EFL Verdict

[SecretDave]

7 minutes ago, Oldben said:

Daily mail ...

Rooney is ready to walk away from Derby if they are relegated to League One

The Rams could be relegated if they get a retrospective points deduction

Rooney has made it clear privately he does not want to manage in League One

As it stands Rooney has only nine senior players to work with for pre-season 

Every cloud has a silver lining... 

[Eddie]

4 minutes ago, Dean (hick) Saunders said:

The LAP can only be looking at the significance of the accounting irregularity though (not the impact on P&S balance) so a points penalty for that on its own would not seem proportional?

If a big points penalty was assigned for minor (which I think is safe to assume it is based on prior rulings) accounting deviation then it would set a big precedent for other things in the future I would have thought. IE If every time a small accounting problem was found in any other clubs accounts they got points would everyone think that is correct.

It strikes me that the EFL are just making it up as they go along. Logic and the phrase "safe to assume" just left by the window.

 

[Spanish]

9 minutes ago, Dean (hick) Saunders said:

The LAP can only be looking at the significance of the accounting irregularity though (not the impact on P&S balance) so a points penalty for that on its own would not seem proportional?

If a big points penalty was assigned for minor (which I think is safe to assume it is based on prior rulings) accounting deviation then it would set a big precedent for other things in the future I would have thought. IE If every time a small accounting problem was found in any other clubs accounts they got points would everyone think that is correct.

I expect they will up the fine and no points.  The efl have then hit the middle ground,  full process carried out properly.  We enter the league with half a squad under embargo, get battered.  The restated accounts is a different story.  If we breach we get a points penalty.  If we don’t what the duck have we been doing pushing the envelope?

Edited June 24, 2021 by Spanish

[alexxxxx]

If anyone followed how the efl put macclesfield out of business the pattern is very similar. It's just an onslaught of appeals and punishments. They even relegated them on ppg in a very dodgy way (applying the points deduction before growthing up the points...).

They appeal everything from the DC to the LAP every time which invariably goes their way. Not fit for purpose. 

They want blood and us out of business, and frankly we're on the ropes right now. It makes it sound like every club and fan wants us gone. 

If we are relegated to league 1 and then get a ffp penalty I honestly think as a business and a club we are gone. Admin then liquidation. 

Make no mistake this must go our way and every avenue must be looked at because the very existence of the club is at stake here. Mel can't bankroll us forever.

Edited June 24, 2021 by alexxxxx

[Rammy03]

9 minutes ago, alexxxxx said:

If anyone followed how the efl put macclesfield out of business the pattern is very similar. It's just an onslaught of appeals and punishments. They even relegated them on ppg in a very dodgy way (applying the points deduction before growthing up the points...).

They appeal everything from the DC to the LAP every time which invariably goes their way. Not fit for purpose. 

They want blood and us out of business, and frankly we're on the ropes right now. It makes it sound like every club and fan wants us gone. 

If we are relegated to league 1 and then get a ffp penalty I honestly think as a business and a club we are gone. Admin then liquidation. 

Make no mistake this must go our way and every avenue must be looked at because the very existence of the club is at stake here. Mel can't bankroll us forever.

Exactly right. It's disgusting really what happened to Macclesfield:  https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/53744939

Unfortunately the EFL seem to get what they want in the end. The evidence is there. They are not fit for purpose, claim to protect clubs but really they destroy them. And this is not just about Derby, once they're finished with us it'll be someone else. 

Edited June 24, 2021 by Rammy03

[NottsRam77]

2 hours ago, Turk Thrust said:

Or hear ducking hear
But agree with the post

Thanks - brain fart , kids , no sleep , etc etc 

[kevinhectoring]

3 hours ago, S8TY said:

but the fact its only a 100k fine says a lot and then to put out two sets of fixtures is nothing short of laughable!!

Sort of agree with you about the fixtures but it’s done for Wycombe (whose owner is a US lawyer). 

The fine is a great result but I think it comes from the panel (the DC) who initially supported us.  If the EFL do appeal the sanction, we’re back in front of the LAP who thought we deceived the EFl and thought that the EFl was unfairly criticised by the DC. So there’s an odds on chance the sanction gets worse. And we’re stuck with the decision of the LAP. 

If as reported the new owners are talking to the EFL, then the best result for us is for them to do a deal to persuade the EFL not to appeal. But Wycombe (supported by others) will probably be able to force the EFL to appeal, and to do it quickly.  
 

So there’s a fair chance the fine gets bigger or becomes a points deduction. But not a points deduction for 20/21 I would say, even though the dual fixture list obviously increases the chance of that happening. 

Edited June 24, 2021 by kevinhectoring

[JfR]

Was having a look back over the decision on sanction in the Sheffield Wednesday case while we wait for the full decision in our case to be published:
https://www.efl.com/siteassets/efl-documents/201920/judgments/efl-v-sheffield-wednesday---decision-on-sanction.pdf

There's some interesting bits in the "When?" section of that document (page 5 onwards), but this bit jumped out at me:
'Although proceedings of this nature are private, the Club (Sheffield Wednesday) and Derby County agreed to share information about the proceedings brought against each other. (...) (I)t has become clear (...) that, if the charge against Derby County is established, the EFL will not be inviting the Disciplinary Commission to impose any points deduction in the present, extended season (19/20). This, according to (Leading Counsel of the EFL Mark) Phillips, is on the basis that "looking at the position of Derby in the League at the moment, anything that the commission does is unlikely to affect the composition of the Championship next year."'

I would hope that the EFL's apparent eagerness to punish clubs in such a manner as to do them the most harm possible through points deductions has been taken into consideration in the DC's judgment, and will be taken into account by the LAP if the case is appealed. 

[RadioactiveWaste]

17 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

Sort of agree with you about the fixtures but it’s done for Wycombe (whose owner is a US lawyer).
 

So there’s a fair chance the fine gets bigger or becomes a points deduction. But not a points deduction for 20/21 I would say, even though the dual fixture list obviously increases the chance of that happening. 

Much as anything I think Wycombe probably "reminded" the EFL that having published fixtures wouldn't be a reason to not carry on the process and they can't "wimp out" by saying oh well we've done the fixtures now, it's done with.

[JfR]

16 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

The fine is a great result but I think it comes from the panel (the DC) who initially supported us.  If the EFL do appeal the sanction, we’re back in front of the LAP who thought we deceived the EFl and thought that the EFl was unfairly criticised by the DC. So there’s an odds on chance the sanction gets worse. And we’re stuck with the decision of the LAP. 

I think a lot of this will depend on how the LAP are instructed to approach the appeal. If it's a wholly new judgment based on their own feelings, it may be the case that they come to a different conclusion. However, if it's like the original appeal, it may be the case that the LAP are tasked with assessing that the DC have come to their judgment "by the book", and that while they may not necessarily have come to the same conclusions as the DC if they themselves were tasked with judging the case, they may not find there to be objective inaccuracies in the DC's handling of the case and would therefore have to uphold their judgments. If it's the latter, the EFL would have to demonstrate that a £100k fine as a sanction is an entirely wrong sanction for the offence in line with law.

[RadioactiveWaste]

1 minute ago, JfR said:

I think a lot of this will depend on how the LAP are instructed to approach the appeal. If it's a wholly new judgment based on their own feelings, it may be the case that they come to a different conclusion. However, if it's like the original appeal, it may be the case that the LAP are tasked with assessing that the DC have come to their judgment "by the book", and that while they may not necessarily have come to the same conclusions as the DC if they themselves were tasked with judging the case, they may not find there to be objective inaccuracies in the DC's handling of the case and would therefore have to uphold their judgments. If it's the latter, the EFL would have to demonstrate that a £100k fine as a sanction is an entirely wrong sanction for the offence in line with law.

I think that's how I understand it. The case has been decided. What is now going to go on is an appeal that the punishment was to lienient.

The EFL appeal will be that given the judgment made in the case (by the LAP) the DC issued the wrong sanction. Until we get the report from the DC we're in the dark about how likely any appeal is to suceed. As this isn't a case with precedent I'm sure the EFL will be insistent that points must be deducted as a warning to others. We will argue that it's only this process that has decided what we did was wrong.

Hopefully the LAP will not be considering "other clubs really really really want Derby relegated" as being material to the appeal.

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

Just to reiterate a basic truth. The £100k fine is nothing to do with P&S figures, that's separate pending resubmission of our old accounts. 

That being said I have a question... What playing advantage have we had due to not advising our amortisation policy clearly enough that would warrant a points deduction? 

[B4ev6is]

Well for me I think us Derby fans send a signal to the efl we dont forget and we dont forgive if I was mel now I be saying to efl I will go to the press show the world that they signed all off.

[Ted McMinn Football Genius]

1 minute ago, B4ev6is said:

Well for me I think us Derby fans send a signal to the efl we dont forget and we dont forgive if I was mel now I be saying to efl I will go to the press show the world that they signed all off.

Trouble is @B4ev6is if we do or ever did have this letter signing off on all of this. I think it would have been presented and utilised to shut this whole scenario down months ago. 

Don’t get me wrong, I do indeed hope we do have this in our armoury and Mr Di Marco can run rings around the EFL and potentially bring the EFL in its current format to a necessary end.

Hopefully, we all get to move on to moaning about team selection and all other mundane rants on the forum (how I long for those days) and stop looking over our shoulders for the next revelation. 

[Steve Buckley’s Dog]

Having just read that the Wycombe chairman is going to sue Derby for 10-15 million quod I pretty much give up. An american lawyer in charge of a club who no one cares about suing us for apparent accountancy discrepancies years ago when they were two leagues below us. Seems from the quotes to be relishing trying to put us out of business. Modern football. Well done Wycombe. Hope you are proud of yourselves. 

[CornwallRam]

1 hour ago, Eddie said:

It strikes me that the EFL are just making it up as they go along. Logic and the phrase "safe to assume" just left by the window.

 

I've recently come to understand that this is probably the only way of running a professional sports league. The governing body needs to have dictatorial powers. The EFL rules effectively give them the ability to revisit any decision and visit any punishment they deem appropriate on a member club.

For us, it's currently catastrophic. Yet, if clubs regularly challenged penalty kicks, red cards, offsides etc through the courts, professional football would not be possible. To prevent this, the EFL are in a limited and specific way more powerful than than the law. 

The thing that makes us a football club is the golden share. It is membership of the league, with automatic entry into the leagues above and below when prompted or relegated. If we lose our golden share, we are an ex-club. The EFL hold the power to revoke it, and to retain it, we have to agree to grant them dictatorial powers. 

That is why we can never win this fight.

 

[RadioactiveWaste]

I am quite amused by the wycombe lawsuit thing though.

Who do they sue? the EFL for not regulating properly? DCFC for not being relegated? DCFC for being in breech of accounting practice when wycombe weren't in the league? If wycombe sue, won't every club want in on it - after all they all played matches against dcfc so all would have a claim? I'm pretty sue Gibson wanted MFC to sue us at one point.

Any lawsuit wycombe try to bring would be based on what exactly - the process by which we've been tried for these charges is set out in the league rules which wycombe agree to as part of being in the league. they didn't like the outcome of the process? Lobby to change the process...

[Gringo]

10 hours ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

 

Great podcast Kieran Maguire came across as erudite knowledgeable and very interesting, all those on here slagging him off should spend an hour listening to this podcast, he did not come across as anti dcfc, and explained all the options from the EFL that gave me a lot of hope.

[Shipley Ram]

50 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

I am quite amused by the wycombe lawsuit thing though.

Who do they sue? the EFL for not regulating properly? DCFC for not being relegated? DCFC for being in breech of accounting practice when wycombe weren't in the league? If wycombe sue, won't every club want in on it - after all they all played matches against dcfc so all would have a claim? I'm pretty sue Gibson wanted MFC to sue us at one point.

Any lawsuit wycombe try to bring would be based on what exactly - the process by which we've been tried for these charges is set out in the league rules which wycombe agree to as part of being in the league. they didn't like the outcome of the process? Lobby to change the process...

The threat is to sue us for cheating.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/57604421

Edited June 25, 2021 by Shipley Ram

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

3 minutes ago, Shipley Ram said:

The threat is to sue us for cheating.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/57604421

Seeing as we were a division or two above them for the years relating this supposed discrepancy and seeing as last year our running costs would have been well within limits, not forgetting they got relegated because they had a 20 stone carthorse up front they can **** off.

As they've accused  Derby County of systematic cheating despite us declaring our calculation variance years ago and this process still be ongoing  and are effectively making a veiled threat to push us into administration, my immediate thought would be sue them instead and turn there shed into a car park.  Wycombe Wanderers not worth the **** of our shoe.