Embargo.

[Mihangel]

The more I think about it, ANY points punishment now is simply a doubling up of what has already been dished out. Effectively, we've lost a lot of points over the last year through our inability to sign the right players. It won't stop the EFL, of course.

[Sparkle]

One thing remains consistent - we don’t have the full information - neither do the so called press 

[RadioactiveWaste]

6 minutes ago, Eatonram said:

I agree in a way, but the EFL will just use attrition. They will delay and delay and delay and yet another transfer window will pass. Unless we find legal recourse as a means of imposing a deadline for conclusion, then we seem to be at the mercy of the EFL's intransigence.

But the EFL's possition will simply be that it is in DCFC's power to submit their accounts (and resolve the other issues) and accept the consiquences of what the accounts say.

[Archie]

11 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

One thing remains consistent - we don’t have the full information - neither do the so called press 

But surely the EFL do and they can look at those facts and apply the letter of the law regarding a punishment and apply it. 

The thing is I don't think they can otherwise they would have done so. They are aware it could be challenged as it seems to be subjective and retrospective which explains why they're trying to 'negotiate' a punishment.

All a load of face saving testicles by the EFL to me. The longer it rumbles on and the legal fees mount, they'll be more disharmony by the remaining 23 teams as they are being billed for this. 

I still think we should fight on regardless.

Edited September 14, 2021 by Archie

[Woodypecker]

23 minutes ago, Eatonram said:

Seen this. Same question never get answered, What is the points deduction actually for? It seems to be either take a points deduction no questions asked OR we keep you in embargo with no foreseeable end. Truly appalling how the EFL are behaving.

Both EFL & Mel seem to have bitten off more than they can chew. Mel fighting it on principle, EFL struggling for legal justification...

[DCFC1388]

For us to be even entertaining the discussion of a points deduction of any amount must mean we know we have breached the P&S figures otherwise we would submit the accounts and no negotiations required.

[Eatonram]

10 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

But the EFL's possition will simply be that it is in DCFC's power to submit their accounts (and resolve the other issues) and accept the consiquences of what the accounts say.

What I dont understand is the explicit quote on sky (can't find now but it was a shot of someones TV) that stated in quotes that Derby had submitted revised and restated accounts, the quote was attributed to the EFL. 

[hintonsboots]

6 minutes ago, Archie said:

I still think we should fight on regardless

Agreed. If any breach of the rules was clear cut a defined points penalty would apply, and would have been dished out already.If It’s the EFL telling Mel he’s been a very naughty boy not sticking to straight line amortisation and other clubs don’t like it, then leave it it Nick DM’s hands. Personally I would love to see the EFL dragged through the civil courts.

Edited September 14, 2021 by hintonsboots

[Archie]

3 minutes ago, hintonsboots said:

Agreed. If any breach of the rules was clear cut a defined points penalty would apply, and would have been dished out already.If It’s the EFL telling Mel he’s been a very naughty boy not sticking to straight line amortisation and other clubs don’t like it, then leave it it Nick DM’s hands. Personally I would love to see the EFL dragged through the civil courts.

I would love that also and would be prepared to chip in for the very best legal representation possible. 

[RadioactiveWaste]

10 minutes ago, Eatonram said:

What I dont understand is the explicit quote on sky (can't find now but it was a shot of someones TV) that stated in quotes that Derby had submitted revised and restated accounts, the quote was attributed to the EFL. 

I don't get it either, my guess is it's a kind of limbo waiting on someone to pull the trigger on actually doing something - it might be we've shown what the accounts say to the EFL but not "submitted" them officially or something like that - but it is a guess and we don't really know what's going on behind the scenes. I suspect trust and good will on each side is still pretty low.

 

[Ram-Alf]

16 minutes ago, hintonsboots said:

Agreed. If any breach of the rules was clear cut a defined points penalty would apply, and would have been dished out already.If It’s the EFL telling Mel he’s been a very naughty boy not sticking to straight line amortisation and other clubs don’t like it, then leave it it Nick DM’s hands. Personally I would love to see the EFL dragged through the civil courts.

By their short and hairys over hot coals

[Van der MoodHoover]

11 minutes ago, Eatonram said:

What I dont understand is the explicit quote on sky (can't find now but it was a shot of someones TV) that stated in quotes that Derby had submitted revised and restated accounts, the quote was attributed to the EFL. 

Interesting choice of words if that's 100% accurate.

Revised suggests we've looked at some additional items - restated implies we've just redone the amortisation numbers. 

If we have "revised" our accounts in ways other than the amortisation approach then I can imagine that is

a) not what the EFL were expecting 

b) opening up further conversations and interpretations of the instructions we received. 

I assume that we may have revised, because simply restating gave us a P&S issue. 

Of course, this is all pure speculation and so on a par with Percy, Nixon and the rest ?

 

[Ram-Alf]

15 minutes ago, Archie said:

I would love that also and would be prepared to chip in for the very best legal representation possible. 

Same here, Shall we start a "Me Too" movement...oh wait a minute ?

[ilkleyram]

9 minutes ago, Eatonram said:

What I dont understand is the explicit quote on sky (can't find now but it was a shot of someones TV) that stated in quotes that Derby had submitted revised and restated accounts, the quote was attributed to the EFL. 

I would guess - given that the quote hasn't been repeated anywhere since - that Sky actually know the same as the rest of us and the rest of the press - diddly squat.  They probably jumped the gun and presumed.

We were found not guilty of any wrongdoing re the stadium sale and have been punished with a fine for the accounting/amortisation issues so both matters are now closed and dealt with, or should be.  The only thing left is the financial results from accounts resubmitted and our performance against FFP targets (for which transgressions and punishment is clearly set out).

You would have thought that had we not resubmitted any accounts that we would have heard about that by now so I would guess that the resubmitted accounts probably either show that we failed FFP but we are arguing mitigation (the EFL let us go on using our amortisation method year after year without saying anything) or that we have resubmitted accounts that show we passed the FFP tests but the EFL don't agree how we have got to that result; or a bit of both.

[brady1993]

Assuming that the whole "negotiating a punishment thing" is a case of the EFL don't think they have an airtight case against us but do have enough evidence to likely stick us with something eventually then the thing I don't get is why would their opening position in that be for a 12 point deduction ?

I get that's the maximum deduction they can hit us with but surely if they had evidence for that then it would be case closed. The thing is a 12 point deduction basically gives us zero incentive to play ball because it's a nailed on relegation and so we might as well fight them tooth and nail however we can legally. It encourages the legal battle that these negotiations you'd think they are trying to avoid. 

[Eatonram]

On 31/08/2021 at 07:28, TexasRam said:

 

[LeedsCityRam]

35 minutes ago, Eatonram said:

I agree in a way, but the EFL will just use attrition. They will delay and delay and delay and yet another transfer window will pass. Unless we find legal recourse as a means of imposing a deadline for conclusion, then we seem to be at the mercy of the EFL's intransigence.

Agree - don't understand why the club haven't used injunctive relief (or threat of) to compel the EFL to behave reasonably up to now.

We were asked to submit restated accounts 2nd July & I find it hard to believe we wouldn't have had a draft set of accounts ready to discuss with the EFL as soon as possible. Nearly 2.5 months have gone since then with another transfer window closed and there is still no decision on whether we are compliant of not & rumours abound of a 12 point penalty. Its that the best outcome 'negotiation' has got us after that length of time, I don't understand why we haven't broken off negotiations with the EFL & asked the case to be referred straight to the Disciplinary Commission for consideration as per regulations 84 & 89 in their own rulebook. Firstly, we're likely to get a quicker decision than this endless stalemate & secondly, the DC took a much more lenient view of the amortisation originally than the EFL did.

The lack of urgency from the club is puzzling though & seems inconsistent with an owner supposedly keen to sell up.

[Eatonram]

Can anyone find the screen shot from about 22 Aug of the sky quote. I’ve tried but can’t find it. 

[RadioactiveWaste]

We were ordered to submit accounts complying with frs102 - not ordered to restate them using straight line ammotisation only. So we've probably changed a few things...

[brady1993]

4 minutes ago, LeedsCityRam said:

Agree - don't understand why the club haven't used injunctive relief (or threat of) to compel the EFL to behave reasonably up to now.

We were asked to submit restated accounts 2nd July & I find it hard to believe we wouldn't have had a draft set of accounts ready to discuss with the EFL as soon as possible. Nearly 2.5 months have gone since then with another transfer window closed and there is still no decision on whether we are compliant of not & rumours abound of a 12 point penalty. Its that the best outcome 'negotiation' has got us after that length of time, I don't understand why we haven't broken off negotiations with the EFL & asked the case to be referred straight to the Disciplinary Commission for consideration as per regulations 84 & 89 in their own rulebook. Firstly, we're likely to get a quicker decision than this endless stalemate & secondly, the DC took a much more lenient view of the amortisation originally than the EFL did.

The lack of urgency from the club is puzzling though & seems inconsistent with an owner supposedly keen to sell up.

The only thing I can sort of speculate is there a motivation for the club that we as fans are seeing. Something the EFL is offering or threatening us with that we feel like we have to take seriously and means we can't exercise other options to break the holding pattern. That's what I'm struggling with here because the pieces of information being drip fed out don't really add up and suggests there is something that hasn't been made public.

If I was to take a wild guess it would be that we see it as the best avenue of getting the least amount of punishment mixed with an element of ending the farce, it's quite possible that the "12 points" being put out into the media is mostly for external consumption and not the EFL's actual hard position.