Oldben

For them to use the word regrettably when their own legal counsel told them there are no grounds for appeal is ducking outrageous, unprofessional and proves they are out to get us based on some twits opinion rather than cold hard evidence.
bankers  
 

More like not wanting massive protest outside there doors with thousands angry Derby fans and press involved so had to back down but like one person said this fight is not over yet.
But hopeful now take over will happen and season ticket details will be out asp.

Efl and Derby have 14 days to appeal once the information is published

TamworthRam,
No, it hasn't. You said keeping Rotherham up would be the maddest thing. Really? I pointed out that the entire football industry is bizarre then. We could get relegated - retrospective unlikely - in the next month yet elite clubs can bend/break rules, or accrue loses in the hundreds of millions (Juventus).
I'm focusing on the final round because - as said already - three sides had a realistic chance to survive the drop and one of them wasn't Wycombe unless they scored 13 goals. Yes, 13 goal away wins are the norm, you see them every week on Quest. They were as good as relegated in name by Matchday 45. And yet that is the side who may be ultimately reprieved. I've already explained myself at length. 
I've pointed out to you how Wycombe won 5 games in 35? Does that sound competitive to you taking into account a whole season?  Rotherham lost to Wycombe at home, so they only have themselves to blame, but this is a side who allegedly created as many chances as Watford (flagged up on Quest). My main bone of contention is that one side was affected by Covid, rightly or wrongly calling games off, (no further action taken by the EFL), another was not. This is a factor not taken into account by a league table.
I've given you examples about how a backlog of games can affect sides, or rest between games can help footballers recovery time.
Don't you think sides, like Wycombe, knew through the football grapevine that Derby could still be relegated,? The whole farce is also tinged with cynicism. 'We're all in it together, one big football family, the Championship.' No, it isn't if you can find a way, any way to circumvent things. 
Why is it madness? I think it's mad that you don't seem to be taking into account the fact that this season has not been like any normal season in recent history. 46 games played between mid Sep to early May?  Really?  Where was the provision for any possible Covid outbreaks to be rescheduled? There were none because the EFL happily wended on their way because they have to keep tv companies & the public happy & entertained, the former, in particular, as its paymaster, a source of revenue to clubs . Why do you think the government were happy to have football back rather than arts & culture? Because it kept a restive public entertained in a time of crisis. 'The show must go on'.
Football without fans - which, to be honest, I found as pointless as the point about Rotherham, in fairness,  some posters seem to think I am making. Broadcasters putting artificial effects/crowd noises to generate atmosphere in games that looked liked glorified friendlies. You don't think that's odd? 
 

Taken from a post on the Wycombe messageboard today
"For what it's worth, a friend of mine who has friends within Derby's first team squad tells me they are all very concerned. The club aren't telling them anything, most of them think they're destined for League One this summer as a result and, given most of them have contracts which include significant pay cuts for relegation, they're almost in open mutiny. Wayne Rooney is being kept away from media over the Euros as they don't want him getting questions on Derby's plight..."

To be honest, if you think I'm mad, then I think you're unimaginative. Yes, to (a). The cynic in me thinks Paul Warne was also upset final day because results meant Rotherham would not even be in a position to benefit from any possible sanction against us (relegation) with the EFL charges/appeal still hanging over us. Wycombe's upturn in form in the last 11 is remarkable. How did they manage 6W when they could only manage 5 in 35? I think clubs at the bottom knew, going on from what happened with Barnsley, that finishing third from bottom could open that possibility.
I thought the entire schedule last season mad as the EFL was fixated in packing in 46 games, barely six weeks after the end of a curtailed season, within a set time frame, international breaks etc, with little room for flexibility.  Playing games over a short period of time does affect teams. Even half a day's advantage can matter in a tournament like the Euros (5live build up to Sweden/Ukraine). It's before my time, but Derby possibly benefited from Leeds playing on a Mon after the FA Cup win in 1972. 
How would you describe the notion of 'competition'? Your take on it is the conventional, common-sense one. Yes, the league table at the end of the season doesn't lie. I agree with you here. Then there is the notion of 'Last Man Standing', yes? Knock-out competitions. Which is essentially what the final day turned out to be. And last season was not like every season, was it? It took place against the background of a pandemic.
 
Relegation permutations ahead of final round of Sky Bet Championship matches | BT Sport
What do Wycombe need to do to survive? Win 13-0 and hope Wednesday win by one goal at Derby.
Like that was ever going to happen. 13-0 away wins. (Well, they may happen the way the EFL are treating us, I fear for the morale of a squad desperate for additions)
"So, yes, the maddest thing".
Hmm, again, we seem to differ in our concept of madness. You seem to think what I suggest is mad? It's OK for Wigan to get relegated within the EFL framework due to a negligent owner, but elite clubs within a wider framework to flout rules (PSG, Man City) get a slap on the wrist, a fine/temp. ban on transfers and then spend £200m in another window, or report losses of £275m (Juventus)? Yes, it's another argument entirely, but maybe the entire game is mad altogether, a bizarre Tea Party out of Alice in Wonderland with Robbie Savage running around in midfield as the Mad Hatter.

Ultimately Derby need a working relationship with the efl.
It wasn't the fault of the efl, that Derby did the amortisation.
The real unfairness is the parachute payments to clubs relegated from the Premier league.
These payments make fair competition in the championship impossible.
So clubs who are not given an equal shout, take risks in an attempt to compete.
The efl want to be seen to have power.
At the moment the efl are reflecting on either taking points from the club, but with a transfer embargo on buying players and not paying high wages for free agents means Derby could be relegated next season instead of this. They have basically put Derby in a place where nothing works for them.
If Wycombe stay in the championship instead of Derby, Wycombe will be relegated next season, they don't have the fan levels of Derby nor the ability to fairly spend enough to compete with the other teams in the championship.
Wycombe are rubbish, don't see how they are meant to get better.
If Derby are relegated they will lose an estimated 10 million a year, as opposed to Wycombe 2 million a year.
If Derby are relegated, Mel could expect to sell Derby for 20 million, who would pay more.
Wycombe are estimated to be worth 7 million.
 

You forgot who probably shouldn’t even have been in the championship in the first place

When the local paper headlines "Derby are heading for another season of crisis", that's bleak.
The article goes on to say how this can be turned around.
Looking at positions within the team that needs to strengthen, how do you strengthen when your looking at free agents and loans.
Loans depend in part on Rooneys name, but are clubs really saying to him, here have one of our best young players on loan.
Do young players really recognise Rooney as a star in today, and therefore want to play for Derby.
How much quality can Derby attract or afford to bring in.
Imagine if you were the new owner at Derby, would you trust Rooney to lead the club forward and get them out of trouble in coming season, based on last seasons results.

That short spell was between Bielik coming back from injury and then getting injured again

But if those goods were fit for purpose when they left the seller’s premises, and got misused and broken by the aforementioned ‘vulnerable person’, then it’s not the fault of the seller, is it?

Its more the fact that a squad that barely survived last year is showing no signs of improvement and will in fact very likely be losing players before the season starts. You seem very confident that the out of contract players will be staying, but unless you know something the rest of us don't the only information we currently have is that none of them have made much progress towards new deals with the club. Everything we've done for the last 6 months has revolved around cutting costs and people are just extrapolating from that and assuming that the same will continue to happen until we see a takeover succeed. 
Swansea are a meaningless comparison to us. The number of players alone has no meaning - you have to take into account the quality of said players as well. I personally think Swansea will struggle this year though, but we'll see.

That's how I see it. By moving the hit to later for each player we had a season or two more in which to achieve promotion. The problem is that those players weren't good enough. What it also means in my opinion, is that we gained an advantage because we didn't have to sell our sellable assets. Nothing illegal or against any League rules (at the time).

I think we used a different amortisation policy (unique in football, but not non-compliant with accountancy practice according to the original views of the DC). This pushed losses to the end of player contracts, giving us a bigger hit in the fourth year of a contract - effectively gambling on being promoted within four years. Once it was clear that the losses would hit without premiership money to cover it, we legally sold our stadium to cover the cost. 

Stoke City legend Mike Pejic had suggested the punishments dished out in cases such Wigan and Sheffield Wednesday are being issued on the wrong people.
He said: "A 12-point penalty punishes the players, the staff and the fans – it is the efl who sanctioned that takeover who should be in the dock.
"The focus (for the efl) now should be on coming up with rules and procedures to make sure that they never make this mistake again, making sure that this kind of disaster is not inflicted on some other poor wretches. Instead, the punishment is dolled out on the poor wretches!"
So teams: Birmingham, Sheffield wednesday, Wigan, Macclesfield.
These teams could and should have been protected.
What Derby did with amortisation was not against the rules at the time, it was not against established accounting practice.
The efl did not like that Derby did it, but just because you don't like something that someone does does not make it illegal.
The rule book was established by the efl and their own rules at the time did not make amortisation accounting policy wrong at the time when Derby did something that the efl did not like.
In Sheffield wednesdays case it was decided to not add a points deduction retrospectively but to add it to next season and then at appeal to further reduce that total to six points.
Now the efl are creating two fixture lists and stating any points deduction in Derbys case can be added retrospectively.
Case law points to efl needing to follow by example what they did for Sheffield wednesday.

Stoke City legend Mike Pejic had suggested the punishments dished out in cases such Wigan and Sheffield Wednesday are being issued on the wrong people.
He said: "A 12-point penalty punishes the players, the staff and the fans – it is the efl who sanctioned that takeover who should be in the dock.
"The focus (for the efl) now should be on coming up with rules and procedures to make sure that they never make this mistake again, making sure that this kind of disaster is not inflicted on some other poor wretches. Instead, the punishment is dolled out on the poor wretches!"
So teams: Birmingham, Sheffield wednesday, Wigan, Macclesfield.
These teams could and should have been protected.
What Derby did with amortisation was not against the rules at the time, it was not against established accounting practice.
The efl did not like that Derby did it, but just because you don't like something that someone does does not make it illegal.
The rule book was established by the efl and their own rules at the time did not make amortisation accounting policy wrong at the time when Derby did something that the efl did not like.
In Sheffield wednesdays case it was decided to not add a points deduction retrospectively but to add it to next season and then at appeal to further reduce that total to six points.
Now the efl are creating two fixture lists and stating any points deduction in Derbys case can be added retrospectively.
Case law points to efl needing to follow by example what they did for Sheffield wednesday.

Stoke City legend Mike Pejic had suggested the punishments dished out in cases such Wigan and Sheffield Wednesday are being issued on the wrong people.
He said: "A 12-point penalty punishes the players, the staff and the fans – it is the efl who sanctioned that takeover who should be in the dock.
"The focus (for the efl) now should be on coming up with rules and procedures to make sure that they never make this mistake again, making sure that this kind of disaster is not inflicted on some other poor wretches. Instead, the punishment is dolled out on the poor wretches!"
So teams: Birmingham, Sheffield wednesday, Wigan, Macclesfield.
These teams could and should have been protected.
What Derby did with amortisation was not against the rules at the time, it was not against established accounting practice.
The efl did not like that Derby did it, but just because you don't like something that someone does does not make it illegal.
The rule book was established by the efl and their own rules at the time did not make amortisation accounting policy wrong at the time when Derby did something that the efl did not like.
In Sheffield wednesdays case it was decided to not add a points deduction retrospectively but to add it to next season and then at appeal to further reduce that total to six points.
Now the efl are creating two fixture lists and stating any points deduction in Derbys case can be added retrospectively.
Case law points to efl needing to follow by example what they did for Sheffield wednesday.

If Wycombe sue Derby, the club should counter sue Wycombe with a slander lawsuit. 
Derby would have to prove the following: Wycimbe made a false, defamatory statement about Derby, knowing it was a false statement. The statement does not fall in any privileged category.
If Wycombe sued Derby, they would have acted negligently when they published the statement which you would assume related to Wycombe being effected by Derbys accounting methodology which an efl panel had previously decided was not an illegal accounting method and at time when it would be very difficult for Wycombe to proof that they were an injured party.
Wycombe not having been in the same league as Derby in the years at which Wycombe claim a mishap happened.
 

Said this many times throughout this fiasco but the biggest problem the EFL have is that chairman can talk about open cases about other clubs without scrutiny. It makes no sense why that’s allowed to happen, no matter what I think about what Mel or this situation. It’s an ongoing process and no one external should be able to comment on it until it’s complete

Who cares about Wycombe they should not have been in the championship last season, they only got in on points per game.

Mel will bring in a top lawyer for the appeal.
He will fight this.
Mel is rumoured to be asking circa 50 million for the club.
Assuming the club is relegated then I would value Derby at 20 million.
The delay in finding new owners could well be connected to this.
Derby have the right to appeal.
I thought that the original decision thar found in favour of the club still stands. Only part of the decision that changed related to the amortisation of the players.
Mel probably doesn't want to see 30 million knocked of the value of the club and so will appeal against the decision if it leads to relegation to league one.
Mel decision to bring in Rooney back fired because a more experienced manager could have meant the club gained more points and then any points deduction  would not have been the issue it has potential to be.
Imagine under an experienced manager Derby had gained 50% more points than under Rooney.
In my opinion Mel brought Rooney in as a name to help sell the club, that has not worked.
Had Derby achieved 50% more points last season, there would be no relegation issue and perhaps more chance of finding new owners.
If Derby are relegated, I dont see Rooney as the best option to promote the club next season.

The crucial part to remember is that the accounting method we used is not cheating - it’s an acceptable way of depreciating assets and was signed off by both our accountants and the EFLs. It only became an issue when McGuire highlighted it and the EFL decided we were trying to pull a fast one….FFP has backed ambitious owners into a corner where they either get creative in the hope they can gain a small advantage out else think ‘to hell with it’ and chuck the kitchen sink at getting promoted by completely ignoring FFP. We won’t be the last team to suffer at the hands of the EFL and FFP…..

This saga now just comes across as a vindictive face-saving exercise by the EFL and payback for all Mel's sniping at them over the years. We've made it easy for them by streching and bending the rules - giving them a convenient stick to beat us with.
You're not telling me that we accidentally used an accounting practice that no other club uses and then failed to highlight it properly in our submitted paperwork.
Mel & everyone else at DCFC thought they were cleverer than the EFL, which probably is the case but if you continually tread on the beast's tail, you're gonna get bitten at some point.

The EFL could now just say ‘ok, we got what we wanted, a clear ruling that how DCFC did the accounting is wrong and the club have been punished. That’s an end to it’.  That way they keep a big club in the Championship and save face. Not really sure what’s in it for them by relegating Derby and Sheff Wed (two of the biggest teams in the EFL) and keeping Wycombe up. An odd business decision. 

You know, the more I think about it, the more bizarre it seems that the EFL are making and very openly broadcasting the fact they're making a separate fixture list based on a points deduction that hasn't happened. They've just invented a potential punishment that's different to the punishment that has actually been handed out and are going to publish a set of fixtures based on this imagined punishment, even though there's no suggestion that it's likely that it will actually be given.
What a weird organisation.