cheron85 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 3 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said: Don't get me wrong, the current system is rubbish, but it's the least rubbish of all of the systems I've seen suggested, here or anywhere else. No there is a MUCH better system - I shall choose who gets what money Stoke - No money - Still too much stink of Pulis - Same applied to Boro Leeds - No money - Just cos you know, Leeds Forest - Get some money to cover the 75 players they have Brentford - Quite like them, they can have some money Derby - No money - Uncle Mel has loads and he can just spend it See - Fair's fair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramsbottom Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 19 minutes ago, Barney1991 said: its from a fan page it's not even credible What a p**** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadioactiveWaste Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 6 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said: If they can only claim it on prem spending, then you're incentivizing them to spend as much as they can in the prem so they can claim more of it back. And how do you classify "prem legacy spending". If Norwich give Pukki a massive new contract in the prem, does that count? Just the part of his wages beyond what he was on before? If they give players a promotion bonus that kicks in if they get promoted following a relegation, does that count? If they expand the stadium while they're there, does that count? If they employ a famous manager, does his wages count? If they have to pay that manager off because he's crap, does that count? It's a massive minefield that literally no one will want to get involved in. The clubs won't want to deal with the extra admin. The Prem/EFL won't want to deal with the disputes etc Don't get me wrong, the current system is rubbish, but it's the least rubbish of all of the systems I've seen suggested, here or anywhere else. Parachute payments were brought in so clubs that were relegated didn't end in dire circumstances die to Premier league costs but lower division income. They were never a fair thing to do. My way addressees that without just handing relegated clubs an automatic financial fair play advantage over everyone else in the division. They're only incentivised to "go crazy" to the extent of the theoretical limit of the parachute fund. Point being if there's nothing, clubs who don't fancy their chances will just jot bother, if there's the current system promotion brings an automatic (and rather unfair) advantage if/when you are relegated. Admin wise, simple, limit it to wages and transfer liabilities entered into upto and including January window the season they get relegated. So if Norwich give pukki a massive new contract then get relegated, yes they can claim that against the parachute fund. as opposed to the current system where Norwich may give pukki a massive new contract knowing they X million parachute income whatever they do. Obviously people cleverer than me would game the system, that's to be expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topram Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Still no statement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MACKWORTHRAM Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 1 minute ago, Topram said: Still no statement? Almost 24 hours later and absolutely nothing from the club. Pretty poor that to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Maybe this in the thread somewhere but for reference.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topram Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 2 minutes ago, MACKWORTHRAM said: Almost 24 hours later and absolutely nothing from the club. Pretty poor that to be honest. Very strange, Wednesday almost immediately replied Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MackworthRamIsGod Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 3 minutes ago, Topram said: Very strange, Wednesday almost immediately replied If Derby were going to go with the usual claptrap 'we contest it, we are innocent, will fight and make no further comment' etc, that would have come out at 9am this morning. The silence suggests to me something bigger is coming, whether it is an announcement we are counter claiming, announcment of investment along with denial of charge. Imagine the meetings that have been taking place between Mel, potential new investors, legal teams etc today. Remember that 'War Room' we were told about, they are getting ready for battle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexxxxx Posted January 17, 2020 Author Share Posted January 17, 2020 Guess the statement needs to be agreed with whoever is going in for the investment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Srg Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 3 minutes ago, alexxxxx said: Guess the statement needs to be agreed with whoever is going in for the investment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Bam Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Saw a report on BBC that had a line about because we had everything signed off by the EFL we are unsure why we have been charged. Could we be just waiting for the EFL to clarify all the details before we comment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadioactiveWaste Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 6 minutes ago, alexxxxx said: Guess the statement needs to be agreed with whoever is going in for the investment. That would make sense. If the deal is not over the line yet, they'd want to be very sensitive about what and how the clubs communicate this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van der MoodHoover Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 26 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said: If Derby were going to go with the usual claptrap 'we contest it, we are innocent, will fight and make no further comment' etc, that would have come out at 9am this morning. The silence suggests to me something bigger is coming, whether it is an announcement we are counter claiming, announcment of investment along with denial of charge. Imagine the meetings that have been taking place between Mel, potential new investors, legal teams etc today. Remember that 'War Room' we were told about, they are getting ready for battle. Ooh.....that'll need 48 hours to finalise........? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sith Happens Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Wonder how much it is for one of those flash ads on the pitchside? We could do a go fund me for the next sky game..something simple like EFL ducking poo... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hector 10 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 It seems Mel Morris bent the rules a little bit or just stayed inside the rules. Think the EFL are just going through the motions of seeing to be doing something about this loophole in the rules. But the bottom line to all this stems from the Sam rush era which as put our club in this position.. Also as fans never got to know the full details/ outcome of the case against the club / Morris v rush Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GenBr Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 48 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said: Parachute payments were brought in so clubs that were relegated didn't end in dire circumstances die to Premier league costs but lower division income. They were never a fair thing to do. My way addressees that without just handing relegated clubs an automatic financial fair play advantage over everyone else in the division. They're only incentivised to "go crazy" to the extent of the theoretical limit of the parachute fund. Point being if there's nothing, clubs who don't fancy their chances will just jot bother, if there's the current system promotion brings an automatic (and rather unfair) advantage if/when you are relegated. Admin wise, simple, limit it to wages and transfer liabilities entered into upto and including January window the season they get relegated. So if Norwich give pukki a massive new contract then get relegated, yes they can claim that against the parachute fund. as opposed to the current system where Norwich may give pukki a massive new contract knowing they X million parachute income whatever they do. Obviously people cleverer than me would game the system, that's to be expected. Maybe you could have it so that any relegated team is immediately on the same ffp restrictions as everyone else. They have a set amount of money in the parachute pot which can only be used for player wages and not transfers. If their wages exceed the amount in the pot the excess is taken into account for ffp. If they breach the ffp limit they get fined or points deductions like all the other teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bimmerman Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Just now, Paul71 said: Wonder how much it is for one of those flash ads on the pitchside? We could do a go fund me for the next sky game..something simple like EFL ducking poo... Hell yeah, I'm in When I worked for a previous company we paid 700 for 6 months behind the goal at Yeovil Town when they were in the championship for what it's worth I'm guessing we'll charge more then that though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sith Happens Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 3 minutes ago, bimmerman said: Hell yeah, I'm in When I worked for a previous company we paid 700 for 6 months behind the goal at Yeovil Town when they were in the championship for what it's worth I'm guessing we'll charge more then that though Efl are Bamfords that will confuse them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pearl Ram Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 7 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said: Leeds 3rd ? 3rd play 6th, 4th play 5th. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade 86 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 The club will strongly contest the challenge to the valuation of Pride Park stadium, as well as the newly notified charge in respect of intangible fixed asset amortisation. As a matter of law, the EFL is not entitled to bring either of the charges, having previously agreed to all of the arrangements surrounding the stadium sale and never having raised the issue of player amortisation before. The Club shall argue that the very bringing of the Charges itself is unlawful. At all times, the Club has acted transparently with the EFL in its submissions for both FFP/P&S and, in respect of the charges above, had received written approval for all of its submissions in respect of this legislation. No allegation has been raised to the contrary by the EFL. Rather, the EFL now claims that it made a “mistake.” https://www.dcfc.co.uk/news/2020/01/club-statement-17th-january-2020 IN YA FACE GIBBO YA PERMED BANKER COYR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.