Spanish Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 13 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said: Ah right, didn't realise they'd hear both appeals (if they happened) together. Bit more worried than previously now. I still don't believe we're guilty of anything bar some technicalities, but still... #COYR both appeals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanjwitham Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 2 minutes ago, Spanish said: both appeals? We could appeal to reduce the punishment, the EFL could appeal to raise it. Presumably both appeals would be handled in a single hearing. RadioactiveWaste 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spanish Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 4 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said: We could appeal to reduce the punishment, the EFL could appeal to raise it. Presumably both appeals would be handled in a single hearing. ah ok, think we would be mad to appeal this when you look at the downside Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 Just now, Spanish said: ah ok, think we would be mad to appeal this when you look at the downside I only meant as a 'time consuming exercise'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spanish Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 remember when Leeds were fined £200k for spying, puts our fine in context doesn't it CBRammette and RadioactiveWaste 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 Just now, Spanish said: remember when Leeds were fined £200k for spying, puts our fine in context doesn't it Don't need to remember, lots of L**ds fans constantly tweeting about it since the appeal result announced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Contain Nuts Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 (edited) 9 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said: We could appeal to reduce the punishment, the EFL could appeal to raise it. Presumably both appeals would be handled in a single hearing. Is there any way an appeal by us could be seen as frivolous (seeing as we've been found guilty, even if it's of very little) and see the punishment go up, like how red card appeals can get games added onto the ban? I can't imagine us appealing a 100k fine would be looked upon too favourable when the opinion of some is that we're lucky to get away with that as it is. Edited June 30, 2021 by Coconut r_wilcockson and Steve How Hard? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spanish Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 1 minute ago, RoyMac5 said: I only meant as a 'time consuming exercise'. Still think they will get this done quickly given the season starts in 6 weeks. Wouldn't be surprised if the club seek an injunction if they try to impose penalties in 20/21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 Just now, Spanish said: Still think they will get this done quickly given the season starts in 6 weeks. Wouldn't be surprised if the club seek an injunction if they try to impose penalties in 20/21 Why wouldn't they as they've issued interchangeable fixture lists? ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkle Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 4 minutes ago, Spanish said: remember when Leeds were fined £200k for spying, puts our fine in context doesn't it They didn’t pay it though - their manager did ! And an argument could have been made that they dishonourably gained 6 points from us ( they didn’t need to spy on the pitch) so should have been docked those points whilst spying on all the other clubs as well causing league chaos yet again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beetle Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 Leeds got fined £200,000 because they cheated. We have been found guilty of the accounts not making it clear what we have done (I believe). So until our accounts are submitted and it is proven we have broken the rules we have not done anything that impacts reality (I believe), that is why the fine is so small. I cannot see on what grounds the EFL can appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnero Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 16 minutes ago, Spanish said: remember when Leeds were fined £200k for spying, puts our fine in context doesn't it Maybe it puts our 'crime' into context, The Scarlet Pimpernel 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spanish Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 5 minutes ago, Carnero said: Maybe it puts our 'crime' into context, that's my point, ah well moving on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 44 minutes ago, Spanish said: remember when Leeds were fined £200k for spying, puts our fine in context doesn't it = got off lightly 27 minutes ago, Carnero said: Maybe it puts our 'crime' into context, = what we did actually wasn't that bad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColonelBlimp Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 3 hours ago, Curtains said: I’m worried as well mate It’s all about the perception of what other people think Derby have done or not done. Being as I posted the original story I need to post this. Sorry Prisoner ? https://planetswans.co.uk/2021/06/29/Derby-county-fans-hit-back-after-our-farce-story/ PS Don’t miss David B comments at the end of article Shame David B didn't proof read it before posting, cringe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rammieib Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 Going to be a fun few days when we release our accounts. Either we A) Release them and DCFC already show we've broken P&S or B) We release them, we show we are perfectly in for P&S and then Kieran Maguire gets a hard on spending three days fine tooth combing through every line to find an error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 1 minute ago, rammieib said: Going to be a fun few days when we release our accounts. Either we A) Release them and DCFC already show we've broken P&S or B) We release them, we show we are perfectly in for P&S and then Kieran Maguire gets a hard on spending three days fine tooth combing through every line to find an error. I just wish we do something unusual and happen to be in the same room as Gibson, KM and Mr Pop when they find out rammieib 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van der MoodHoover Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 3 hours ago, Spanish said: Do you think that the reason the EFL lean so heavily on accounting standards is because they had no intention in drawing up exhaustive rules when industry ones exist? Perhaps I am giving them too much credit? If indicative market values were available and I don't know of any (?) it would have been sensible to wrap them within the club's methodology. Not that I have any knowledge of this because the details are not published but the theory that players have a residual value may not be practically correct given our recruitment experiences. Corporate governance is based on industry and business experience and amortisation should surely lean on that heavily I would think. There is no point on having a policy that is not fit for purpose unless the point of it is to delay the hit until something comes along to save you errr...... like selling your stadium. All this would be very fascinating if it wasn't so serious for the club. I am very worried about the threat and the impact of the long embargo The EFL probably (I say this with no evidence at all so it's just conjecture) wan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van der MoodHoover Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 Just now, Van der MoodHoover said: The EFL probably (I say this with no evidence at all so it's just conjecture) wan I've started so I'll finish... ? The EFL probably (I say this with no evidence at all so it's just conjecture) wanted to avoid rule writing as far as possible, that's for sure. However, they appear to have done no real analysis to see whether a straight adoption of existing frameworks will give them what they now claim they want in terms of outcomes (everyone using the same approach to the detailed topic of amortising player contract values). Accounting standards by definition are really NOT industry specific. They are now based unequivocally on the principle of "economic substance over form" to reinforce this point. I think as far as "indicative market values" go then you would be looking for broadly comparable transactions. That's basically how property valuation is carried out. But it is a negotiable point and as it is indeed industry specific should be within the EFL purview. To be sure, if you held aggressive valuations in your accounts on the basis that you would be actively trading out these player assets, but you then didn't and they went for 0, then you would expect the following... - large final year write downs - an increasing auditor challenge to the directors as to why they felt the approach met the overall principles of true and fair, plus the accounting concept of prudence. - ultimately an insistence on a revision to the approach in order for the auditors to continue to sign off. My overall issue with the EFL is that they appear to have "short circuited" these stages altogether and are now writing rules retrospectively at the same time as sanctioning a member for not complying with a non-existent rule. From a regulatory lens that is appalling behavior. angieram, Ghost of Clough, LeedsCityRam and 5 others 3 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamUltraRam Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 2 hours ago, duncanjwitham said: Up to 14 days after the panel release their written reasons, which they haven't yet. On the off chance that the EFL aren't going to appeal, unless they quickly state that, we still have to wait two weeks before we can start trading properly again waiting for the clock to tick down - more punishment for us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account.
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now