Yani P Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 He liked it apparently.. Part of his contract terms.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheresOnlyWanChope Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 17 hours ago, RandomAccessMemory said: Exactly, but that doesn't change the facts of the matter that were obviously previously accepted as ok, so I really don't see what leg the EFL have to stand on with regards to these charges? The Club statement said that the EFL said they'd made a "mistake", what was the mistake they admitted, I wonder? I'd also quite like to know the rule that is alleged to have been breached in relation to the amortisation charge, as I can't see which one it would be. Could the club be lying or mistaken? Someone correct me but from reading this situation, I don't understand how the EFL can bring in a charge if they were requested by Derby to confirm all was in order and gave a positive verdict. Do we know for sure the club made contact with the EFL properly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 48 minutes ago, Theres’s Only Wan Chope said: Could the club be lying or mistaken? Someone correct me but from reading this situation, I don't understand how the EFL can bring in a charge if they were requested by Derby to confirm all was in order and gave a positive verdict. Do we know for sure the club made contact with the EFL properly? We are taking what MM says at face value. Youd imagine for the club to come out with such a strongly worded statement they would have something to back it up. The EFL have not refuted anything that DCFC have said in the media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shipley Ram Posted July 21, 2020 Author Share Posted July 21, 2020 1 hour ago, Theres’s Only Wan Chope said: Could the club be lying or mistaken? Someone correct me but from reading this situation, I don't understand how the EFL can bring in a charge if they were requested by Derby to confirm all was in order and gave a positive verdict Having working in a legal area the situation was probably complicated. More like we told them the details, they gave the ok perhaps not asking further questions, or taking everything they should have into account. A Teesside umpalumpa then threatens legal action saying they haven't followed thier rules, our case then gets sent to review by more senior staff, or by an external QC who says the original decision to ok it may have been wrong. They decide they have to charge us to defuse the umplaumpa's case, even though it makes them look like idiots. I can imagine the case being brought even if they think they will lose, to say they complied with their rules and get rid of the umpalumpa's case. (They may have a case, we've got no idea who was told, or agreed anything). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MackworthRamIsGod Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 32 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: We are taking what MM says at face value. Youd imagine for the club to come out with such a strongly worded statement they would have something to back it up. The EFL have not refuted anything that DCFC have said in the media. My only concern is we did that with Sam Rush. Big statement, Mel looking forward to it all coming out in court so we the fans knew the details and before you know it, its settled out of court, why? I'd take anything said with a pinch of salt and see what the EFL claim to have against us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 5 minutes ago, Shipley Ram said: Having working in a legal area the situation was probably complicated. More like we told them the details, they gave the ok perhaps not asking further questions, or taking everything they should have into account. A Teesside umpalumpa then threatens legal action saying they haven't folled theier rules, our case then gets sent to review by more senior staff, or by an external QC who says the original decision to ok it may have been wrong. They decide they have to charge us to defuse the umplaumpa's case, even though it makes them look like idiots. I can imagine the case being brought even if they think they will lose, to say they complied with their rules and get rid of the umpalumpa's case. (They may have a case, we've got no idea who was told, or agreed anything). Rules state that we submit our reports to an EFL Executive who then approves those submissions. Not only did we do this, but we discussed the amortisation and stadium on numerous times throughout those processes. The amortisation practice has been used and approved every year since (and inclusive of) the 15/16 season. A lot of “mistakes”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
therealhantsram Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 7 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said: My only concern is we did that with Sam Rush. Big statement, Mel looking forward to it all coming out in court so we the fans knew the details and before you know it, its settled out of court, why? I'd take anything said with a pinch of salt and see what the EFL claim to have against us. If you have ever had any experience of lawyers, you'll know that's just the way they operate. Be bullish, over confident, try to make out that no other option is a possibility. All about trying to make your case as strong as possible. All a bit like poker. Sometimes you are bluffing, and hope the other party folds for fear of wasting money playing their hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 8 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said: My only concern is we did that with Sam Rush. Big statement, Mel looking forward to it all coming out in court so we the fans knew the details and before you know it, its settled out of court, why? I'd take anything said with a pinch of salt and see what the EFL claim to have against us. I dont really remember MM going on record with details against SR. He has been very specific in what he says the EFL said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 17 minutes ago, Shipley Ram said: Having working in a legal area the situation was probably complicated. More like we told them the details, they gave the ok perhaps not asking further questions, or taking everything they should have into account. A Teesside umpalumpa then threatens legal action saying they haven't followed thier rules, our case then gets sent to review by more senior staff, or by an external QC who says the original decision to ok it may have been wrong. They decide they have to charge us to defuse the umplaumpa's case, even though it makes them look like idiots. I can imagine the case being brought even if they think they will lose, to say they complied with their rules and get rid of the umpalumpa's case. (They may have a case, we've got no idea who was told, or agreed anything). No, not having that. Submissions are made to the EFL, accounts are filed at Companies House. There were plenty on here who noticed the change in amortisation policy, so to suggest the EFL missed it 3 years on the trot is not believable to me. How player values were arrived at I would have no problem with the EFL investigating but the actual use of the policy, nah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 1 hour ago, Ghost of Clough said: Rules state that we submit our reports to an EFL Executive who then approves those submissions. Not only did we do this, but we discussed the amortisation and stadium on numerous times throughout those processes. The amortisation practice has been used and approved every year since (and inclusive of) the 15/16 season. A lot of “mistakes”. I think you’re looking at it through Ram-goggles, which is your prerogative, unless you were sat on Mel’s lap throughout. hopefully it will all come out in due course..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rampage Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 17 minutes ago, RamNut said: I think you’re looking at it through Ram-goggles, which is your prerogative, unless you were sat on Mel’s lap throughout. hopefully it will all come out in due course..... Are we safe even if they take 12 points from us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 28 minutes ago, RamNut said: I think you’re looking at it through Ram-goggles, which is your prerogative, unless you were sat on Mel’s lap throughout. hopefully it will all come out in due course..... We’re revisiting old ground here... The club stated it had “written approval for all of its [FFP / P&S] submissions”. It is a fact these will have been approved by an EFL Executive, as that’s what process details. One of these submissions would include the stadium profits, with 3/4 sets of submissions which include the amortisation policy. The stadium transaction and valuation were “discussed extensively with the EFL Executive“, who even asked us to make a small adjustment of P&S purposes... we were clearly acting on the EFL Executives instructions and were given written approval for our plans. The statement put out by the club was not denied by the EFL, with logic saying that’s because the comments were true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 10 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said: The statement put out by the club was not denied by the EFL, with logic saying that’s because the comments were true. surely you can see how many presumptions are in that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheresOnlyWanChope Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 2 hours ago, G STAR RAM said: We are taking what MM says at face value. Youd imagine for the club to come out with such a strongly worded statement they would have something to back it up. The EFL have not refuted anything that DCFC have said in the media. Interesting, if that's the case, I can't see how we can face any real punishment. Probably a lot more complicated! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 2 minutes ago, RamNut said: surely you can see how many presumptions are in that? Like they'd prejudice any case by making a comment! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 3 minutes ago, RamNut said: surely you can see how many presumptions are in that? One presumption. That presumption being that the club aren’t openly lying to the public. I think I’m safe making that one presumption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
europia Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 23 hours ago, Tamworthram said: The statement doesn't really say anything we didn't already know. To paraphrase, final league positions will be determined after the games on wednesday but still subject to resolution of any ongoing proceedings. Yes the comment is a bit inconclusive. Seems to leave the EFL with some room to manoeuvre, should it suit them to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rammieib Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 On 20/07/2020 at 18:19, Ghost of Clough said: I don’t follow your point? It doesn’t seem to be related to the point I was making. A very minor improvement(s) (diving in to tackles in the area, scoring penalties) would see a big upturn in our results and points. Enough points to be in the playoffs. What I mean is that it’s very easy to say a few changes here and there would result in more points but what I’m saying is that whenever fans take this for granted we forget the flukes like Boro away, Leeds away, Forest at home where we have scraped points with last minute goals. So whilst over a season we could have had better improvements but the fact we didn’t in reality reflects on the players we have and the situations that have occurred. I do agree had Keogh not done what he did, we would have been in a better position though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spanish Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 12 hours ago, Rampage said: Are we safe even if they take 12 points from us. Still happy if they deduct it from next season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NottsRam77 Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 23 hours ago, RamNut said: I think you’re looking at it through Ram-goggles, which is your prerogative, unless you were sat on Mel’s lap throughout. hopefully it will all come out in due course..... I think he’s just re iterating The clubs statement which if true I genuinely can’t see how we can be punished The efl representative that signed off our accounts after giving guidance and Agreeing to our adjustments is surely the liable party in all of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.