Coppello

What is the source of this information? It's completely wrong as clubs are allowed to make deductions for certain expenditure such as on the youth academy and women's football. It's definitely incorrect!

Today marks 50 years since we landed on the moon. To commemorate this I thought I’d share a fact. Rover’s record breaking signing of Andy Tilson is closer to the date of the moon landing then it is to the present day.

That's a good shout. He has been a bit disappointing in all honesty and rarely grabs any headlines. Sadly not, @TomF broke the bad news above.

Tom Banton is a joke. Scooped two sixes off the first over:

Is the game live on Youtube? Had a little look but couldn't see anything? I thought I read the other day that the non-Sky games were being streamed.

Finished on 5 wickets before the Australia As declared. I'm pleased for him as if he carried on in a similar way to his first innings it would be pretty devastating.

In all honesty, I have no idea and I don't think the Premier League do. I'd be shocked if there were repercussions in the PL for their failings in the Championship. I haven't read the article but he does tend to touch a nerve with a lot of people in football. For someone who is trying to become a credible journalist and increase his appearances on Sky/BBC, he doesn't need to write distasteful things about the owners of each club which detracts from his articles.

Remaining fixtures: Essex: 13-16 July - Warwickshire (H) 18-21 August - Kent (A) 10-13 Sept - Warwickshire (A) 16-19 Sept - Surrey (H) 23-26 Sept - Somerset (A) Somerset: 13-16 July - Yorkshire (A) 18-21 August - Warwickshire (A) 10-13 Sept - Yorkshire (H) 16-19 Sept - Hampshire (A) 23-26 Sept - Essex (H) So three away games each and two home games remaining, ending with the big finale in Taunton at the end of September. The game this weekend is massive as I wouldn't fancy going to the T20 break in second place. I can't see Essex dropping any points at home which adds additional pressure on the final game.

Stop referring to Gloucestershire as 'we', it's confusing the hell out of me. This is clearly a Somerset forum, your views belong on Gaschat ?

I thought that. It's a bit cheeky given they've just seen our spinners take 8 wickets between them!

26-5 between the two of them. I'll take the plaudits chaps.

I'm expecting a vintage Bess/Leach performance today!

This happens every single year and I don't think it has been the wettest year on record by any stretch. Maybe they should turn it into an aquatics centre and be done with it!

Another major positive is over the past few seasons, Somerset have been very strong at home in the latter part of the summer. Leach normally comes into full flow and skittles out many teams at Taunton. I'm starting to believe after 139 years of hurt, we're finally going to win the CC!

This is ridiculous!

Early breakthrough by Gregory. Kent 7-1!

At least Extras is having a good game - 14*!

Is this a PL points deduction once a Championship club has been promoted? There's currently nothing written in the legislation about it and I don't think the PL are that interested. They're focused on the granting of UEFA licenses to PL teams and ensuring the adherence to those rules rather than looking at the teams towards the bottom of the division. In addition, they're almost separate jurisdictions and this is why the EFL were unable to punish QPR until they went down to the Championship. There may be appetite to change this given the current situation but I haven't heard anything.

Yeah but I'm sure that we can agree that the land value difference between Middlesbrough and Derby is not significant enough to create a £40-50m difference. As mentioned, i've spoken to various professional in and around the sports industry and they think it's a bit of a sham. This includes the surveyor who works for a large firm who have become a leader for valuing sports facilities. Whilst I'm sure that the property prices are rising in Derby, it's not exactly London or Monaco in terms of land value. I saw your explanation of the development works that have gone on at Pride Park over the last few years but I seriously doubt the capital expenditure will be anywhere near enough to have significant boost (>40%) to the stadium value. As a side note, we levelled a three stands at Ashton Gate a few years ago, added in boxes, top media facilities, a desso pitch, increased our capacity by £8,000, added in a coffee shop/sports bar/new club shop and landscaped the whole area and it still only cost £45m. This value would then have been depreciated if we to do a depreciated replacement cost valuation today. This is where myself, finance professionals in the sports industry and experienced surveyors are slightly confused and why the 'independent' valuation might not be all that it seems. I am sure you can appreciate this? Regarding your point about reversing impairments, you can only reverse an impairment up the amount of the initial impairment. So my calculations were correct when I said that you can reduce a players value from £20m, down to £2m and back up to £20m. There is a reason why no other football club (that I can think of anyway) accounts for player valuations in the same way. Your point about the accuracy of the accounting valuations on disposals compared to their market value is actually quite a simple one. If you sell a player on the 10th August 2019 for £20 million for example, you would have performed an revaluation exercise as at '30th June 2019'. Whilst this is the book date, this will actually be performed a lot later, ie around September/October time when the company is audited. This will allow you to accurately account for the players sold and you will adjust said players value to the £20m he was sold for. There is no better indication of a player's value than its actual selling price. This will limit the loss/gains on player trading because it will always been fairly accurate, you would've already recognise an impairment or valuation gain pre-disposal. The vast majority of losses would actually be made in the January transfer window as they would've been revalued several months earlier. The big issue will be for players who are not sold in the summer and therefore the accounting valuation is based on an internal assessment. These will fluctuate significantly season-on-season and will result in impairments and reversals all over the shop. As I mentioned, player registrations are not an asset which should be fair valued, it doesn't really follow accounting guidance, creates a lot of risk and makes an auditor shit their pants. Any reputable audit firm would have a real issue with it. Regarding your query about the stadium valuation, the depreciated replacement cost method is basically what it would be to build the stadium now and then depreciate to the current level of wear and tear. So it would be the value with the depreciation removed. Also, what do the two owners in dispute have to called Mel Morris and Steve Gibson. I keep thinking your owner is called Mel Gibson!

I thought I'd dip my toe back into this thread. Thanks for contributing @DerbyFan, it's always good to have opposing fans views on here and it allows for better debate. I don't want to turn this into a dick waving contest (as I know you already mentioned that you're female ?) but I feel I'm reasonably qualified to comment. I was an audit manager at a big four accounting firm having worked there for 6 years, currently work in the football finance world, have worked on a stadium valuation over the last couple of months and have also discussed the Pride Park debacle with a surveyor who has conducted four different stadium valuations in a variety of locations in the UK. I've commented on here in the past that the organisation that I have a problem with is the EFL for leaving these pretty obvious loopholes open but I think Derby's actions are pretty unethical. I also have a problem with some of the professionals engaged by Derby to conduct the valuation and sign off the accounts. The fair valuing of the players registrations is also questionable practice. I'll start with the stadium valuation, I apologise if you have already responded to some of these points to Mr P. but I've quickly scanned over this thread as there is a lot of posts! I appreciate that you have conducted an 'independent valuation' but it is clearly out of line with the market valuations. The club I work for has had its stadium valued over the past few weeks and the final value was considerably less than Pride Park. The club that I work at is London based and therefore I would've expected the land value to give the London club a significant head start before even considering the stadium itself. This raises a few concerns for me personally. Another club who revalued their stadium per their most recent set of accounts is Middlesbrough. The combined value of their stadium, training ground and headquarters has been revalued at £49.7m also using the depreciated cost method. The notes from their accounts is as follows: This is an excellent benchmark given they were built three years apart and have almost identical capacities. Whilst this does not consider all of the work performed on the stadium during their 20-25 year lives, the values are remarkably different. Middlesbrough is a notoriously cheaper area, I will admit, but this does include the stadium, training ground and other buildings. This does call into question the integrity of the surveyor who performed the valuation. The auditor has a duty to review the report and, whilst they're not experts at valuing stadiums themselves, should consider the credentials of those performing the survey and also perform a benchmarking exercise comparing against other stadiums in the area. As @Mr Popodopolous states, the right thing to do would be for the EFL to conduct its own review but they are completely inept as an organisation and that ship has sailed. Personally I wouldn't sue Derby in the way that Gibson has; as you state you've just exploited a loophole and, whilst unethical, is not against the rules. I was not aware of the way in which you account for the player registrations until I read the thread this morning. I can't fathom how this could be allowed by the auditor having looked at the financial statements. As stated previously, accounting guidance allows the fair valuing of assets in many circumstances and this is not a situation where it is applicable. In the most simplistic terms, there is a 'fair value hierarchy' which considers the reasonableness and the level of judgement exercised. The hierarchy is as follows: - Level 1 inputs: This is where there is an identical asset in an active market. Players are not like barrels of oil where they are homogeneous and there is not an active market of Jack Marriott's being traded daily. Players are all different and would not meet the level 1 input criteria. - Level 2 inputs: These are quoted prices for similar assets in active markets or quoted prices for identical assets which are from inactive markets. In reality, footballers are not really similar assets as the sales prices are so volatile and cannot be reliably measured. Form, contract length, medical history, nationality and age all haze the situation further. The willingness of other clubs to buy a player has a massive impact on the valuation rather than the individual player himself. - Level 3 inputs: These are values which determined from observable sources. For example, Mel Morris' excel model or an in-house assessment of other forwards etc. These are the least reliable and is what the player values are based on. As you go down the hierarchy the relevance of the valuation decreases. The value of players are volatile and are hugely determined by form, injury etc. For example, say Bristol City sign Assombalonga for £20m and in 19/20 he scores 1 goal. This would result in a massive impairment charge of probably about 80% of his value (I say probably because it is impossible to value!). If he then scored 29 goals in 20/21 he would be revalued up to £20 million again, causing massive volatility in the financial statements. If I told my auditor that I was going to use this method, he would laugh his way out of the door before resigning. It is clearly a piece of creative accounting by the Derby County finance team. If I were the audit partner of Smith Cooper Audit Ltd, who sign off the accounts of DC, I'd be sweating that the accounts were going to be reviewed by the governing body as there's some very concerning issues in the accounts. What is even more interesting is that the lead audit partner is a Derby County fan which probably impairs his independence somewhat. As I mentioned previously, it's not the club itself that are completely at blame, there's many other 'professionals' that are failing to perform their duties properly. Apologies all for the length - I'm not sure how many will make it to the end!

What the **** are these names? Absolutely dreadful and insulting to the history of the game. I hope it falls flat on its ass and there's no chance I'll be going to any of the games. What is wrong with T20 cricket - it's short enough?!

I got a little nervous when the 9th wicket took a while to fall. Looks like we're nearly there now!

Thank god Extras top scored in the first innings. His runs have given us a fighting chance. 0-1. Off to a flyer.

Yeah it's the UEFA rules. They're two independent codes of conduct but its just that the UEFA one is mainly administered by the PL (who have no actual say in the rules themselves).

One thing that you might find slightly interesting is that the UEFA have their FFP rules which are different to the Premier League (as you're aware). UEFA sets the rules and each nation has a licensing body, which is the Premier League in England. Any team that wishes to compete in a European competition has to submit a number of reports through the UEFA portal to show that they are in compliance with these rules. All clubs are encouraged to submit these documents to UEFA regardless of their league position but in reality it would only be beneficial for any clubs with a shot of getting into CL/EL in April. These documents are submitted through the portal but are actually detail reviewed and audited by the Premier League (or whoever the local licensing body is). If the test is passed, the club are then issued with the UEFA license. If there are any issues, such as Man City/PSG, UEFA will then step in.