admira Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 Let's buy David Beckham, give him the No.7 shirt and get sponsored by 7 up, just because we can. #ENGLANDOLDBOYSCLUB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdyabroad Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 1 hour ago, SaintRam said: Said back in January that based on the statement Derby made when the charges came in the EFL would have no leg to stand on and this would get thrown out. Feeling pretty smug right now, it must be said. Maybe some of those who well and truly threw their toys out of the pram back in January can reflect. Also, probable silver lining: We were told the EFL charge delayed the Gabay investment which in hindsight seems like a good thing. That, my friend, is a very good point that I hadn’t considered in all these shenanigans ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSD Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 "Gibson, remember when you refused our invite to look at our accounts?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaspode Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 4 minutes ago, Mucker1884 said: Two different approaches to announcing the same decision... DCFC Official Announcement:"Charge two was also dismissed, save for, the commission found the wording of the amortisation policy in its financial statements could have been clearer." EFL Official Announcement:"A second charge relating to the Club’s policy regarding the amortisation of intangible assets was found proven only in respect of the Club’s failure to properly disclose a change in policy in 2015." Yeah... Well... Whatever! ? "the Club’s failure to properly disclose a change in policy in 2015" - which effectively means that even though the poilcy is perfectly acceptable, the EFL didn't notice the change and they reckon that's out fault because we didn't make a big fuss about it...what a pathetic outfit they are.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 5 minutes ago, Mucker1884 said: Two different approaches to announcing the same decision... DCFC Official Announcement:"Charge two was also dismissed, save for, the commission found the wording of the amortisation policy in its financial statements could have been clearer." Yeah... Well... Whatever! ? They are saying this is why they investigated ie they had just cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spanish Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 17 minutes ago, FindernRam said: The EFL have claimed right to, and will appeal this in my view if only to drag it out further, I assume the panel who look at appeals are the same people. Incidentally I thought there was no right to appeal a tribunal decision. Saw it quoted somewhere but can't find it anywhere. They can appeal to abitration, looking forward to someone giving them an bigger spade to dig their hole Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 2 minutes ago, Gaspode said: "the Club’s failure to properly disclose a change in policy in 2015" - which effectively means that even though the poilcy is perfectly acceptable, the EFL didn't notice the change and they reckon that's out fault because we didn't amke a big fuss about it...what a pathetic outfit they are.... We've used that policy since 15/16 and we asked the EFL directly if it was acceptable. Those accounts have been in the public domain since 07/04/17, brought directly to the EFL's attention by Kieran Maguire in mid-2018 (iirc), and we weren't charged until Jan 2020. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadioactiveWaste Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 2 minutes ago, Spanish said: They can appeal to abitration, looking forward to someone giving them an bigger spade to dig their hole I'd find it very amusing if they tried to appeal a day later than 14 days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B4ev6is Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 I think mel conserding sueing efl now I think he should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turnstile Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 7 minutes ago, Gaspode said: "the Club’s failure to properly disclose a change in policy in 2015" - which effectively means that even though the poilcy is perfectly acceptable, the EFL didn't notice the change and they reckon that's out fault because we didn't make a big fuss about it...what a pathetic outfit they are.... Their fault they should employ a more competent legal team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 19 minutes ago, Van Gritters said: To appeal wouldn’t they have to provide something or some evidence that hasn’t been considered in the hearing. Or do they take it higher up the legal chain? I don't think they can bring new evidence. I think any appeal has to be based on the independents reaching the wrong decision based on the information provided Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BriggRam Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 Baby Shower at the Riverside this season, all travelling Derby fans to have dummies and rattles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeedsRam1999 Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 Viva la Sh*thouse returns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B4ev6is Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 Also a chant were not guilty nana were not guilty. Gibsin is a banker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodley Ram Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 scores coming in Derby County 1.........EFL.......didn’t Derby County 1.........Gibson ....didn’t going to have a beer tonight awesome ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ambitious Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 The amount of people angry about this 'not guilty' result is staggering considering they don't know what they are angry about. I've even seen a lot of people mention that 'it will catch up with us eventually'. Almost half our team is academy players now. We've probably cut our wage bill more than half since the last figures came out. The irony is that there are teams who are genuinely angry about this, for example: Stoke, who had a wage bill of £50m coming into the most recent season, and Forest, who are in their final year of their 'rolling years' before it becomes an issue. Forest, in particular, they have an enormous wagebill in comparison to ours, a lower income and they don't have a stadium to sell. The irony in them begging for tighter punishments will not be lost on me when this all comes to a head. I guess it depends on what happens with P&S this year, because we could be seeing a situation where 50% of the division falls below the requirements due to fans not being allowed into stadiums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lagavulinram Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 1 hour ago, inter politics said: One person I'm particularly pleased for is Cocu. He has had enough rubbish thrown at him since joining. Yeah. Right on. Im actually really positive about the new season now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eccles the ram Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 This has happened on my wife's 60th birthday. She's happy, i' m happy and gobson isn't! Happy days!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade 86 Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 19 minutes ago, Zag zig said: Pity, I have limited legal knowledge outside my A’ level Law many moons ago but I hope given we have been falsely scrutinised, we can look at the manner of this investigation and the damage to our reputation. I’d have thought there is a distinct possibility the EFL might have a case to answer there? I've not said there is no case to answer though, have I? Only that firstly, we can't reclaim our legal costs and secondly, that I think it's unlikely we will seek punitive costs either. The veiled threat of legal action is most likely there to discourage any further action by the EFL. Personally I'd love to see us go after the EFL but I think it's something the club's legal advisers would need to look at carefully before proceeding down that path. My gut instinct is that as long as no appeal is lodged, Mel will instead favour getting back to the business of securing the club a promotion and will simply leave this sorry episode behind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 1 minute ago, Ambitious said: The amount of people angry about this 'not guilty' result is staggering considering they don't know what they are angry about. I've even seen a lot of people mention that 'it will catch up with us eventually'. Almost half our team is academy players now. We've probably cut our wage bill more than half since the last figures came out. The irony is that there are teams who are genuinely angry about this, for example: Stoke, who had a wage bill of £50m coming into the most recent season, and Forest, who are in their final year of their 'rolling years' before it becomes an issue. Forest, in particular, they have an enormous wagebill in comparison to ours, a lower income and they don't have a stadium to sell. The irony in them begging for tighter punishments will not be lost on me when this all comes to a head. I guess it depends on what happens with P&S this year, because we could be seeing a situation where 50% of the division falls below the requirements due to fans not being allowed into stadiums. I struggle to believe we won't see a major reform of financial control in this league. The question is whether clubs failing in that transition period will be punished in line with those who have been punished already (Birmingham and Wednesday). The four clubs I think are most liekly to fail Reading, Forest, Stoke and Wednesday (again) may find themselves in the lucky position of being found guilty during that transition and get away with just a soft embargo. I seem to recall softer penalties (Leeds, Forest, etc) when we moved from the single year £13m losses to 3-year £39m losses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.