Jump to content
IGNORED

Derby Deserve Relegation; Are the Football League going to bungle this one too?


Recommended Posts

rooney hasnt exactly done very well so let him stay in the championship and smack him with 12 points for 24 months ago and another 12points for trying to get away with it. -24 would be a decent let off for them next season

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, redsquirrel said:

rooney hasnt exactly done very well so let him stay in the championship and smack him with 12 points for 24 months ago and another 12points for trying to get away with it. -24 would be a decent let off for them next season

Should be deducted 12 points for the house he’s building!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

If you look at the various crimes of Luton it all added up to 20 points plus as I recall. Derby have also made multiple infractions.

In order for the rules to be adhered to it not only has to take effect now but it also has to include sanction for the beginning of next season. In short, one infraction causes relegation, likely the least serious as it only needs 1 or 2 points correct? . Another infraction to be applied for the start of the new season. I would like to see them start in League One with -18 points and a find of £10 million.

Unless the punishment is punitive it will keep happening. If they appeal and lose, the evidence of which I am told is overwhelming, the punishment doubles. -36 points and £20 million.

We don't actually need football clubs who treat the game with such utter disdain.

I must confess, in all honesty, that I never liked Parry; he always struck me as a bit of a whimpy smiler yes man. I suspect he will either have an epiphany and dish out the necessary or, more likely, revert to type.

God help the game for the next few seasons if he does nothing other than a pathetic cowardly points deduction for next season. Simply a cop out and perhaps some inducing handover at Charnock Richard Services. Always felt it was a decent brown paper bag type place with a howling wind blowing around at that altitude. Perhaps he can have a go on the Knightmare Roller Coaster to cleanse the conscience. Maybe its his Camelot.

 

Edited by havanatopia
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/05/2021 at 11:18, hertsexile said:

The problem we have here is that Derby have broken financial regulations Sheffield Wednesday were punishment for the same the offence. 
The EFL need to impose their punishment now before the fixture release. Therefore Derby should be relegated and Wycombe stay up that would be the right thing to do. 
However as we all know in football the powers that be are more than happy 😃 to punish the little teams but reluctant to enforce any punishment on so called big clubs 

Except it's not.

Sheffield Wednesday were guilty of putting the stadium sale in the wrong accounting period. Sheffield Wednesday overspent in the 3 years to 2018.

Derby were found guilty of only incorrectly defining the amortisation policy in the accounts by accountants, and by using an incorrect amortisation policy by lawyers. Derby did not overspend in the 3 years to 2018, even when using a 'commonly accepted' amortisation policy.

Logic dictates that no on field advantage means no on field deduction (points). As it was simply an accounting c*ck up, a fine is the reasonable punishment.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/05/2021 at 10:05, Steve Watts said:

I certainly hope that it isn't their argument!  You can't win a legal battle with an outright falsehood...well...ok, you probably could, but not in this case.

If the EFL apply the points deduction they'll either end up relegated and start the season in league one, or they'll apply it to next season and Derby will start with negative points in the Championship.  But to say that Derby are in league 1 now is simply not true!

I think the reason any penalty is generally applied the following season is because if the penalised club appeals to the law courts the case can run over to the start of the next season, if the result of the case affected which league they were in the league fixtures for the two leagues in question would be chaos, in fact they may not even be able to start until the appeal had been concluded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

Except it's not.

Sheffield Wednesday were guilty of putting the stadium sale in the wrong accounting period. Sheffield Wednesday overspent in the 3 years to 2018.

Derby were found guilty of only incorrectly defining the amortisation policy in the accounts by accountants, and by using an incorrect amortisation policy by lawyers. Derby did not overspend in the 3 years to 2018, even when using a 'commonly accepted' amortisation policy.

Logic dictates that no on field advantage means no on field deduction (points). As it was simply an accounting c*ck up, a fine is the reasonable punishment.

So you believe that throughout this whole episode Derby County Football Club have been honest and played by the rules and the spirit of those rules? The club / club accountants made a little c@ck up so lets all move on?

I don't know the ins and outs of this but when something looks like a fish, swims like a fish and smells like a fish then..........

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, supercidered said:

So you believe that throughout this whole episode Derby County Football Club have been honest and played by the rules and the spirit of those rules? The club / club accountants made a little c@ck up so lets all move on?

I don't know the ins and outs of this but when something looks like a fish, swims like a fish and smells like a fish then..........

Yeah, basically you (Derby) tried to fudge the impact of amortisation on the club accounts.  It wasn’t an accountancy cock-up, it was a deliberate choice to use a different amortisation method to the other 71 EFL clubs.  Mel did it eyes wide open, seems fans buy the bullshit that it was a tinsy-winsy admin error.  Mel gambled on getting away with it.  He got caught.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

Except it's not.

Sheffield Wednesday were guilty of putting the stadium sale in the wrong accounting period. Sheffield Wednesday overspent in the 3 years to 2018.

Derby were found guilty of only incorrectly defining the amortisation policy in the accounts by accountants, and by using an incorrect amortisation policy by lawyers. Derby did not overspend in the 3 years to 2018, even when using a 'commonly accepted' amortisation policy.

Logic dictates that no on field advantage means no on field deduction (points). As it was simply an accounting c*ck up, a fine is the reasonable punishment.

Taking your points in turn:

1.  Agreed.

2. Agreed.

3. Sort of.  Derby admitted to misleading the EFL with regards to the description of the amortisation policy.  It also turns out that they didn't tell their auditors the truth, nor did they keep any paperwork, and then fudged the actual amortisation when the figures were inconvenient.  As regards the LAP then that constituted two QC's and a retired Master of the Rolls (the second most senior judge in England and Wales), I'd suggest that you read their CVs and the decisions of some of the cases that they were involved in before suggesting that they weren't competent because they aren't accountants.  In essence the EFL won the appeal because the original panel did not deal with the expert evidence correctly, and the LAP agreed with the EFL's expert.  That isn't an accounting issue that's just bad planning from the club as they chose not to tender any expert evidence, or maybe they couldn't find anyone willing to be an expert for them?  The LAP also said that the accounts were "at worst seriously misleading", that's as close as you will get to any quasi-judicial panel saying that the club lied.   As to whether or not the club overspent, I don't know, I haven't seen the actual revised amortisation figures for each year, but if you have them I would love to see them.

4. By that that logic any attempted offence is no offence as you failed, the specific has also failed in previous EFL cases. Plus I doubt that you can prove that Derby would not have been relegated, had they abided by all the regulations correctly.  I would also suggest that the club did get an on field advantage given the Play Off appearances in 2015/16, 2017/18 and 2018/19.  It wasn't a simple accounting error, it was a deliberate scheme to break the rules on a 💩 or bust policy which should be punished accordingly.  As to the actual punishment who knows, I suspect that the club are deliberately time wasting to avoid a decision by the AGM when the final position is usually agreed (although that can be extended if the club agree a penalty).  If the club has breached FFP I would expect to see at least an additional 3 point penalty due to the aggravating circumstances, but then so separate penalty for those two offences.

More than happy to discuss further.

 

 

Edited by Hxj
  • Like 3
  • Flames 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/05/2021 at 20:09, redsquirrel said:

rooney hasnt exactly done very well so let him stay in the championship and smack him with 12 points for 24 months ago and another 12points for trying to get away with it. -24 would be a decent let off for them next season

GIve them a choice.  24 points in the Championship next year or 12 this year (ie relegation).

I'd choose relegation if I were them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Bard said:

GIve them a choice.  24 points in the Championship next year or 12 this year (ie relegation).

I'd choose relegation if I were them.

Unfortunately, my guess is they won't get the choices you've outlined. My guess is that they will get away with it and face no points sanction at all. Absolute disgrace to English football.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Mel did it eyes wide open, seems fans buy the bullshit that it was a tinsy-winsy admin error.  Mel gambled on getting away with it.  He got caught.

Morris may still get away with it though.

Edited by havanatopia
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, In the Net said:

Wycombe being trodden on because they're not one of the big boys.  Standard EFL behaviour -  disgraceful. 

I reckon they should "sell" their ground to themselves and see what the EFL does.

  • Like 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When is a decision due on this matter, or are the EFL dragging their heels to avoid confrontation?  Absolute disgrace. Teams have to prepare and budget for next season. This should be announced as soon as the play off places are confirmed, i.e, by next week. But my guess is they will bottle it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure when the season actually ends, officially. I guess any time up to when the results are released. So 24th of June, but they would need a little time to make the changes, so I would guess  the previous week. Doesn't give them time to act.

I can see them copping out and being the bottle jobs we al expect them to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, marmite said:

When is a decision due on this matter, or are the EFL dragging their heels to avoid confrontation?  Absolute disgrace. Teams have to prepare and budget for next season. This should be announced as soon as the play off places are confirmed, i.e, by next week. But my guess is they will bottle it.

According to Derbyshire Live, not this season..

 

Derby have not commented on the latest claims but remain convinced they have not done anything wrong amid claims there were "ambiguities" in the accounts when it came to the amortisation of players' contracts.

The independent panel now has to decide whether Derby breached EFL rules, they could face further charges and a points deduction.

But it is not likely to be decided before the start of next season meaning it will hang over the club well into the next campaign.

 

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/derby-county-efl-wayne-rooney-5466196

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

Except it's not.

Sheffield Wednesday were guilty of putting the stadium sale in the wrong accounting period. Sheffield Wednesday overspent in the 3 years to 2018.

Derby were found guilty of only incorrectly defining the amortisation policy in the accounts by accountants, and by using an incorrect amortisation policy by lawyers. Derby did not overspend in the 3 years to 2018, even when using a 'commonly accepted' amortisation policy.

Logic dictates that no on field advantage means no on field deduction (points). As it was simply an accounting c*ck up, a fine is the reasonable punishment.

Which ever way you look 👀 at it there were financial irregularities which need to be dealt with appropriately by the EFL. The fact is Derby can’t keep dodging bullets. There has to be punishment for breaking the rules no excuses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Hxj said:

Plus I doubt that you can prove that Derby would not have been relegated, had they abided by all the regulations correctly.  I would also suggest that the club did get an on field advantage given the Play Off appearances in 2015/16, 2017/18 and 2018/19.

Proven by not failing P&S under a standard amortisation method, so we could/would have had exactly the same sqaud...

  • Hmmm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

Proven by not failing P&S under a standard amortisation method, so we could/would have had exactly the same sqaud...

As I said previously we would be delighted if you could let us all have the figures proving this.  I wouldn’t trust anything the club says on this.  Unless they are available we will have to await the outcome. 

If Derby didn’t fail FFP then I still expect a 3 points penalty for next season.  Misleading is a serious offence.

In addition the EFL AGM could be interesting next month.

Edited by Hxj
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your points are debatable @AnotherDerbyFan

Before I start, I would state a position which is that contrary to what quite a few on your forum seem to think I'm not explicitly anti Derby- I have slated quite a few clubs for possible FFP related issues. That said I can't abide Mel Morris for obvious reasons- but anyway- I would also add though that a new owner shouldn't wipe the slate clean if any punishment occurs. by which I mean remove verbatim any punishment. Mitigate perhaps.

@Hxj has covered the bulk but a couple of things. Is it truly and utterly verifiable that Straight Line would see you compliant at all times? Reports suggested that you were trying to delay the process- nothing to hide, nothing to fear as they say- well it might be applicable here. How do you for sure that a restatement on the EFL's terms would not see any breaches over the last 6 seasons? I think that is a debatable assertion. I also saw a suggestion that any punishment under the new method for past Accounts if it changed from compliant to breach would be immoral- but would it be explicitly forbidden, that is a better question. I'm not altogether sure if I care about the morality aspect here if I'm honest.

Further, I have seen it stated a number of times- not least on your forum that because no advantage was gained that no punishment would be merited. That is a nice try, but no dice. Sheffield Wednesday arguably gained no advantage yet look at the Panel etc. A better example is Birmingham because they absolutely gained no advantage up the top end certainly and in their case the below formed part of their 2019 defence:

image.png.d31c2c31ae57fc14f2278420883436e2.png

image.thumb.png.f18aee7a9e68a68507a6b275ba596b98.png

Let's go back a bit. In Birmingham's case after years of turmoil followed by austerity they went a bit mad under Zola for half a season ie a January window and Redknapp in Summer 2018.

Two windows, in an overall period that covered 18 months from December 2016 to end of June 2018- restraint was shown in January 2018 or maybe the EFL had a word who knows. This formed part of their argument...no advantage gained so why punish?

Did not cut any ice. Was a nice try but Paragraphs 25-28 make it abundantly clear why it is flawed. A Summer 2018 Soft Embargo, which became a strict Embargo and a deduction of 9 points, an EFL Business Plan during which they had to ask EFL in terms of renewing existing and some young players even- think they had trouble renewing Captain Morrison eg and I remember references to young players and contractual issues. Indeed even follow up charges with respect to the 2018/19 season- indeed the EFL even appealed the Not Guilty- and rightly so. Because it gained them the right to impose an Absolute Obligation on a Club with respect to the numbers as opposed to Best Endeavors.

https://www.efl.com/contentassets/c79763f8e2174f4fb87200a371abf5fa/190322---efl-v-bcfc---decision---final.pdf

I would also add, that just because the Club or indeed any Club says something- and even to an extent this applies to the EFL- doesn't make it entirely so. Both will look to paint their picture in a favourable light- thought Derby's statement was absolutely evidence of this, and so to a lesser extent was that of the EFL. On that note, what or who was the original source of the claim that no Points could be docked for this offence, only a fine- if it was from the Club I question the veracity- or indeed Club friendly journalists. Is there anything in writing from a truly independent and relevant source that states it can only be a fine at most?

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Hxj said:

As I said previously we would be delighted if you could let us all have the figures proving this.  I wouldn’t trust anything the club says on this.  Unless they are available we will have to await the outcome. 

If Derby didn’t fail FFP then I still expect a 3 points penalty for next season.  Misleading is a serious offence.

In addition the EFL AGM could be interesting next month.

The LAP concluded we were open an honest through the whole thing so can't see us getting punished for "misleading".

The charge was only for using an improper amortisation policy, not for failing P&S due to the policy.

That's backed up by the club's statement of "would have only led to the Club re-submitting its P&S calculations", and further backed up by my own P&S estimates (£1..7m inside the limit).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

The LAP concluded we were open an honest through the whole thing so can't see us getting punished for "misleading".

The charge was only for using an improper amortisation policy, not for failing P&S due to the policy.

That's backed up by the club's statement of "would have only led to the Club re-submitting its P&S calculations", and further backed up by my own P&S estimates (£1..7m inside the limit).

Sorry I can't find the paragraph where the LAP says that you were open or honest, could you help me out?  The actual decision by the LAP creates a different impression.

I agree that the breach admitted and the breach proved were not for failing the financial limits, but they still fall under the under the P&S rules, see paragraph 10 of the LAP decision.  What makes you think that the club won't get punished for the two breaches?

Personally I wouldn't trust a word of what the club says on this matter.  The press statement is so riddled with "it's not our fault" whines and misstatements I thought my kids had written it having been caught with their hands in the biscuit tin again.  However I do agree that the effect of the decision is that the club will have to resubmit their P&S calculations, that will determine if there is a breach of the P&S financial limits, subject to any other issues such as the rent for the stadium which is mentioned in the DC decision.  Whilst I have no issue with your serious research and the methodology of your calculations as I understand it you still don't have the real data.  That is crucial.  There are also other calculations out there.  Finally it intrigues me that following the LAP decision the club have not come out officially and said "Despite the decision by the LAP we have not breached the FFP limits".

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/05/2021 at 01:10, BigTone said:

Another reason why I am rapidly losing interest in the game.

Yes I have been watching far more Rugby. I think it’s a mixture of us being shite for the 41st season in succession, no fans in the stadium, over paid tossers across our club and football in general and blatant cheating which is ignored if you are a marginally well known name!

Edit! Also how deluded people (not so sure they are deluded but just trying to defend the position of a basket case football club that has been teetering on the brink of meltdown for ages) completely pointlessly argue!

I guess there will be a statement by the authorities on WRDCFC soon, I just wish they would get on with it and it gives a rationale for whatever is decided  

 

Edited by REDOXO
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Hxj said:

As I said previously we would be delighted if you could let us all have the figures proving this.  I wouldn’t trust anything the club says on this.  Unless they are available we will have to await the outcome. 

If Derby didn’t fail FFP then I still expect a 3 points penalty for next season.  Misleading is a serious offence.

In addition the EFL AGM could be interesting next month.

A little bit on that, I read periodically that a lot of clubs want Stephen Pearce off the EFL Board, I think this latest Derby related fiasco should be the final straw for his presence there IMO.

Would voting on his future presence be an EFL/Championship divisional AGM matter I wonder?

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pops, on your earlier post, I would say few of us are anti Derby per se. We are simply anti rule busters. The rules may be stupid, they may be almost, but not quite, impossible to follow and it's up to a club if they balls up their maths to have a go at a fiddle . That's their business. But, upon being caught they must do the time. The FL are fudging the entire thing as of now. We hold out hope for justice.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

A little bit on that, I read periodically that a lot of clubs want Stephen Pearce off the EFL Board, I think this latest Derby related fiasco should be the final straw for his presence there IMO.

Would voting on his future presence be an EFL/Championship divisional AGM matter I wonder?

It's a divisional matter.  Presumably Ashton has resigned as well, will be interesting to see who is elected.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Hxj said:

It's a divisional matter.  Presumably Ashton has resigned as well, will be interesting to see who is elected.

Mooted to be a toss up between Peter Risdale and Tony Scholes...

...Yes that Peter Risdale!? 😱

Problem with Scholes too is that he's a big moaner about FFP- not beyond the realms that they might fail it. Plus Stoke fans seem to think he's done/is doing a terrible job there in general.

Scraping the barrel, my god- frying pan and fire springs to mind if Pearce is shunted out- what about I dunno Barnsley, Luton CEOs or some bigger reasonably well run clubs- Keith Lamb at Middlesbrough- they seem to go for shockers on the board. QPR now they're reformed, Swansea? Not saying Preston are badly run but Risdale...? Who is the Millwall CEO, they seem to outperform their financials.

Ashton and Pearce  ⬅️

Risdale and Scholes ➡️

Getting worse if anything??

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, havanatopia said:

Pops, on your earlier post, I would say few of us are anti Derby per se. We are simply anti rule busters. The rules may be stupid, they may be almost, but not quite, impossible to follow and it's up to a club if they balls up their maths to have a go at a fiddle . That's their business. But, upon being caught they must do the time. The FL are fudging the entire thing as of now. We hold out hope for justice.

Yeah agreed with this Hav. Bust the rules, you're not going to be popular and get caught the appropriate punishments must be handed down.

A small conspiracy theory of mine might be that the EFL, could they be looking to drag it out to await a suitable takeover in order to hand down a reduced punishment? Shouldn't be a factor and clear how long the legal process can take with this but Nixon did suggest a couple of weeks back that if Derby get a suitable new owner by August that a points penalty could be reduced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...