MadAmster

Maybe Walkley actually has a Littlehampton and there is where his insecurity all starts...  ?

Maybe Walkley actually has a Littlehampton and there is where his insecurity all starts...  ?

Didn't finish this sentence in my previous post so here it is in full...
What I feel they should have done was to have told us we couldn't use it anymore and that, either from the 20/21 season or the 21/22 season we should have reverted to linear depreciation. That would have been fair under the circumstances.

Ours got ridiculously expensive. We booked, initially, flights from Amsterdam to Donington. Cheapest destination and only 30 minutes from Derby by bus. The flights turned out to be cheaper via Booking.com, at £150 return each, than direct with the airline, Flybe. Last week Flybe went belly up. Because we booked through Booking.com we're not covered by ATOL so we are now pinning our hopes on the Credit Card company refunding our money. Immediately booked KLM flights into Brum at £300 apiece. The bus from EMA to Derby was a fiver return last time I used it, might be a couple of quid dearer now. Train from Brum International £25 return. All in all that's 500 apiece so far and we haven't had a drink or any food yet..... here's hoping the credit card company comes through... 

Didn't finish this sentence in my previous post so here it is in full...
What I feel they should have done was to have told us we couldn't use it anymore and that, either from the 20/21 season or the 21/22 season we should have reverted to linear depreciation. That would have been fair under the circumstances.

The rules were retrospectively changed to include banning the depreciation method. A method MM told them we were ging to use back in 2015. Why did it take them 4 years to decide there was something "iffy" with the method? The 12 point administration penalty was, using hindsight, inevitable as the debt was unsustainable and MM couldn't/wouldn't continue to pay for the mess he'd made. IMO we got screwed over with the other 9 point FFP penalty. We had stayed, very narrowly, within FFP limits by the depreciation method and the sale of the ground. To me, an advocate of natural justice, the EFL should have recognised their culpability in accepting the method in 4 years' accounts before finally deciding they didn't like it. They used a blanket, cover any and all eventualities clause that gives them carte blanche to take action if they believe something, although not specifically banned, gives a club an unfair advantage. What I feel they should have done was to have told us we couldn't use it anymore and that, either from the 20/21 season or the 21/22 season. We would have been the first club to survive a 12 point deduction. The whole thing would have been sorted much earlier, we'd still be a Championship side and Gibson wouldn't have liked the outcome. A definite win=win situation ?

Didn't finish this sentence in my previous post so here it is in full...
What I feel they should have done was to have told us we couldn't use it anymore and that, either from the 20/21 season or the 21/22 season we should have reverted to linear depreciation. That would have been fair under the circumstances.

Didn't finish this sentence in my previous post so here it is in full...
What I feel they should have done was to have told us we couldn't use it anymore and that, either from the 20/21 season or the 21/22 season we should have reverted to linear depreciation. That would have been fair under the circumstances.

That'll be 6000 then if you count the ones Morecambe won't sell.

A 2 year business plan is an EFL requirement for all clubs coming out of Administration. The EFL has a sort of skeleton, the club puts the meat on the bones and then it's down to the EFL whether they accept the plan or ask for amendments. To the best of my knowledge, DCFC's plan was accepted first time. They didn't write it, we did.

The amortisation (player depreciation) issue. It's a weird one. Under UK Government accounting rules (FRS102), the methodology used by DCFC under MM (he told the EFL he was going to use that method in 2015, why did it take them 4 years to decide it was "illegal" under EFL rules?) is 100% legal and used by many firms. In 2019 there wasn't a specific EFL rule disallowing its use. 
The first tribunal, which contained some accountants (logical when it's an accounting issue) found the club not guilty. The EFL decided to appeal, on the very last day they could lodge an appeal. The appeal committee contained ZERO accountants to adjudge this accounting issue. They found DCFC guilty. We had to amend and resubmit several years accounts and the end result was we were seen to have broken FFP limits in, IIRC, 3 seasons. That led to the 9 point deduction.
Several months later, the EFL introduced a new rule disallowing the methodology DCFC had used. Yes, that's right. They made a rule to stop anyone else doing it. So, why did we get found guilty. The answer is that they have, alongside the specific rules, a catch all get out clause to the effect that they can decide something is wrong if they feel like it. In this case DCFC was using a different amortisation methodology to the rest of the Championship sides and that was, somehow, despite being legal, unfair to the other clubs.
Did we get shafted? IMO most definitely. Why were we shafted? Again, this is a personal opinion. MM had ruffled too many EFL feathers and was involved in a spat with another SBC club chairman and together they saw a way to "get their own back".
Move to 2023 and it seems Chelsea are doing the same, or something very similar. UEFA will be changing their rules next season to stop anybody else doing it. Chelsea have got in first and will get away with it.
Strangely enough, I'm glad someone got burnt, unhappy it was us but I sincerely hope that the EFL and PL (hopefully UEFA and FIFA too) change the rules in order to ensure no other club can get into the situation we were in.  

Which is exactly what I wrote. (y)
 

The amortisation (player depreciation) issue. It's a weird one. Under UK Government accounting rules (FRS102), the methodology used by DCFC under MM (he told the EFL he was going to use that method in 2015, why did it take them 4 years to decide it was "illegal" under EFL rules?) is 100% legal and used by many firms. In 2019 there wasn't a specific EFL rule disallowing its use. 
The first tribunal, which contained some accountants (logical when it's an accounting issue) found the club not guilty. The EFL decided to appeal, on the very last day they could lodge an appeal. The appeal committee contained ZERO accountants to adjudge this accounting issue. They found DCFC guilty. We had to amend and resubmit several years accounts and the end result was we were seen to have broken FFP limits in, IIRC, 3 seasons. That led to the 9 point deduction.
Several months later, the EFL introduced a new rule disallowing the methodology DCFC had used. Yes, that's right. They made a rule to stop anyone else doing it. So, why did we get found guilty. The answer is that they have, alongside the specific rules, a catch all get out clause to the effect that they can decide something is wrong if they feel like it. In this case DCFC was using a different amortisation methodology to the rest of the Championship sides and that was, somehow, despite being legal, unfair to the other clubs.
Did we get shafted? IMO most definitely. Why were we shafted? Again, this is a personal opinion. MM had ruffled too many EFL feathers and was involved in a spat with another SBC club chairman and together they saw a way to "get their own back".
Move to 2023 and it seems Chelsea are doing the same, or something very similar. UEFA will be changing their rules next season to stop anybody else doing it. Chelsea have got in first and will get away with it.
Strangely enough, I'm glad someone got burnt, unhappy it was us but I sincerely hope that the EFL and PL (hopefully UEFA and FIFA too) change the rules in order to ensure no other club can get into the situation we were in.  

Morecambe have a very good home record and a poor away record. I see that away record not improving on Saturday.

Morecambe have a very good home record and a poor away record. I see that away record not improving on Saturday.

The amortisation (player depreciation) issue. It's a weird one. Under UK Government accounting rules (FRS102), the methodology used by DCFC under MM (he told the EFL he was going to use that method in 2015, why did it take them 4 years to decide it was "illegal" under EFL rules?) is 100% legal and used by many firms. In 2019 there wasn't a specific EFL rule disallowing its use. 
The first tribunal, which contained some accountants (logical when it's an accounting issue) found the club not guilty. The EFL decided to appeal, on the very last day they could lodge an appeal. The appeal committee contained ZERO accountants to adjudge this accounting issue. They found DCFC guilty. We had to amend and resubmit several years accounts and the end result was we were seen to have broken FFP limits in, IIRC, 3 seasons. That led to the 9 point deduction.
Several months later, the EFL introduced a new rule disallowing the methodology DCFC had used. Yes, that's right. They made a rule to stop anyone else doing it. So, why did we get found guilty. The answer is that they have, alongside the specific rules, a catch all get out clause to the effect that they can decide something is wrong if they feel like it. In this case DCFC was using a different amortisation methodology to the rest of the Championship sides and that was, somehow, despite being legal, unfair to the other clubs.
Did we get shafted? IMO most definitely. Why were we shafted? Again, this is a personal opinion. MM had ruffled too many EFL feathers and was involved in a spat with another SBC club chairman and together they saw a way to "get their own back".
Move to 2023 and it seems Chelsea are doing the same, or something very similar. UEFA will be changing their rules next season to stop anybody else doing it. Chelsea have got in first and will get away with it.
Strangely enough, I'm glad someone got burnt, unhappy it was us but I sincerely hope that the EFL and PL (hopefully UEFA and FIFA too) change the rules in order to ensure no other club can get into the situation we were in.  

A 2 year business plan is an EFL requirement for all clubs coming out of Administration. The EFL has a sort of skeleton, the club puts the meat on the bones and then it's down to the EFL whether they accept the plan or ask for amendments. To the best of my knowledge, DCFC's plan was accepted first time. They didn't write it, we did.

The amortisation (player depreciation) issue. It's a weird one. Under UK Government accounting rules (FRS102), the methodology used by DCFC under MM (he told the EFL he was going to use that method in 2015, why did it take them 4 years to decide it was "illegal" under EFL rules?) is 100% legal and used by many firms. In 2019 there wasn't a specific EFL rule disallowing its use. 
The first tribunal, which contained some accountants (logical when it's an accounting issue) found the club not guilty. The EFL decided to appeal, on the very last day they could lodge an appeal. The appeal committee contained ZERO accountants to adjudge this accounting issue. They found DCFC guilty. We had to amend and resubmit several years accounts and the end result was we were seen to have broken FFP limits in, IIRC, 3 seasons. That led to the 9 point deduction.
Several months later, the EFL introduced a new rule disallowing the methodology DCFC had used. Yes, that's right. They made a rule to stop anyone else doing it. So, why did we get found guilty. The answer is that they have, alongside the specific rules, a catch all get out clause to the effect that they can decide something is wrong if they feel like it. In this case DCFC was using a different amortisation methodology to the rest of the Championship sides and that was, somehow, despite being legal, unfair to the other clubs.
Did we get shafted? IMO most definitely. Why were we shafted? Again, this is a personal opinion. MM had ruffled too many EFL feathers and was involved in a spat with another SBC club chairman and together they saw a way to "get their own back".
Move to 2023 and it seems Chelsea are doing the same, or something very similar. UEFA will be changing their rules next season to stop anybody else doing it. Chelsea have got in first and will get away with it.
Strangely enough, I'm glad someone got burnt, unhappy it was us but I sincerely hope that the EFL and PL (hopefully UEFA and FIFA too) change the rules in order to ensure no other club can get into the situation we were in.  

The amortisation (player depreciation) issue. It's a weird one. Under UK Government accounting rules (FRS102), the methodology used by DCFC under MM (he told the EFL he was going to use that method in 2015, why did it take them 4 years to decide it was "illegal" under EFL rules?) is 100% legal and used by many firms. In 2019 there wasn't a specific EFL rule disallowing its use. 
The first tribunal, which contained some accountants (logical when it's an accounting issue) found the club not guilty. The EFL decided to appeal, on the very last day they could lodge an appeal. The appeal committee contained ZERO accountants to adjudge this accounting issue. They found DCFC guilty. We had to amend and resubmit several years accounts and the end result was we were seen to have broken FFP limits in, IIRC, 3 seasons. That led to the 9 point deduction.
Several months later, the EFL introduced a new rule disallowing the methodology DCFC had used. Yes, that's right. They made a rule to stop anyone else doing it. So, why did we get found guilty. The answer is that they have, alongside the specific rules, a catch all get out clause to the effect that they can decide something is wrong if they feel like it. In this case DCFC was using a different amortisation methodology to the rest of the Championship sides and that was, somehow, despite being legal, unfair to the other clubs.
Did we get shafted? IMO most definitely. Why were we shafted? Again, this is a personal opinion. MM had ruffled too many EFL feathers and was involved in a spat with another SBC club chairman and together they saw a way to "get their own back".
Move to 2023 and it seems Chelsea are doing the same, or something very similar. UEFA will be changing their rules next season to stop anybody else doing it. Chelsea have got in first and will get away with it.
Strangely enough, I'm glad someone got burnt, unhappy it was us but I sincerely hope that the EFL and PL (hopefully UEFA and FIFA too) change the rules in order to ensure no other club can get into the situation we were in.  

Let's get out of L1 first before thinking about whether we could be as successful in the SBC. One week into July we had 5 players. On zero outlay, LR put together a good squad which PW has got more organised and on a roll. IMO, this squad would likely end up between 12th and 16th in the SBC next season if we went up. PW would, most definitely, get some new blood in and we might lose a couple, especially of the older players. I don't see Curt or Stears in the squad next season. Didzy might manage half the games. Next season, as things stand, we still can't pay transfer/loan/agent's fees so it will be free loans, free transfers or free agents. Obviously the "aim" would be promotion but, realistically, midtable is as much as we could hope for.
Let's not try to run while we're still perfecting walking.

Nice one ?  
 

Morecambe have a very good home record and a poor away record. I see that away record not improving on Saturday.

Strange prediction.. I'll go for 2561 left in the home end

The amortisation (player depreciation) issue. It's a weird one. Under UK Government accounting rules (FRS102), the methodology used by DCFC under MM (he told the EFL he was going to use that method in 2015, why did it take them 4 years to decide it was "illegal" under EFL rules?) is 100% legal and used by many firms. In 2019 there wasn't a specific EFL rule disallowing its use. 
The first tribunal, which contained some accountants (logical when it's an accounting issue) found the club not guilty. The EFL decided to appeal, on the very last day they could lodge an appeal. The appeal committee contained ZERO accountants to adjudge this accounting issue. They found DCFC guilty. We had to amend and resubmit several years accounts and the end result was we were seen to have broken FFP limits in, IIRC, 3 seasons. That led to the 9 point deduction.
Several months later, the EFL introduced a new rule disallowing the methodology DCFC had used. Yes, that's right. They made a rule to stop anyone else doing it. So, why did we get found guilty. The answer is that they have, alongside the specific rules, a catch all get out clause to the effect that they can decide something is wrong if they feel like it. In this case DCFC was using a different amortisation methodology to the rest of the Championship sides and that was, somehow, despite being legal, unfair to the other clubs.
Did we get shafted? IMO most definitely. Why were we shafted? Again, this is a personal opinion. MM had ruffled too many EFL feathers and was involved in a spat with another SBC club chairman and together they saw a way to "get their own back".
Move to 2023 and it seems Chelsea are doing the same, or something very similar. UEFA will be changing their rules next season to stop anybody else doing it. Chelsea have got in first and will get away with it.
Strangely enough, I'm glad someone got burnt, unhappy it was us but I sincerely hope that the EFL and PL (hopefully UEFA and FIFA too) change the rules in order to ensure no other club can get into the situation we were in.  

Morecambe have a very good home record and a poor away record. I see that away record not improving on Saturday.