EFL Verdict

[kevinhectoring]

1 hour ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

If such draconian measures are attached to any deviation from policy, it most definitely needs to be their responsibility and definitely shouldn't be revisited after 3 years. A firm and direct policy as to calculation should also have been in place from the get go.

Completely agree with your second point. The EFL should have a rule that tells clubs how player amortisation must work. The problem is, they didn’t actually realise what we were doing until just before the first hearing, so it would have come too late. Hindsight is a wonderful thing

Think you’re off beam on the first point though. One reason the rules require accounts to comply with the statute is so that the EFl does NOT have to worry about drilling down into them. Where would they stop if that were their responsibility?  Assessing recognition decisions ? Investigating contractual connections with owners ? Checking expense invoices? They can’t do it

[Indy]

1 hour ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

Is there a time limit on any appeal? 

I thought it was a fortnight. But, to my knowledge, the commission hasn’t yet released its findings, so that clock hasn’t even started yet?

[RAM1966]

13 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Just a hunch,

But,

Suppose the EFL appeal, could the LAP rule a deduction (say 3 points) suspended pending any breaches due to the restated P&S figures?

Possibly, but, there is one important point to consider, the fact that we do not need to present the restated accounts until the 18 Aug.  I think the independent disciplinary committee have done this for a reason, the season will have already started.  So even if we did not pass P&S rules we would not have the points deduction applied until the current season we are a about to start!!!

Maybe the EFL have pissed the Independent Disciplinary Committee off too, with this circus of a witch hunts.....  They appeal nearly everything, I often wonder why the EFL appointed the committee in the first place!!!! 

Edited June 27, 2021 by RAM1966

[Van der MoodHoover]

1 minute ago, kevinhectoring said:

Completely agree with your second point. The EFL should have a rule that tells clubs how player amortisation must work. The problem is, they didn’t actually realise what we were doing until just before the first hearing, so it would have come too late. Hindsight is a wonderful thing

Think you’re off beam on the first point though. One reason the rules require accounts to comply with the statute is so that the EFl does NOT have to worry about drilling down into them. Where would they stop if that were their responsibility?  Assessing recognition decisions ? Investigating contractual connections with owners ? Checking expense invoices? They can’t do it

Then you have contradicted yourself, given the imprecise nature of accounting standards. 

If you accept compliance with the law of accounting then you have to accept the occasional practice that makes you think "that's not what I meant" the EFL have decided not to here. 

If you want to interpret and then ensure compliance with said interpretation then you have to provide the resources. 

What you cannot do is what is happening here, which is to say that the EFL, having not provided any meaningful guidance, has decided there's been a breach of something that they wanted to happen, and is therefore desperate to portray this as a breach of accounting law - which it is not. 

 

[RAM1966]

9 minutes ago, Indy said:

I thought it was a fortnight. But, to my knowledge, the commission hasn’t yet released its findings, so that clock hasn’t even started yet?

The longer it takes the better ?

[kevinhectoring]

13 minutes ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

Then you have contradicted yourself

Consistency is a sign of a closed mind 

[Spanish]

8 hours ago, RAM1966 said:

Possibly, but, there is one important point to consider, the fact that we do not need to present the restated accounts until the 18 Aug.  I think the independent disciplinary committee have done this for a reason, the season will have already started.  So even if we did not pass P&S rules we would not have the points deduction applied until the current season we are a about to start!!!

Maybe the EFL have pissed the Independent Disciplinary Committee off too, with this circus of a witch hunts.....  They appeal nearly everything, I often wonder why the EFL appointed the committee in the first place!!!! 

The restated accounts demand has nothing to do with the DC yet.  If we breach then they will get involved.  The threat of relegation comes from the guilty verdict in charge 2 particulars 2 and 5.  Currently the penalty is £100k but may go to appeal if either side are unhappy

[Spanish]

Just now, Spanish said:

The restated accounts demand has nothing to do with the DC yet.  If we breach then they will get involved.  The threat of relegation comes from the guilty verdict in charge 2 particulars 2 and 5.  Currently the penalty is £100k but may go to appeal if either side are unhappy

Caveat, the findings of the second DC have not been published yet so there is some uncertainty

[Woodley Ram]

11 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

I think we are on slightly different points. I was on about disclosure and I was talking about this statement below. What the LAP is saying here (in their prissy code) is: it is inconceivable that the club has no documents relating to the accounting treatment. But they claimed they did not and that was a porky pie.

28. The DC made disclosure orders in relation to documents in the Club’s control relevant to the accounting treatment. However, the Club did not produce a single document evidencing or relating to the accounting treatment adopted and confirmed that none existed.

can some one point me in the direction of the outcome (not the statements) as I cannot find it and would like to read it

[Brammie Steve]

Will all those qualified legal accountants schooled in the arcana of EFL vs DCFC please speak now or forever hereafter hold their peace.

For the sake of every Rams supporters' sanity and capacity to enjoy the possible easing of restrictions necessitated by the pandemic!

Edited June 28, 2021 by Brammie Steve

[Indy]

47 minutes ago, Woodley Ram said:

can some one point me in the direction of the outcome (not the statements) as I cannot find it and would like to read it

I don’t think it has been published yet. 

[Curtains]

Articles like this don’t help us and it’s factually incorrect IMO 

 

https://planetswans.co.uk/2021/06/28/Derby-county-farce-leaves-the-efl-integrity-in-question/

[RoyMac5]

8 hours ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

Then you have contradicted yourself, given the imprecise nature of accounting standards. 

If you accept compliance with the law of accounting then you have to accept the occasional practice that makes you think "that's not what I meant" the EFL have decided not to here. 

If you want to interpret and then ensure compliance with said interpretation then you have to provide the resources. 

What you cannot do is what is happening here, which is to say that the EFL, having not provided any meaningful guidance, has decided there's been a breach of something that they wanted to happen, and is therefore desperate to portray this as a breach of accounting law - which it is not. 

Indeed.

What next, we can't understand your accounts workings out so we're deducting points? Oh right, that's what they're thinking about doing!

[i-Ram]

4 minutes ago, Curtains said:

Articles like this don’t help us and it’s factually incorrect IMO 

https://planetswans.co.uk/2021/06/28/Derby-county-farce-leaves-the-efl-integrity-in-question/

It’s not particularly helpful to post factually incorrect articles that don’t help us either.

Planetswans? ?  

[Curtains]

1 minute ago, i-Ram said:

It’s not particularly helpful to post factually incorrect articles that don’t help us either.

Planetswans? ?  

That’s the thing though they are putting this rubbish out there. 
 

It’s just what a lot are saying and being fed by the media 

[Tamworthram]

4 minutes ago, Curtains said:

Articles like this don’t help us and it’s factually incorrect IMO 

 

https://planetswans.co.uk/2021/06/28/Derby-county-farce-leaves-the-efl-integrity-in-question/

True but it’s not really an “article” as such is it? Isn’t Planetswans a football forum similar to this one which means I doubt anyone in any sort of authority would take any notice of it assuming they even stumbled across it.

If we ever reach the stage where online fans forums have any sort of serious influence, especially on matters not directly impacting their club, then football is in serious trouble.

[Curtains]

3 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

True but it’s not really an “article” as such is it? Isn’t Planetswans a football forum similar to this one which means I doubt anyone in any sort of authority would take any notice of it assuming they even stumbled across it.

If we ever reach the stage where online fans forums have any sort of serious influence, especially on matters not directly impacting their club, then football is in serious trouble.

The problem is it’s a perception that’s gaining ground. 
 

Hey ho 

 

 

Edited June 28, 2021 by Curtains

[ThePrisoner]

19 minutes ago, Curtains said:

The problem is it’s a perception that’s gaining ground

Things like this gain ground because you post them. Best not give them the attention or time of day really. 

[Ghost of Clough]

12 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

I'm sure you 'got it' before the EFL because it's your club and you're all over the numbers. Quite a different question is whether the EFL has the responsibility or the manpower to check the methodology underlying the numbers (which are presumably pulled from the audited accounts). I don't know the answer to that question 

If someone like Kieran Maguire has the spare time to look at every club's accounts in the top two divisions, I'm sure the EFL should have someone capable of doing so too.
If I get it, then any junior accountant fresh from Uni should be able too as well. If resources are tight, then the kid on a gap year placement should be capable of getting it - it's not difficult stuff ?

[Woodley Ram]

Quote

I have read a lot on this subject on the board, so went back to the original paper.

forget about what we produced or didn't, its better to concentrate on what we are guilty of:

1, failing to have an amortisation process that undertakes the process in a straight line ( Important thing here, the player contracts were accounted as 0 at the end of the contract by DCFC)

2, failing to adequately disclose the policy and process in the financial statements. (so we did disclose the policy but not in a way that was not totally transparent).

FRS 102 doesn't state how amortalisation should be carried out as the rule would need to be flexible enough to account for different businesses such as the rise in the value of an office block for instance. However it is accepted practice in football that this is done on a straight line. 

I don't think you can give a points deduction on these points as you cannot show that we benefited from them. That is why in my opinion we have been asked to resubmit our accounts, and if over the limit will get a punishment for it.

If there is an appeal we could get number 1 overturned and the EFL know that. If I was them I would not appeal and wait for the revised set of accounts and give them to a set of auditors to pull apart. The EFL have proven susceptible to outside pressure so who knows. 

This all depends on the sale of PP, if we are over FFP limits I cannot see how this could be we could be punished retrospectively. Also with the original charge of not using a straight line, I'm not sure how they could deduct points without knowing if we have benefited from them.