alexxxxx

If we win the next 10 games in a row we might stay up. 

10 minutes ago, Black ('n' White) Sheep said:

Just seen the Reading news... So how come they only get 6 points deducted for breaching P&S and we got 9? Someone enlighten me?

Didn't we technically fail multiple periods and they failed one

Would love to hear @The Baron's view on the final outcome as he is thought as (rightfully or wrongly) as the catalyst for this charge by the efl. 

My view is that the decision notice and the statement by the EFL shows that the agreed decision has some glaring holes in it. For example the £30M additional money couldn't be counted as income for reasons unexplained. 

The fact parry has said it is important to respect the 'principals' of FFP on behalf of other clubs (tactic admission that the rules are not well written). 

The fact that the agreement could only be made if Derby withdrew the admin appeal (these are of course technically unrelated breaches) - suggests that Derby have a reasonable case but efl unwilling to work with us on it properly. 

The fact that the efl state that the restated accounts were never actually submitted in August even though at the time they said they had - my belief is that they were submitted but in fact they weren't thought to be by the efl as being compliant with FRS102 and now the club are being asked to 'agree' that they weren't without that actually being tested in the open.

The reference to straight line amortisation in the agreement where it doesn't actually say that in the regulations (and it could have done). 

The agreement doesn't state why the breaches were only noticed years later.

The fact that the club and the efl have to agree on any further statement means that we'll never ever actually find out what happened behind the scenes. 

Seems to me this outcome is basically due to the fact that the efl have all the time in the world and Derby are running out of money. 

The EFLs actions have been vindictive and Mel/Pearce have not covered their backs enough by making things clear enough when the accounts were submitted to make our case watertight. 

INDEPENDENT REGULATOR FOR EPL, EFL AND NATIONAL LEAGUE NOW. 

10 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Agreed. As I said in an ealier post they should not be negotiating with the administrators as their ultimate goal is not what is in the best interests of the club, whereas the EFLs should be.

I think what we've learned is how the efl operates without a regulator. The efl have no incentive to ever moves things along at haste and they wish to avoid scrutiny. 

The rules can remain the same in my view but the procedure needs to be better defined, with binding time limits for negotiation , and an independent regulator needs to handle the process. The efl will then be minded to improve. 

The efl aren't there to protect fans interests, or even fairness, it's just an organisation that acts on the whims of chairman majority regardless of legal merit. 

If anyone followed macclesfields expulsion from the league... 

I'm gutted it's unlikely we'll never see a thorough dissection of the efl and derbys arguments. 

Fans have been competely let down. 

I hope the efl and Derby publish a full explanation of what rules have been alleged to have been broken, the alleged values of the overspend, amortisation methods etc. 

The EFL have frankly had us by the balls for months and months. The rules and regulators need to change.. It's not fair that fans of the team involved have to be left in uncertainty for years and years. 

Any players of any value will be gone 2nd week of January 

11 minutes ago, maxjam said:

TBH I just don't care anymore. 

If it takes dropping down to Div One to start again with a clean slate and have nothing else hanging over us then so be it.  

Onwards and Upwards.

COYR

I fear a long, long road back unfortunately. 

7 minutes ago, Reggie Greenwood said:

Wonder if we went  legal this would have dragged on for months and one or more of the bidders said just get it done to move on and stop EFL continually stalling things ? Plus if it went on too long Admin would run out of dosh. Check mate from EFL without having to prove what they have done is correct or not ? 

Exactly my thoughts reggie. Efl wont have to prove a thing or show their working. Just bully you until 'justice has been done.' 

Also the 3pts suspended is just pointless. 

14 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

I don't get this....we broker an alleged deal which ends up with us getting deducted 21 points?

Other option is efl drag it out and we can't exit admin and get liquidated.

Breaks my heart this unfortunately. Level of punishment is completely unwarranted and Mel has just thrown us out the window. 

Might as well void all our results as well... 

Well done to all involved at the efl. 

Are we sure the 'future years' doesn't just mean the years after the first set of accounts that were submitted? 

I actually think this is really bad news. 

We've not looked like causing any damage from crosses all game yet this seems to be our current plan

Making Barnsley look like brazil

That was a pen all day at least from the only time I saw it on sky

Not to put a big downer on the evening... But we are in real trouble. 

Hows he beaten from that angle??? 

Nothing but 3pts today lads 

Braves won it all in the end. Don't tend to watch the world series as its on too late but glad it was someone other than the dodgers and astros tbh

8 minutes ago, Mucker1884 said:

 

 

If these posts (and this response) don't get deleted, they will forever be available to the eyes and minds of the worldwide public, and forever be associated with "Derby County fans".

Let that sink in!  ?

Yeah they're really bad takes this is nothing like racism. 

3 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

Well yes the £100,000 fine for allegedly not following an accounting standard (actually a failing if anything by our auditors) is about the size of it.. a smaller fine than Leeds got for spying on us. Did leeds get threatened with relegation for their crime.. I don't think so. 

I think the problem with the LAP/DC decision was that although it found Derby guilty it couldn't seem to guide the efl and Derby to a solution to the amortisation policy issue. The restating accounts requirement has clearly just kicked the can further down the road.

We're nearly 3 months in from submitting p and s and yet we've still got no idea how much we've allegedly broken p&s rules and no independent panel has even yet to be called. 

I know this is boring but I've been pulled in to reading otib and their discussion on us. 

I don't really understand their obsession with us not filing accounts with CH like it's a crime against humanity. I thought it was known that the reason why we've not filed accounts was due to the fact that a fundamental feature of our accounting process has been under scrutiny for so long (years and years) by the efl. Hence why they've not been filed. I also don't quite understand why this in itself has given us (or not) a sporting advantage. Is not filing accounts with CH an offence in itself with proscribed penalty? Surely it is dependent on the outcome of discussions with the efl about the acceptability of amortisation techniques which has been ongoing for literally 2+years?

The DC was clear in that the breach in how the amortisation was described and evidenced in the accounts only merited a small punishment... Any case leading on from that should be based on its own merits.

Derby will eventually be punished (or not, if nothing to answer for) for breaking the rules and an appropriate penalty will be applied. 

Its clear Derby and the efl (and by extension the other clubs) don't trust each other... The independent panels are the best way to resolve this. 

I feel like the whole thing is so blown out of proportion and the background to the whole thing matters. 

Administration is a separate issue and we'll see what happens. 

1 hour ago, Malty said:

Yes, this could be a positive. i.e. we have a real chance of winning our appeal and the EFL have to get their own rules changed quickly to stop an avalanche of clubs going into administration and claiming force majeur as well.

they have to act quickly to change their own rules accordingly. Meanwhile Derby could actually “get away with it” and be successful on appeal … then ironically support the EFL when they propose a rule change to stop other teams doing the same.

The other irony is that Derby seem to have been the master of identying loopholes and being successful in exploiting them (with the possible exception of amortisation). This one they could have been successful in almost by chance rather than design!!

I have half a mind that in a week or so’s time our points deduction will change to minus 6 … then it’s a case of arguing the other points deduction ….

… and by the way on the other front we have no obligation to file accounts for the previous company that is now in administration … and therefore the efl can’t very easily prove that we have failed prs. Unless of course we decide to be really nice and present them with revised accounts … but why would we do that?

We might get away with minus 6 only. now wouldn’t that be brilliant!

Thoroughly dishonest and dishonourable, but still brilliant!!
 

I doubt the efl would drop the requirement for submission of p&s statements. They'll probably have to drop the requirement for submitting accounts to CH. 

10 hours ago, Chester40 said:

That anyone still cares is the more surprising thing.

He's obviously garbage or has serious problems being a professional football player and had an agent who's been successful in hyping him up. 

I'm always skeptical of tech bros. Promise more than they deliver. Let's see... Perhaps there's more cash than him or he's part of a consortium lead by gse. 

13 minutes ago, The Baron said:

 

6: I’m in favour as self regulation has not been an overwhelming success, but it won’t be a silver bullet, just look at regulators such as OFCOM and the water industry. Effectiveness will depend on the powers of the regulator and whether they want to be unpopular with club owners or not.

 

I think the problem that Derby fans have with is that the efl have show to be very poor at self regulation. The opaqueness of how decisions are made on what charges to persue etc seem like they're open to political motivation. The EFLs language in their 'disappointment' in being unable to punish us further and their actions in producing an interchangeable fixture list, for example seems inappropriate for an impartial body. 

I enjoy your podcast kieran just not so much when you're talking about us! 

3 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

It is not wrong logically at all.

Our appeal is based on COVID being the sole reason for going in to administration. If it can be argued that our poor business practices and poor financial state meant we were less resilient to external factors, then that means COVID was not the sole reason for us going in to administration.

COVID was one of the factors, probably even the biggest factor, but was it the only one? Of course not.

I hope we get the deduction reduced or overturned, but I rate the chances of it happening as much as I rate my chances of winning the lottery.

Surely it's about at the time the club goes in to admin rather than what would have happened without covid. 

The reason we're in administration is because we can't service the debt (as Mel can't/won't do it). Maybe It could be proven that covid was the sole reason we went under because revenues due to covid were too low to be matched with mels cash to service the debt and operate the club. 

Its only on Derby to prove, not the efl to disprove, so it's not beyond the possibility that Derby could prove it. 

I also don't think the overall resilience of the club is that relevant to proving whether covid was the only reason it went under. It either went under due to covid or it didn't?