chinapig

38 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Maybe the likes of Reading, the ones spending too much with little regard for the rules.

The best thing Derby can do is get their accounts sorted, show some willing.  Leaving it to 18th August is just giving the EFL opportunity to (rightly) play hardball.

I sense administration and a points deduction….plus a tightrope on further points deducted if the accounts are not in order.

Rooney can bleat all he likes.

Yes, it's hard to see why clubs would be sympathetic unless they are in a similar position. Or in other cases would like the regime weakened in case they find themselves facing sanctions in future.

I fear that the fact that it's Rooney doing the bleating as opposed to a manager who is not a celebrity may carry more weight than it should.

14 minutes ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

Well, there`s a turn up - who could have predicted that!

Though I suspect we can predict the outcome. The phrase "there is some sympathy .." points in a certain direction.

If the EFL say, "Tough, you knowingly broke the rules and you knew what the sanctions were" I might even start to believe they take the issue seriously though.

15 minutes ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

Derby County face starting season without a centre-back, says Wayne Rooney - BBC Sport

Is that the sound of the world`s smallest violin I hear?

Come now, apparently poor little innocent Derby are being victimised by the evil EFL. Have a heart. Or not as the case may be.

Of course if it wasn't for the grossly unfair transfer embargo they could have signed Richard Keogh to solve their centre back problem.

46 minutes ago, Hxj said:

I am sure that his statement is as honest as all the others.  Whilst there might be a further profit, that means that there also might not be.  Surprising that given the time passed he doesn't actually know there is.

A bit like all the official DCFC statements that fail to mention whether they fail the P&S loss limits or pass them.  That would be something that I would have checked when the EFL first got concerned. If I passed I could have restated the accounts, agreed to a non-points sanction and moved on.

Technically it is for the EFL to propose an 'agreed sanction' with a list of reasons and for the club to accept or reject.  In addition costs follow the decision so if the club was sanctioned at any hearing it would have to pay some costs as well.  That said we all know that the decisions are not made in a vacuum.  However I don't see a conspiracy here, but then I generally don't.  I would consider the suspended (until the end of the 2021/22 season) 3 point penalty for a one month failure to pay the players an entirely reasonable sanction. 

Personally I won't have faith in the outcome until I have faith in the process and those controlling it.

You may think otherwise but the history of the governance of the game doesn't lead me to accept the word of those in power.

Wholesale reform of governance is required but I doubt it will happen because there are too many powerful vested interests.

8 minutes ago, Hxj said:

It simplifies and speeds up justice and it reduces costs significantly.

Team A has breached FFP by say an amount which it means a 6 point penalty arises.  If both parties so wish, why not agree a 6 point penalty arises. 

And what if Team A says we will only agree to a suspended penalty or it will cost you (the EFL) a lot of time and money to go through due process?

Still, as in politics, we all agree that these things are agreed by decent chaps in back rooms. Don't we?

20 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

In lieu of and avoiding a Disciplinary Process, clubs and the EFL can agree to a, ell "Agreed Decision".

Applied to both Derby and Sheffield Wednesday here, Not entirely sure why, seems a bit odd- there seems to be provision within the EFL Regs but why exactly.

I don't really know if it's appropriate tbh. However on the plus side, IF the EFL stick to the letter of the law with the Embargo, maybe Derby will have to include the kids they fielded at Chorley among their 23/24 man squad. 

At Chorley they fielded a scratch team due to a Covid outbreak, most of them kids who played their one and only game but by EFL Regs for such offences, they could be construed as players of "Professional Standing" or whatever the exact term is.

Quite so doing deals over an expensive dinner is built into the rules. The only question remaining is who pays for the dinner.

No doubt as a part of the transparency the EFL is suddenly claiming we will be told who did the deal, when and where.

54 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Tbh @chinapig

Not fully sure I agree. Small steps for a start, let's remember in 2018/19 there were multiple non wage payment incidents and possibly one stretching back to 2017/18 in the case of Macclesfield.

EFL under Shaun Harvey did nothing- Bury rode to promotion and Bolton fought against relegation the two high profile examples without censure or intervention as wages were either late or unpaid. The Governance that occurred with Bolton, Bury, Macclesfield arrived after he had left.

Suspended sentences will hold a Club's feet to the fire- any failure before next June and Bang, -3 or -6 automatically, hopefully fresh charges would follow too over that offence.

I don't think it's enough but I credit improvement when I see it. Much more needs to be done, ie why wait until now when in Derby's case when it was December/January 2020/21.

Sheffield Wednesday would be harder to penalise in the existing season given this occurred March-June.

3 pts=1 month. To be applied automatically, moving forward IMO.

As for the line on that BBC article, it wasn't unfortunately the EFL's decision to make IIRC. The Independent Panel set the sentence and I hope the implications of that remain in full force for the Club.

Resubmit Accounts for 2015/16, 2016/17 and 2017/18 the correct way by 18th August. This will have a knock-on effect on multiple periods.

I take your points but I would like to see an automatic 3 point deduction if, say, a club fails to pay its players twice in the same season with further deductions for subsequent failures.

The problem is that the EFL is the clubs not an independent governing body. I suspect many clubs don't want a stronger regime in case they want to break the rules themselves in future.

And decisions of the Independent Panel and subsequent appeal decisions seem to be remarkably timid. I suspect a plea bargain was agreed with Derby and Wednesday in this case.

Let's see if Swindon get a feeble penalty for paying their players late but short of government intervention I don't expect football's governing bodies to ever get their act in order.

Love the game, hate the business.

Can't get the link to paste but more evidence from the BBC of the EFL getting tough on big clubs. I'm sure the same generosity will be shown to small ones. Won't it?

Derby County and Sheffield Wednesday will start next season on the same points mark as all their rivals after receiving suspended points deductions.

Assuming they comply with EFL rules on the payment of their players, both will escape any immediate points penalties.

Championship side Derby have accepted a suspended three-point penalty, to be implemented only if the club fail to pay their players before 30 June 2022.

Relegated League One Wednesday accepted a suspended six-point deduction.

This will only come into effect if the club do not pay in full the arrears owed to the players on or before 5 July 2021 and/or they fail to pay their players before 30 June 2022.

It is understood that these arrears have now been paid.

If Wednesday pay their players up until 31 December 2021, the sanction will be reduced to a suspended three-point deduction.

Both cases refer to last season's Championship, in which Wednesday began the season under a 12-point deduction, later halved to six, before being relegated by three points, while Wayne Rooney's Derby stayed up on the final day thanks to nearest rivals Rotherham shipping a late equaliser at Cardiff.

An EFL statement said: "In December 2020, Derby County failed to pay their players as per the terms of the agreements between the club and its players and were charged with misconduct under the EFL regulations.

"In the months of March 2021, April 2021, May 2021 and June 2021, Sheffield Wednesday failed to pay their players as per the terms of the agreements between the club and its players and were charged with misconduct under the EFL."

Derby have endured a turbulent few weeks, having been hit with a £100,000 fine last month for breaching rules relating to financial fair play.

There was also uncertainty over which league the Rams would be playing in next season after the EFL announced an "interchangeable fixture list". But the EFL decided not to implement the decision to deduct points.

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Derby can’t be under P&S….they’ve yet to re-state their accounts!!!

If they are found not to be compliant the Commission will get tough and increase the fine to £110k then.

Firpo has joined Leeds for £16m and rumour is that Man City will go for Griezmann if they can't get Kane.

Pjanic has been linked with Man Utd and Spurs I think.

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Hard to understand why it was lifted or how it slipped through the net in the first place tbh, this particular loophole has caused nothing but trouble

Assuming it did slip through. Alternatively maybe it was engineered for certain favoured clubs who wanted to go on squandering money without penalty and regardless of the potential long term damage.

11 minutes ago, Rich said:

Talking with one of their supporters the other day, who said that people in the know have heard that a deal has been done for the fruit market, by either Wael, or his company. Backed up by the fact that he now has a personal wealth of some £400m. When we delved a little further into his personal wealth, we found that the information on his wealth referred to 2016 and was the family wealth, not Waels.

If I'm not mistaken, this wealth was diminished with a drop in share value of the Bank or Hotel business. Even so, with the passing of his father giving his bank account a boost, you'd expect a figure possibly around 25% of that family wealth, so upwards of £100m. A tidy sum but, is it enough to purchase the Fruit Market and adjoining land and build a stadium? Just saw that Everton's new stadium is expected to cost £500m. What could Wael expect to get if he decided to spunk all his fortune into this venture. If he did, at least it would prove how insane he actually is.

My one fear is that Marvin and his right hand man are doing a covert deal with the city's land, just to give those cretins a more even platform to compete.

 

Surely this is old news? Or isn't their new stadium opening in August after all?

1 hour ago, havanatopia said:

Parry was supposed to be the tough breath of fresh air. He's just a limp ***** like the rest of them. That meal with Morris in west London was the ultimate stitch up.

I have little doubt that Parry and Morris agreed a plea bargain so to speak.

1. Have a little charade pretending the EFL is being tough that results in a puny fine.

2. Claim EFL lawyers have said there are no grounds for appeal and pretend to be disappointed 

3. Advise Derby how to best finesse their revised accounts.

4. Agree a 6 point penalty say but tell them to appeal in the knowledge it will be cut by half.

5. Issue a statement claiming the EFL has upheld the integrity of the game.

6. Morris picks up the bill for the next slap up meal with Parry.

7. On to next nice little earner.

2 minutes ago, hertsexile said:

Let's face the legal process has made a complete mockery of the Derby case legal loopholes have once again allowed a team to get away with bending the rules. The sooner we get a fair and just playing field regarding financial matters in the football the better it has been shown that FFP rules do not work !

Parachute payments need to be scrapped as we are rewarding failure use the money wasted on this to increase winning pots for successful teams that win promotion from the lower leagues

 

Don't worry, the 'fan led' review (the one with precisely one fan representative) will sort it out. As long as it does what the big Premier League clubs want.

4 minutes ago, Jerseybean said:

This article suggests there could even be a switch after the season starts….https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/crazy-fixture-scenario-derby-wycombe-24426643?fbclid=IwAR3LOX_JSuzfJJR2FkON9mpMZH07OV4vfKbXKaJGAMwqgKK04nOet6yAdfk
 

Whereas this EFL statement concludes with saying the fixtures as published will stand: https://www.dcfc.co.uk/news/2021/07/efl-statement-derby-county-sanction-written-reasons

TBH I have no idea if this saga is now done and dusted or not! 

Doesn't the Mirror piece predate the EFL statement?

The latter roughly translates as "phew, we don't have to relegate Derby and our lawyers have given us cover so we can pretend we would have been tough without actually doing anything".

When the revised accounts are in my money's on a 6 point deduction (if any) reduced to 3 on appeal. Possibly agreed in advance with Derby.

7 minutes ago, The Gasbuster said:

Is anybody actually surprised at this outcome ?

I reckon it suits the EFL. Does anybody really believe they wanted to relegate Derby? A bit of posturing to look tough then a big sigh of relief from Parry I suspect.

7 minutes ago, sephjnr said:

Or Wigan. Or Bury. Or Bolton. Or Macclesfield. Wednesday got bitchslapped with points lost a season too late, I wonder if they won't touch Derby after the fine after all.

If Parry is anything like his predecessor Harvey he will already be advising Derby how to finesse their revised accounts so they look like they didn't breach FFP.

2 minutes ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

EFL bottled it again? 

I reckon the EFL statement was meant to read "we instructed our lawyers not to find any grounds for appeal ...".

2 minutes ago, Red Cloud said:

stinks of back-handers

More a case of "it's Wayne Rooney's Derby County so of course we have to go easy on them. Now if it was Wycombe ..."

1 hour ago, TomF said:

Colleague went to AG for his second jab yesterday and noted a women walking in for hers in full rovers kit attire.  #obsessed 

When she was directed to the Stand did she ask what one of those was?

14 hours ago, Redsi2 said:

They can't help mentioning Barcelona again. Why!!!!

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/bristol-rovers-kick-pre-season-5583303

What next, naming their new Low Performance Centre La Gasia?

4 minutes ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

I suppose at most clubs, when a player performs badly, he is threatened with being packed off to some ramshackle lower league outfit as punishment.

I wonder what the s*gs threaten those players with?

Judging by recent events, a move back to League 1 with Gillingham. Thereby missing the chance to wear the world famous quarters representing the Barcelona of League 2. Cruel and unusual punishment.

1 hour ago, BS3City said:

Indeed Idliketo, I thought the same as you, which is why I snuck into the Memstad the other day to gather some evidence. 

Their tarmac is indeed something to be proud of.

Special, just like them...

You mock but those are Championship ready weeds.

1 hour ago, AnAstonVillafan said:

I'm sure Derby will get whats coming to them. The club is in a downward spiral anyhow with one owner who does not want to be there and no one coming to the rescue.  The EFL will get them sooner or later, if they are proven to be guilty.

And yes The EFL are mostly to blame. The regs have loopholes and they seem slow to react. I believe currently they are more geared towards saving clubs rather than compliance.

I think your last sentence hits the mark. In fact Shaun Harvey pretty much said so iirc. I suspect he at best turned a blind eye and at worst encouraged clubs to find a way around the rules, hence the fashion for "selling" stadiums.

It's going to be hard for the EFL to recover the position, assuming they have the will to do so in the first place.

41 minutes ago, Red Army 75 said:

Joey Barton has been found guilty and sentenced to 3 more years at Bristol Rovers 

Cruel and unusual punishment out of all proportion to the offence. He would undoubtedly win an appeal.