Ghost of Clough

You missed the bit where we asked then if it was acceptable before we actually submitted the P&S figure to them

You missed the bit where we asked then if it was acceptable before we actually submitted the P&S figure to them

I trust my figures over his

A reminder of what the EFL are appealing...
The second charge (amortisation) was split up into 5 particulars.

1. The EFL withdraw the first particular,  so nothing to look into.
2. This is not in contradiction to the financial standard FRS102
3. As per the 2nd particular
4. Unreliability in estimating a player's value does not mean the policy contradicts FRS102. 
5. Inadequate disclosure is punishable. As it doesn't impact passing/failing P&S, it is impossible to receive a points penalty against this particular.

A reminder of what the EFL are appealing...
The second charge (amortisation) was split up into 5 particulars.

1. The EFL withdraw the first particular,  so nothing to look into.
2. This is not in contradiction to the financial standard FRS102
3. As per the 2nd particular
4. Unreliability in estimating a player's value does not mean the policy contradicts FRS102. 
5. Inadequate disclosure is punishable. As it doesn't impact passing/failing P&S, it is impossible to receive a points penalty against this particular.

12 points for the overspend. Then plus some more (up to 9) for deliberately misleading and failing to provide details on the policy. Then minus some for EFL incompetence.
So 0 points.

12 points for the overspend. Then plus some more (up to 9) for deliberately misleading and failing to provide details on the policy. Then minus some for EFL incompetence.
So 0 points.

12 points for the overspend. Then plus some more (up to 9) for deliberately misleading and failing to provide details on the policy. Then minus some for EFL incompetence.
So 0 points.

I trust my figures over his

I trust my figures over his

I trust my figures over his

I love the idea of taking a holiday in Sunderland.  

A reminder of what the EFL are appealing...
The second charge (amortisation) was split up into 5 particulars.

1. The EFL withdraw the first particular,  so nothing to look into.
2. This is not in contradiction to the financial standard FRS102
3. As per the 2nd particular
4. Unreliability in estimating a player's value does not mean the policy contradicts FRS102. 
5. Inadequate disclosure is punishable. As it doesn't impact passing/failing P&S, it is impossible to receive a points penalty against this particular.

First line: The EFL has won its appeal
Next paragraph: An independent panel will now decide on what punishment
So they haven't won anything yet. A "win" could simply be a penalty.
They state Wednesday as a "precedent", yet ignore the fact they were awarded the 12 point penalty at the end of last season, with the deduction being applied to this season. Using that precedent, a penalty for us would be applied to next season.
 
The reporting in this country is poor.

A reminder of what the EFL are appealing...
The second charge (amortisation) was split up into 5 particulars.

1. The EFL withdraw the first particular,  so nothing to look into.
2. This is not in contradiction to the financial standard FRS102
3. As per the 2nd particular
4. Unreliability in estimating a player's value does not mean the policy contradicts FRS102. 
5. Inadequate disclosure is punishable. As it doesn't impact passing/failing P&S, it is impossible to receive a points penalty against this particular.

First line: The EFL has won its appeal
Next paragraph: An independent panel will now decide on what punishment
So they haven't won anything yet. A "win" could simply be a penalty.
They state Wednesday as a "precedent", yet ignore the fact they were awarded the 12 point penalty at the end of last season, with the deduction being applied to this season. Using that precedent, a penalty for us would be applied to next season.
 
The reporting in this country is poor.

A reminder of what the EFL are appealing...
The second charge (amortisation) was split up into 5 particulars.

1. The EFL withdraw the first particular,  so nothing to look into.
2. This is not in contradiction to the financial standard FRS102
3. As per the 2nd particular
4. Unreliability in estimating a player's value does not mean the policy contradicts FRS102. 
5. Inadequate disclosure is punishable. As it doesn't impact passing/failing P&S, it is impossible to receive a points penalty against this particular.

They were given a penalty during the season. The appeal wasn't until the season ended, with the original penalty standing. Very different circumstances than what we have.

A reminder of what the EFL are appealing...
The second charge (amortisation) was split up into 5 particulars.

1. The EFL withdraw the first particular,  so nothing to look into.
2. This is not in contradiction to the financial standard FRS102
3. As per the 2nd particular
4. Unreliability in estimating a player's value does not mean the policy contradicts FRS102. 
5. Inadequate disclosure is punishable. As it doesn't impact passing/failing P&S, it is impossible to receive a points penalty against this particular.

First line: The EFL has won its appeal
Next paragraph: An independent panel will now decide on what punishment
So they haven't won anything yet. A "win" could simply be a penalty.
They state Wednesday as a "precedent", yet ignore the fact they were awarded the 12 point penalty at the end of last season, with the deduction being applied to this season. Using that precedent, a penalty for us would be applied to next season.
 
The reporting in this country is poor.

But we were charged with filling P&S. "Breach of acounting standards", "EFL regs" and misleading the EFL does not equate to failing P&S.
I envisage a fine for misleading the EFL and refusing to hand over details of the policy on request. There is absolutely no chance of a points deduction.

Hello Kieran

A reminder of what the EFL are appealing...
The second charge (amortisation) was split up into 5 particulars.

1. The EFL withdraw the first particular,  so nothing to look into.
2. This is not in contradiction to the financial standard FRS102
3. As per the 2nd particular
4. Unreliability in estimating a player's value does not mean the policy contradicts FRS102. 
5. Inadequate disclosure is punishable. As it doesn't impact passing/failing P&S, it is impossible to receive a points penalty against this particular.

They were given a penalty during the season. The appeal wasn't until the season ended, with the original penalty standing. Very different circumstances than what we have.