Indy

This bit confuses me. So the arbitration panel (with no accountancy expertise) rules that the commission (which includes an accountant) was wrong on a point of accountancy legality. And that is referred back to the commission (including the accountant) who went into a fair amount of detail about why accountancy law wasn’t broken, to decide on a punishment. Makes no sense. 

This bit confuses me. So the arbitration panel (with no accountancy expertise) rules that the commission (which includes an accountant) was wrong on a point of accountancy legality. And that is referred back to the commission (including the accountant) who went into a fair amount of detail about why accountancy law wasn’t broken, to decide on a punishment. Makes no sense. 

This bit confuses me. So the arbitration panel (with no accountancy expertise) rules that the commission (which includes an accountant) was wrong on a point of accountancy legality. And that is referred back to the commission (including the accountant) who went into a fair amount of detail about why accountancy law wasn’t broken, to decide on a punishment. Makes no sense. 

This bit confuses me. So the arbitration panel (with no accountancy expertise) rules that the commission (which includes an accountant) was wrong on a point of accountancy legality. And that is referred back to the commission (including the accountant) who went into a fair amount of detail about why accountancy law wasn’t broken, to decide on a punishment. Makes no sense. 

Yet the accountants on the DC found nothing wrong with the policy itself. Only lawyers on the LAP think it's improper for the intended purpose. In fact, the LAP praised the club's honesty.

My reading of the 2 staements (EFL vs DCFC) based on zero knowledge of the actually facts:
The EFL needed a win for it's own credibility as much as anything else and are being pretty triumphalist about it.
DCFC also needed a win to get out of the poo.
The result is actually somewhere in between. It's a qualified win for the EFL, but given the orginal panel's pretty scathing verdict of the EFL's case, I don't think they will be inclined to go all guns blazing at us, especially as the part that the appeal overturned was one the original panel were detailed in why they found in our favor.
It's a win for the EFL, but not the big one they want everyone to believe. There's going to be some consiquences for DCFC, but yet to see what. Almost certainly won't be applied this season.

The highlighted part beggars belief. In the absence of a prescribed amortisation model, the club, like most other companies, is obliged to follow financial reporting standards, in this case FRS102. The club's auditors, by definition qualified accountants, were clearly satisfied that they did, so how on earth can someone who is not an accountant say that they didn't. It is almost as if they deliberately chose not to have an accountant on the panel so that they could get the decision they wanted without having to let the facts get in the way of their disgusting face-saving ploy.
 

On the basis that the EFL clearly act when threatened by member clubs, would it be possible for us to threaten them if they do not retrospectively investigate Middlesbrough for selling their tax losses to a group company?

I've been critical of the way we've conducted business and where that has left our finances but on this particular charge I still maintain that I don't think we've done a hell of a lot wrong morally.

I'm getting to the point where I just want it done.
It's been 8 months since the EFL appealed. 

Not entirely unrelated to this thread I get the principles behind FFP but the reality we are seeing this season with the exception maybe of Barnsley having a cracking season is a league that is in danger of becoming a closed loop from the Premier League which is fuelled by the parachute payments, same/similar clubs yo-yoing between the two, the increase in punishments to clubs in our league making them too afraid to dare to dream of anything other than staying in the league.
The 3 coming down next season all have obvious claims of bouncing back, Brentford/Bournemouth/Swansea depending on who goes up will be thereabouts again. 
I'm well aware we have far bigger issues of our own to worry about but if I was a neutral I'd say this league is in real danger of going from exciting to boring very fast. 

It annoys me Kieran Maguire gets so much air time from Derby media sources.
He was the one who complained to the EFL about our accounting practices. Why? What was it to him?
We are in this mess partly, if not largely, down to him.

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

What I can't get my head around is that we have knowingly pushed the rules. Submitted them, expecting them to be rejected, but they haven't and we have continued to operate that way. On that basis, they cannot retrospectively punish us.
Also what we have done is not some random new way of reviewing assets, its common practice, so the notion that we have pulled the wool over their eyes is absolute tosh. 

Not in the eyes of the independent panel who had access to all of the relevant information though. 

Looking at other team’s forums and the heart warming responses on Twitter and the like makes you realise how people blindly lap up anything printed in the Daily Mail. No wonder we are stuck with Boris Johnson for the next 200 years. I had a read to check the number of modal verbs used in that badly written article and subsequently found another article that said our survival was ‘one of the most dismal sights of the weekend’.
I love the unbiased tone of that article. I am going to presume that Mel Morris has become friends with Jeremy Corbyn. I think it is the most likely explanation for this love affair they have developed with us, whilst conveniently ignoring all other transgressions, as pointed out elsewhere.
Personally I draw comfort from knowing that no matter how much that awful rag hates us, it will never be as much as I despise it and it’s bigoted, badly written divisive poo.
 
 

Can you blame them? Especially if what is read by supporters of other clubs are just the endless negative articles written about us by various papers.
It wasn't so long ago that everyone was rooting for us in a play-off final over a "cheating" QPR. Now the tables have turned. There's always the animosity towards the clubs that have splashed the cash to get up but failed, rather than those who were successful as they stuck two fingers up to the rules on the way up.
Lots of praise for teams like Leicester, Villa, Wolves etc in recent seasons for how they've done in the Premier League, with very little mention that they bent the same, or similar rules as we have apparently broken to get there. They were successful with it, we weren't. We're the ones who are vilified.

IIRC didn’t the EFL’s argument rest on the interpretation of their own regulations saying a method must be “applied consistently” which they retrospectively defined as consistent with other clubs? The panel said there was no legal definition of consistent in this case, and DCFC’s interpretation of it being consistent over time (ie we didn’t change the methodology each year to suit ourselves) was reasonable. 

IIRC didn’t the EFL’s argument rest on the interpretation of their own regulations saying a method must be “applied consistently” which they retrospectively defined as consistent with other clubs? The panel said there was no legal definition of consistent in this case, and DCFC’s interpretation of it being consistent over time (ie we didn’t change the methodology each year to suit ourselves) was reasonable. 

IIRC didn’t the EFL’s argument rest on the interpretation of their own regulations saying a method must be “applied consistently” which they retrospectively defined as consistent with other clubs? The panel said there was no legal definition of consistent in this case, and DCFC’s interpretation of it being consistent over time (ie we didn’t change the methodology each year to suit ourselves) was reasonable. 

Ignorant query:
How can we have lost £30m more by accounting for reduction in player values over the course of a contract at differing rates?
Surely that moves the losses to different years, rather than magics them away?
 

IIRC didn’t the EFL’s argument rest on the interpretation of their own regulations saying a method must be “applied consistently” which they retrospectively defined as consistent with other clubs? The panel said there was no legal definition of consistent in this case, and DCFC’s interpretation of it being consistent over time (ie we didn’t change the methodology each year to suit ourselves) was reasonable. 

Just going back to basics and excuse my ignorance but who said we cant use the amortisation policy we decided to use? Who said it was wrong and why is it wrong? 

Surely it isn’t as simple as saying that if we have to make adjustments, we fail P&S and get punished because if the EFL had done their jobs in the first place, as the governing body, they would have pulled Derby up on it. Derby would surely then have adjusted transfer plans accordingly to meet P&S at the time?

Depends on what the punishment might be:
If it’s slap on the wrist and a relatively small fine then yes, take it and move on. If it’s a points deduction, that’s a different matter and may depend on the number of points.