AutoWindscreens

Not just an American, but a loudmouth lawyer! And this is what loudmouth lawyers do.

Well, except that he actually talks about the league one fixtures they have coming up.

Not just an American, but a loudmouth lawyer! And this is what loudmouth lawyers do.

£90k per week
£90k per week
£90k per week!
That says it all.
If that is anywhere near true then we deserve to go bust.

£90k per week
£90k per week
£90k per week!
That says it all.
If that is anywhere near true then we deserve to go bust.

£90k per week
£90k per week
£90k per week!
That says it all.
If that is anywhere near true then we deserve to go bust.

When the new kit comes out with blue shorts and red numbers, all will be right with the world.

You're right the appeal would be against the fine, but in order to decide whether to appeal they'd be well-advised to wait for the DC's reasons, which haven't been given yet.
I'm pretty sure that the possibility of points deduction/relegation this season does not come from the accounts which are to be submitted by 18 Aug, but from the possibility of an appeal against the fine.
If the new accounts show a breach of the financial rules then, as others have said, that would surely have to be a new charge.
 

You beat me to it!

I think we might be giving too much weight to the 'interchangeable fixtures' statement. Given the timing of the announcement of the punishment and the release of fixtures so close to it, the EFL are just covering the bases.
There is an appeal period built in to the decision and, to take advantage of that they either had to plan for a relegation contingency or hold back the entire fixture release for both the Championship and League One.
Just because they have -sensibly - covered the bases does not mean they intend to appeal.

There's still a good possibility that the EFL don't appeal.
They got the judgment yesterday. Presumably they argued for a points deduction, and that is why they had already developed the option of interchangeable fixture lists.
They have the option of an appeal and right now they are thinking of it. If you don't get what you want from a judgment, your first public statement is that you are considering the judgment and considering an appeal. No point in committing yourself either way.
But it doesn't mean that they will appeal, because that will depend on deciding there is a good chance of showing that the DC was too lenient, or got something wrong. When you're talking about punishments, the DC will have a reasonably wide range of possible responses within which the Appeal Panel could not say they were wrong. It may well be that their advice will be that the DC could not really be said to have got it wrong, even if they disagree with it. 
The appeal provisions say: "the Appeal ... shall be limited to a consideration of whether the decision being appealed was in error and the burden of establishing the decision was in error shall rest with the appellant; and ... in the case of appeal against sanction, the grounds are that the original sanction was too severe or too lenient having regard to all the circumstances."
So I actually doubt that in the end the EFL will appeal.
Wishful thinking maybe!

There's still a good possibility that the EFL don't appeal.
They got the judgment yesterday. Presumably they argued for a points deduction, and that is why they had already developed the option of interchangeable fixture lists.
They have the option of an appeal and right now they are thinking of it. If you don't get what you want from a judgment, your first public statement is that you are considering the judgment and considering an appeal. No point in committing yourself either way.
But it doesn't mean that they will appeal, because that will depend on deciding there is a good chance of showing that the DC was too lenient, or got something wrong. When you're talking about punishments, the DC will have a reasonably wide range of possible responses within which the Appeal Panel could not say they were wrong. It may well be that their advice will be that the DC could not really be said to have got it wrong, even if they disagree with it. 
The appeal provisions say: "the Appeal ... shall be limited to a consideration of whether the decision being appealed was in error and the burden of establishing the decision was in error shall rest with the appellant; and ... in the case of appeal against sanction, the grounds are that the original sanction was too severe or too lenient having regard to all the circumstances."
So I actually doubt that in the end the EFL will appeal.
Wishful thinking maybe!

There's still a good possibility that the EFL don't appeal.
They got the judgment yesterday. Presumably they argued for a points deduction, and that is why they had already developed the option of interchangeable fixture lists.
They have the option of an appeal and right now they are thinking of it. If you don't get what you want from a judgment, your first public statement is that you are considering the judgment and considering an appeal. No point in committing yourself either way.
But it doesn't mean that they will appeal, because that will depend on deciding there is a good chance of showing that the DC was too lenient, or got something wrong. When you're talking about punishments, the DC will have a reasonably wide range of possible responses within which the Appeal Panel could not say they were wrong. It may well be that their advice will be that the DC could not really be said to have got it wrong, even if they disagree with it. 
The appeal provisions say: "the Appeal ... shall be limited to a consideration of whether the decision being appealed was in error and the burden of establishing the decision was in error shall rest with the appellant; and ... in the case of appeal against sanction, the grounds are that the original sanction was too severe or too lenient having regard to all the circumstances."
So I actually doubt that in the end the EFL will appeal.
Wishful thinking maybe!

Hey! There's a queue, you know? Get in line.

A lunatic with delusions of being a football manager, and, crucially, a resemblence to a potato?

Have we finally unmasked Barry the Ram? ?

Can we make it "New Improved"? I think that would make everyone feel better.

I sometimes wonder if you actually know anything about football at all!
So that's five players totally out of position... six if you count New, who has only played there 3 times in his entire career, and he's been a pro for 18 years!
I know this is Derby County, and I know this is Wayne Rooney, but even they wouldn't be so useless as to put that bloody team out!
... Having said that, I do like the idea of New playing wide left.  Now that does excite me!  

Brentford's model will be fine for them in the Prem where they have more money to spend. They are planning to spend big money this season. I have no doubt Brentford are smart enough.
What I mean is it will be much harder for a club at Champioship level to find a cheap (i.e. cheap for a Champ budget) foreign player using stats - if they are cheap it's because they are unknown and if they are unknown they won't have the visa points. It is harder for an imitator now to follow the Brentford model from the Championship.

Brentford's model will be fine for them in the Prem where they have more money to spend. They are planning to spend big money this season. I have no doubt Brentford are smart enough.
What I mean is it will be much harder for a club at Champioship level to find a cheap (i.e. cheap for a Champ budget) foreign player using stats - if they are cheap it's because they are unknown and if they are unknown they won't have the visa points. It is harder for an imitator now to follow the Brentford model from the Championship.

I can't resist...
Cantona a bad character??? The very opposite.
 
 

Derbyshire! Duck yeah!
Or should that be,
Derbyshire! Yes me duck?
 
 

You'll get no push back on that statement......

I think the big thing for me is, the club clearly knew they were doing something a bit unusual. So if I was them, I'd be documenting the hell out of it.  There would be spreadsheets for every player with the values we'd plugged in to get the final figures, with printed and dated copies, the rationale for any oddities (player X is valued at £Ym on transfermarkt but we think he's worth £Zm because...) and so on.  If the club can't produce that, then they've either been sloppy with their record-keeping (bad), they never had a process and made up figures to fit what we needed for the accounts (very bad), or they never did this process at all and invented it post hoc to cover their backsides (very, very bad).  Obviously I hope it's just sloppy record-keeping, but it's an open goal for social-media speculation.

I wasn't sure about this fella in the beginning, but I'm starting to warm to him.