guilty parties.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Such a tit that he called the Amortisation issue- who knows about the exact numbers but the underlying principle nearly 3 years back?? 

Vindicated to an extent I'd suggest.

Doubt that can be done- besides which, how much beyond a "League Appeals committee" can you go- love Gee's saltiness!

Better still, does anyone know if Keogh would now be classed as a Football Creditor?? Believe non-fulfilment of such obligations leads to auto embargoes.

The regulations themselves seem fairly binding but who knows these days...

"as the decisions of those bodies themselves are deemed to be final with no subsequent right of appeal or challenge".

The funny thing is, despite everything that if they had done the basics- you know treated the 3 equally, either sacked all- possibly preferable- that would have been ballsy and something to actually applaud Derby for.

[Hxj]

‘Misconduct’ means:

(a)  any matter which is expressed in these Regulations as constituting ‘misconduct’;

(b)  a breach of any other Articles and/or Regulations of The League (and any rules made in accordance with them);

(c)  a breach of an order, requirement, direction or instruction of The League.

83 Investigations and Disciplinary Proceedings

83.1  The League shall have power to initiate and prosecute disciplinary proceedings against any person subject to these Regulations for breach of these Regulations or other conduct amounting to Misconduct.

83.2  The League shall have the power to investigate any of the following:

83.2.1  suspected or alleged breach of any of these Regulations; and/or

83.2.2  any complaint, allegation or suspicion of financial or other irregularity; and/or

83.2.3 misconduct,
by any Club, Official or Player.

 

Covers that from my perspective.

[sh1t_ref_again]

The championship is becoming a joke, its already nicely rigged to try and ensure any prem team who have to dirty there feet by being relegated have a significant advantage over everyone else, then we also have the teams (Villa, Derby and a few others), who believe they belong in the prem by birth right so fiddle FFP to try and get there, or you could argue this is caused by having to complete against parachute payment teams.

Clubs should be fighting to get a level playing field and fair competition, but the bigger clubs and powers to be are not interested in this, 

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 hours ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

The championship is becoming a joke, its already nicely rigged to try and ensure any prem team who have to dirty there feet by being relegated have a significant advantage over everyone else, then we also have the teams (Villa, Derby and a few others), who believe they belong in the prem by birth right so fiddle FFP to try and get there, or you could argue this is caused by having to complete against parachute payment teams.

Clubs should be fighting to get a level playing field and fair competition, but the bigger clubs and powers to be are not interested in this, 

Aston Villa in fact had Parachute Payments for 3 years to 2019 as well.

They’re in many ways the worst but the recidivist nature of Derby, plus the sheer arrogance of Derby fans and ownership since 2018 really is objectionable.

Wouldn't be at all averse to Aston Villa crashing and burning, in fact it'd be great. 

As for Parachute Payments. Simple starting point is to class then as Loans or other Balance Sheet items, or that stabilise the Cash Flow but not in a way that impacts Profit.

No problem with clubs using them to survive while making cutbacks but exclusion in their entirety from FFP (or maybe all except the amount equal to Solidarity Payments) would cap their spending power somewhat.

[sh1t_ref_again]

17 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

 

As for Parachute Payments. Simple starting point is to class then as Loans or other Balance Sheet items, or that stabilise the Cash Flow but not in a way that impacts Profit.

No problem with clubs using them to survive while making cutbacks but exclusion in their entirety from FFP (or maybe all except the amount equal to Solidarity Payments) would cap their spending power somewhat.

The issue would be they can only repay the loan, if they get promoted, although this could then be paid to the EFL, similarly where the clubs going back up would have received further parachute payments as promoted within the 3 year window, this money is also paid to the EFL to try and reduce the massive difference between subsidised clubs and not.

The other solution is for contracts to enforce wage reductions upon relegation, but this would entail salary caps which could also be detrimental.

The championship is a bit like playing a game of poker, knowing you opponent is cheating and has all the good cards as the deck is stacked against you, I really cannot believe the EFL and club chairman allow this situation to exists, although I guess its a case of have a few million and shut up and tow the party line.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

11 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

The issue would be they can only repay the loan, if they get promoted, although this could then be paid to the EFL, similarly where the clubs going back up would have received further parachute payments as promoted within the 3 year window, this money is also paid to the EFL to try and reduce the massive difference between subsidised clubs and not.

The other solution is for contracts to enforce wage reductions upon relegation, but this would entail salary caps which could also be detrimental.

The championship is a bit like playing a game of poker, knowing you opponent is cheating and has all the good cards as the deck is stacked against you, I really cannot believe the EFL and club chairman allow this situation to exists, although I guess its a case of have a few million and shut up and tow the party line.

 

There usually are wage reductions on Relegation from the PL. Between 1/3-1/2.

Repayment to bolster the EFL clubs seems not a bad idea, though I'd wonder how necessary repayment is if the Parachute Payments don't hit the Profit and Loss (possibly save for the amount equivalent to Solidarity Payments- I assume Relegated clubs don't get these too while in receipt of Parachute Payments).

I have read but certainly don't know for sure, that the current FFP was harmonised between the two Divisions (though the enforcement feels one way) as part of the deal to keep the current rate of Solidarity Payments in place.

If it's EFL voting as 72, I can well understand the bottom two divisions especially voting in that way...the PL only would like to do what is good for the PL ultimately.

All that said, I hope Derby get pursued and punished to the fullest extent possible.

[downendcity]

27 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

 

The championship is a bit like playing a game of poker, knowing you opponent is cheating and has all the good cards as the deck is stacked against you, I really cannot believe the EFL and club chairman allow this situation to exists, although I guess its a case of have a few million and shut up and tow the party line.

 

We need Steve to adopt the Del Boy poker tactics then......