Jump to content

EFL appeal


Sith Happens
 Share

Recommended Posts

EFL. 
Who are these people? The Gestapo? 
Apart from anything else, we’ve had a season with no fans, no money, and in what way have we actually benefitted from these infractions? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

This line from Derby's statement interests me the most.

It seems to insinuate that the League Arbitration Panel are in a worse place to judge whether it follows FRS102 than the original Disciplinary Commission.

Then this line: 

In combination with this from the EFL statement:

Would suggest we have some mitigating circumstances. While the LAP did not agree that the amortisation model DCFC used followed FRS102, those at the club believed it did, for good reason - 'carefully researched and objectively justifiable information'.

I still think it throws some shade at the EFL. They should have spotted this in the first place - they knew at the time that there was a different amortisation model, but breezed past it taking the club at face value, instead of investigating it further. As above, the club didn't outright mislead the EFL, but what was said was not enough. 

So, as I understand it, I'd expect a fine for the misconduct, and then a points deduction as a result of the accounts recalculation.

I agree with all but the last half sentence 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rambam said:

EFL. 
Who are these people? The Gestapo? 
Apart from anything else, we’ve had a season with no fans, no money, and in what way have we actually benefitted from these infractions? 

The issues not relating to this season its relating to accounting for how the club paid for players in 3 previous seasons stretching back from 2017.

The daily mail ...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-9566403/Derby-RELEGATED-Championship-EFL-pushing-points-deduction.html

The thing with that is Derby have the legal right to an appeal before a relegation due to points deduction can be applied.

The championship season however doesn't finish until after the final play off game so they have a very short window before a points deduction would have to be applied retrospectively.

However its within derbys power to argue that Sheffield wednesdays and Birmingham points deductions were not applied until the following season so how can they apply it now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Ambitious said:

On another note: I hope Steve Gibson drowns in a pool of his own piss. 

Never liked the look of him, reminds me of a lanky streak of piss that was regularly bullied, hence his spiteful and vindictive demeanor. Hopefully what goes around comes around. Remember the lavish spending a few years back (15 million on Assombalonga comes to mind) and the wild claim that the tin pot club would smash the league? Hopefully he will see the consequences of that spending in the near future.

Edited by DanS1992
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Oldben said:

The issues not relating to this season its relating to accounting for how the club paid for players in 3 previous seasons stretching back from 2017.

The daily mail ...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-9566403/Derby-RELEGATED-Championship-EFL-pushing-points-deduction.html

The championship season however doesn't finish until after the final play off game so they have a very short window before a points deduction would have to be applied retrospectively.

For the club, the season finishes when that club plays their last game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So i get that the EFL could appeal, but how could another club appeal? is that in the rules? Is thats what happened with Gibson submitting Preliminary issues? Or is they have submitted further evidence which is not allowed?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

No accounts recalculation, you think?

I think recalculation, but no points deduction due to the circumstances.

We started using it in 2015 in good faith. Those 3 seasons spending activities were related to that decision by the EFL.

If they told us we couldn't use it, our transfer activities would have differed to ensure we remained compliant.

It's a bit different to SW, who were not complaint, then after the deadline passed tried to put the sale in the wrong year to stay within limits. Even they managed to get their punishment reduced by 6 points despite blatantly cheating. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least now we can be pretty certain we'll be in the Championship next year - It's difficult to see how a large points deduction could be imposed but at least we'll know what we're up against. Up the Rams and all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I'm hoping the fact that it goes back to the original panel is a good sign - one of the things that seemed so wrong was the idea their opinion could or should be disregarded in favour of the second opinion, which thankfully proved not to be the case - ultimately the second panel's decision only really serves as a guide for original panel when it comes to a decision on punishment?

So it goes back to the original panel, who were of the mind that our only real error was not recording our intentions clearly enough. This same panel now make a further judgement based on one new finding, one which still shows that we acted in good faith, even if what we ended up doing turned out to be against some rules (despite us gaining approval from the EFL prior to doing it)?

Is that likely to be enough to sway them from thinking the EFL were being somewhat frivolous in chasing punishment to thinking we should be tarred, feathers, hung, draw & quartered? We shall see.

Edited by Coconut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.