Embargo.

[cheron85]

38 minutes ago, EnigmaRam said:

Sorry but we must have done something wrong or we wouldn’t be under threat of a points deduction. I can only assume that we’ve breached P&S but there are mitigating circumstances which is what we are discussing with the EFL. 

Assumption followed by assumption - There could be any number of reasons the EFL are questioning it - For starters they apparently don't have internal accountants so maybe they're working with outside consultants who need more time on our books?

I would imagine after last time they are unwilling to take our accountants word on whatever has been submitted so they're likely poring over everything with a fine tooth comb which could take ages

[Carl Sagan]

2 hours ago, gccrowdpleaser said:

That's the exact same situation we were in anyway. We can't sign free agents unless embargo is lifted over and above our current 23.

The text highlighted is entirely irrelevant really. As long as we are in embargo we are at our limit.

The 16 is only really relevant to protect to ability of a team to out out an 11 plus 5 subs. If they can't they may be permitted to sign additional players up to the 16 but not beyond.  

Yeah I realized the logic of that after I'd posted. Didn't make any practical difference unless we'd sold a couple of people yesterday but hadn't been able to replace them before the window closed, but thought we might later on after the dust had settled.

[EnigmaRam]

6 minutes ago, cheron85 said:

Assumption followed by assumption - There could be any number of reasons the EFL are questioning it - For starters they apparently don't have internal accountants so maybe they're working with outside consultants who need more time on our books?

I would imagine after last time they are unwilling to take our accountants word on whatever has been submitted so they're likely poring over everything with a fine tooth comb which could take ages

Yep, another assumption 

[Crewton]

It's also possible that we haven't breached the P&S limits with the revised accounts (or have failed them by a whisker), but the EFL want to hit us with -3 points deductions for each of the breaches still listed - HMRC debt, non-filing of a/c at Companies House, and non-filing of a/c with the EFL - with the -3 pt suspended deduction for late payment of wages - with the logic of "accept this now, otherwise we'll refer the whole raft of breaches to an IDP and you COULD get more".

Until we know some facts, the permutations are endless.

[RoyMac5]

20 minutes ago, Crewton said:

It's also possible that we haven't breached the P&S limits with the revised accounts (or have failed them by a whisker), but the EFL want to hit us with -3 points deductions for each of the breaches still listed - HMRC debt, non-filing of a/c at Companies House, and non-filing of a/c with the EFL - with the -3 pt suspended deduction for late payment of wages - with the logic of "accept this now, otherwise we'll refer the whole raft of breaches to an IDP and you COULD get more".

Until we know some facts, the permutations are endless.

Or it could be that as with the appeal fine they have sent our 'details' to their lawyers to be looked at to see if they can deal with us in a way that they'd prefer but which we will appeal? We know they weren't happy they had to accept there was no standing for them to re-appeal our £100k, maybe that is what is happening now with our accounts?

[Crewton]

13 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Or it could be that as with the appeal fine they have sent our 'details' to their lawyers to be looked at to see if they can deal with us in a way that they'd prefer but which we will appeal? We know they weren't happy they had to accept there was no standing for them to re-appeal our £100k, maybe that is what is happening now with our accounts?

Who knows, it's another possibility. If they don't have faith in their own defined processes to deliver "justice", they really are in a whole mess of trouble of their own.

[MACKWORTHRAM]

57 minutes ago, cheron85 said:

Assumption followed by assumption - There could be any number of reasons the EFL are questioning it - For starters they apparently don't have internal accountants so maybe they're working with outside consultants who need more time on our books?

I would imagine after last time they are unwilling to take our accountants word on whatever has been submitted so they're likely poring over everything with a fine tooth comb which could take ages

All we have are assumptions.

Owing to the disgusting lack of communication from the football club.

[RadioactiveWaste]

20 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Or it could be that as with the appeal fine they have sent our 'details' to their lawyers to be looked at to see if they can deal with us in a way that they'd prefer but which we will appeal? We know they weren't happy they had to accept there was no standing for them to re-appeal our £100k, maybe that is what is happening now with our accounts?

That does seem plausible, probable even.

I think the whole construcive discussions probably never did resolve into an acceptance on either side, and my bet would be DCFC submitted accounts showing no breach and the EFL are now trying to find a way to bring it back as a new charge.

[Tamworthram]

4 minutes ago, MACKWORTHRAM said:

All we have are assumptions.

Owing to the disgusting lack of communication from the football club.

Isn’t the “disgusting lack of communication from the football club” another assumption that they are at liberty to actually tell us everything we want to know?

[RadioactiveWaste]

8 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

Isn’t the “disgusting lack of communication from the football club” another assumption that they are at liberty to actually tell us everything we want to know?

I certainly feel there's a lot of muddle between what folk want to know, what folk have a right to know, what folk have a reasonable expectation to be told and what for very good reasons has to remain confidential until a certain point.

We might all like a blow by blow account of the discussions, but that;s never going to happen.

I do whole heartedly agree the club have been very bad at communications, and frankly, the ownership has got us into a very bad set of circumstances which it is going to be hard to communicate in a positive way.

A bit more could've been done to reassure fans, certainly. However endless comms to the effect of "we're still working on that, nothing to announce" aren't going to be the solution either.

[i-Ram]

1 hour ago, Crewton said:

It's also possible that we haven't breached the P&S limits with the revised accounts (or have failed them by a whisker), but the EFL want to hit us with -3 points deductions for each of the breaches still listed - HMRC debt, non-filing of a/c at Companies House, and non-filing of a/c with the EFL - with the -3 pt suspended deduction for late payment of wages - with the logic of "accept this now, otherwise we'll refer the whole raft of breaches to an IDP and you COULD get more".

Until we know some facts, the permutations are endless.

Dont get to worked up by this Crewton otherwise you might end up in a soup.

[Premier ram]

10 hours ago, Bubbles said:

sometimes I can’t help but wish Mel would just accept the 9 point deduction. surely that’d mean the sale of the club would be quicker? 

NO , NO ,NO

[Gringo]

40 minutes ago, Premier ram said:

NO , NO ,NO

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjp0Niv9t3yAhWDg-AKHRzJDYsQwqsBegQIBhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DTJ5sjFf4w1k&usg=AOvVaw06PnyLPUc_8U1qdPdPB9Q3

[Ram-Alf]

13 minutes ago, Charlotte Ram said:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjp0Niv9t3yAhWDg-AKHRzJDYsQwqsBegQIBhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DTJ5sjFf4w1k&usg=AOvVaw06PnyLPUc_8U1qdPdPB9Q3

One of Winstons put downs when in Parliament to a female MP, She said, If I were your Wife, I'd put poison in your tea, Winstons reply, If I were your Husband i'd drink it.

[Barney1991]

Had this back from nixon so how does this work then if the amortisation. Can’t be changed 

[Gaspode]

1 minute ago, Barney1991 said:

Had this back from nixon so how does this work then if the amortisation. Can’t be changed 

It just shows how ridiculous the EFL stance is - their rules don't state what method to use so we use a perfectly acceptable method and yet they want to bend the laws of the land to fit in with their incompetence.....

So come on EFL, change the rules now and make sure any accounts submitted from this point forward use the straight line method - and accept that it's down to your amateurish behaviour that we've been able to gain an advantage....

[RadioactiveWaste]

8 minutes ago, Barney1991 said:

Had this back from nixon so how does this work then if the amortisation. Can’t be changed 

So this reads as resubmitting the accouts to companies house was not a ruling that could be complied with, so there's been an exercise in "Here's what they would've looked like" but that neither constitutes proof we breached allowable losses, nor does it fully comply with what DC2 instructed DCFC to do. That's a bit aukward for both sides, i suppose that explains the need for "discussions"

[GboroRam]

11 minutes ago, Barney1991 said:

Had this back from nixon so how does this work then if the amortisation. Can’t be changed 

Very worrying. 

The battery level, I mean. 

[Ram-Alf]

13 minutes ago, Barney1991 said:

Had this back from nixon so how does this work then if the amortisation. Can’t be changed 

The EFL need to stick to something they actually know...like the value of football stadia...Oh wait a minute

[Sparkle]

3 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

So this reads as resubmitting the accouts to companies house was not a ruling that could be complied with, so there's been an exercise in "Here's what they would've looked like" but that neither constitutes proof we breached allowable losses, nor does it fully comply with what DC2 instructed DCFC to do. That's a bit aukward for both sides, i suppose that explains the need for "discussions"

Well it made no sense to be asking us to resubmit legal accounts which have been accepted by the crown. - Farce 

EFL should say that no progress can be made from now on - it’s no wonder they are asking us to accept a points deduction because they can’t legally give us one!