ck-

Spare a thought for Morecambe, who are now unable to sell their £80mil stadium. They should have taken the opportunity quickly when it was revealed that the EFL's 'expert' valued it the same last year.

I would guess the club will say "covid times hit us hard, like everyone else and we got shafted by this takeover that wasn't." Which is pretty much true.
But unpaid bills never get you any goodwill.

Yes, agree. I spotted that too. Not paying on time isn’t great. Wouldn’t be surprised if some of the lack of support from other clubs isn’t due to that. 
“You’ve found a loophole?”  Grudging respect. 
 
“You’ve found a loophole, you’re better off as a result, and still you’re stiffing us????”  To55ers!

Or ask Gibson if he wants decking 

Should’ve told him to make sure he amortises his pint in a straight line. No sipping at the start and downing the last half at the end.

The section within the IDC report regards our embargos wasnt the best read. Shows that it isnt just because of us not submitting our accounts but also due to not paying wages (which we knew about) but also not paying other clubs transfer installments & money owed to the HMRC which is where the story a while back clearly came from.
Hopefully any potential owners in talks with us is fully aware of all of this and also aware of potential revised accounts so if they're still around it means they're willing to take this on and pay those bills

I hope we are one of the clubs who voted in favour of this. Boil a little more piss when other clubs see our name in the list.

I don't think any of us could have foreskin this development

The EFL deserve circumcising! ?
 

Anyone else getting a bit of passive-aggressive DC-on-LAP action from this paragraph:

Just missing some sarcastic air-quotes around "the LAP has found".

They aren’t appealing because they can’t find a mistake in the ruling. You can’t just appeal for a laugh, you actually have to have a coherent argument as to why the original judgment was wrong. Whah-whah-whah-I-don’t-like-it unsurprisingly doesn’t count.
Seriously, everyone with an interest in this should read the written reasons. They aren’t *that* long and are fairly readable for a layman. The arguments they lay out for why they've given the punishment are very clear and logical to me.

I defiantly know what you mean Steve! ?

https://www.efl.com/contentassets/873a8914e09740d3b3a8848131ea10b8/210630---efl-v-Derby-county---decision-on-sanction-final.pdf
There's a definite implication that we've been less than transparent in many statements, below are a selection. It appears the DC got a bit impatient with the "EFL is against us/Mel" argument in their responses to several statements too.
 



 

Thanks quite a different spin but whilst we remain in embargo we are the losers.  Guessing that may indicate not straight line compliant?

Mistyped. Will resubmit later

Get 11 full size plastic dummies and make them look like our best players from the past. Attach them to rods with handles at the end. Then install them across Pride Park and get a coach to work each handle during the matches. No spinning allowed though.

It's time to think outside the box. For example: instead of 11 "players", how about we pick Wayne Rooney and 10 aggressive dogs? The dogs attack the other team, Rooney scores. Simple football. Cheap (dog food, kennels). 

Tbh if I was going to base my season tickets purchases on the quality of our squad - out of the 17 I’ve had Id probably only ever have gotten one ?.

Thank you very much, really does mean a lot.
It really is a very strange place to be, you realise you dont truly understand what someone must go through until you go through it yourself.
We will get through it.

It's good to touch base on this now and again. Currently we are only guilty after appeal of not flagging up a different amortisation policy to everyone else. Not an illegal one just a different one. 
Now, in time, due to the acceptance of the charge, we may be guilty of failing P&S BUT only if in time our resubmissions fail. So, to repeat, at this time we are only guilty of not flagging up a DIFFERENT BUT NOT illegal amortisation policy. BIG DEAL! 
I have to keep reminding myself incase I'm going mad. 

Oh no, I think there's a misintrerpretation.
new       new       new is a player I admire, he is good enough to play CB position on his own.

WHOA!
Where the hell did that pessimism come from!  
Who stole B4's password!   

Are people seriously moaning about a player putting in the hard yards in the summer, enjoying their football and showing a desire to be in the team?
No one is suggesting he's the only player doing it but Jesus surely we should be commending the lad for showing some bloody passion and desire to get back fit!!!
But no, we have to pull him down and say, well others will be, and his sessions aren't that hard, or he's got a seven year old keeper.... So what, he's practising a thing called technique....
FFS this forum.... 

There's a difference between the way in which it was explained being wrong and it actually being wrong.

So I think it's not really in dispute that our explanations were less than clear. And for that we're rightly (IMHO) punished.

But then, the separate point is whether that accounting treatment is WRONG as opposed to just not what EFL would like. There is a lot of evidence that it isn't wrong from an accounting practice, although our implementation of it may have been poor as we apparently couldn't show any systematic approach to valuations.

So, moving on to the EFL position: it isn't unreasonable, because the purpose of their rules is to ensure everyone is judged by the same criteria. If we had clearly explained what we were doing, they might have been able to say "OK, it's not against the rules, but that's not what we intended. We're going to amend the rules for next year".
We can argue that the EFL should have checked our submission, but they'd only have cause to do that if we had actually given them a reason to do so. Otherwise there is an element of trust in place.
 
In short, we tried to be too clever, and while there is nothing accounting wise that is wrong, in a competition that is trying to create a level playing field we stretched things too far and didn't signpost it well enough.
I don't think either party is coming out of this too well.

It's not a black and white matter.
Oh, wait...