Points deduction incoming?

[WhiteHorseRam]

Wouldn't a points donation be nice? I think the EFL should give us a discretionary 10 pts as - 

* we are a wonderful old club, one of the originals

* always providing loads of off-pitch gossip and dramas, makes the Championship more interesting I think

* Just imagine Steve Gibson's little face when he heard the news

 

Edited August 27, 2021 by WhiteHorseRam
typo

[RadioactiveWaste]

6 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Isn't that just agreeing to not spend too much ie stick to P&S?

Suspect there'd be quite a lot of "how to" inposed. Not something new ownership are likely to like taking on.

[atherstoneram]

I would think that with Keogh having found to be unlawfully dismissed and the club ordered to pay up his contract in full that becomes part of the wage bill especially if a monthly payment has been arranged which i imagine would not be less than what he was on per month

[RandomAccessMemory]

I think at this point there’s too much we don’t know, such as what is the proposed deduction for? Is it for breaching the P&S limit in the years we had to restate? Is it for the next 3 year period that includes 2019? The one that includes 2020? (That one seems highly unlikely, given that Covid losses are allowable.) If we have breached the limit, is the proposed punishment purely for that or are they trying to claim for aggravating factors?

Saying that, if I’m reading between the lines of the article, it says ‘with a points deduction still possible’ - only ‘possible’ so not guaranteed? If it’s not guaranteed why would we accept it as though it was?

‘Under pressure from rival Championship clubs, the EFL is pushing for Derby to be punished’ - if we have obviously breached the limit why would they have to be put under pressure to try and punish us, and it wouldn’t only be ‘possible’, it would be written in the rules, so they’d just charge us with breaching it, let it go to another Disciplinary and be done with it, why would they effectively be negotiating with us? - unless they thought they would lose the case due to mitigating factors in our favour, so are trying to get us to accept something so they don’t lose face again?

It says ‘as expected’ about challenging the proposed punishment, ie. they don’t expect us to accept what they have proposed, presumably they think we’d accept a lesser amount, just to get it behind us, but why should we if it’s not guaranteed? If accepting a deduction doesn’t even get us out of an embargo, what does it get us? If we can’t add to the squad to mitigate the deduction, why not fight it, otherwise we’d have a small squad and a deduction, when we could fight it, have a small squad but maybe avoid a deduction. Why should we have to just accept both?

It, once again, points out ‘Derby have always maintained they did not seek any competitive advantage with their amortisation policy.’ which does make it look like as though it’s a limit breach, it’s in the years we’ve had to restate, they are trying to increase the punishment because of aggravation, trying to say that we deliberately went over the limit to give us an advantage, and we’re fighting our corner on it.

If it’s a small limit breach it may be that we’re trying to avoid a deduction at all, due to what was mentioned in the club statement post original charge, we can’t go back and retrace our steps to get back in line.

The DC made it very clear that we couldn’t have known at the time that what we were doing was going to be considered contrary to FRS 102. If it’s that we’ve ended up going over by an amount we could have sold a player for (so bid rejected) or played hard ball and increased what we sold a player for, not bought a player for, not paid a loan fee/signing on fee or wages for, as we couldn’t have known at the time that doing what we did would lead us to breach retrospectively, and different decisions would have been made at that time had we known, I don’t think we’d just roll over and accept it, and I wouldn’t want us to either.

[duncanjwitham]

8 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Suspect there'd be quite a lot of "how to" inposed. Not something new ownership are likely to like taking on.

There was something about Birmingham being ordered by the EFL to accept a bid for Che Adams that was worth significantly below what they valued him at, they refused and ended up with a points deduction.  If we end up in the position where the EFL are ordering us to sell players for less than what they're worth, I'd say that makes us almost unsaleable.  No new owner would be willing to accept that.  And of course, if it turns out that the EFL would be willing to drop an imposed business plan for a new owner, then it just backs up the "personal vendetta against Mel Morris" arguments...

[RandomAccessMemory]

11 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

There was something about Birmingham being ordered by the EFL to accept a bid for Che Adams that was worth significantly below what they valued him at, they refused and ended up with a points deduction.  If we end up in the position where the EFL are ordering us to sell players for less than what they're worth, I'd say that makes us almost unsaleable.  No new owner would be willing to accept that.  And of course, if it turns out that the EFL would be willing to drop an imposed business plan for a new owner, then it just backs up the "personal vendetta against Mel Morris" arguments...

I think what happened there was they refused to sell him for about half of what they eventually got, the EFL charged them, the DC cleared them, the EFL appealed, the LAP overturned the ruling due to some legal reason, but they realised how ridiculous it was so they still only effectively gave them a slap on the wrist for it.

I’m not sure how a business plan would work with a change in owner, as they’d have their own business plan anyway.

Edited August 27, 2021 by RandomAccessMemory

[atherstoneram]

8 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

There was something about Birmingham being ordered by the EFL to accept a bid for Che Adams that was worth significantly below what they valued him at, they refused and ended up with a points deduction.  If we end up in the position where the EFL are ordering us to sell players for less than what they're worth, I'd say that makes us almost unsaleable.  No new owner would be willing to accept that.  And of course, if it turns out that the EFL would be willing to drop an imposed business plan for a new owner, then it just backs up the "personal vendetta against Mel Morris" arguments...

But i can't see a new owner just wanting to put enough money in to keep the club "ticking over" so it's understandable the imposed business plan would be lifted

[MaltRam]

Why are we accepting a points reduction? What have we done wrong?

[nogbad van 50]

3 minutes ago, Needlesh said:

Why are we accepting a points reduction? What have we done wrong?

Don’t think anyone outside the club really knows,just a lot of speculation at the moment and people hoping this long running saga is resolved soon.
 

[RoyMac5]

44 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Suspect there'd be quite a lot of "how to" inposed. Not something new ownership are likely to like taking on.

Who would keep an eye on it though? Hand on heart 'yeah we'll do it' kind of stuff?

[RadioactiveWaste]

Just now, RoyMac5 said:

Who would keep an eye on it though? Hand on heart 'yeah we'll do it' kind of stuff?

I honestly don't know, suspect it'd be done on a kind of "ah ha gotchya" basis fron the EFL side.....

[hintonsboots]

4 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

I honestly don't know, suspect it'd be done on a kind of "ah ha gotchya" basis fron the EFL side.....

 

[DCFC1388]

I wonder if this 'business plan' fits in with what Nixon has previously said about the EFL wanting assurances from Mel?

Maybe the business plan is simply proof of funding and a structure to fund the club, cover the cost of any more incomings plus any payments of outstanding money (Cocu, HMRC & Keogh) whilst Mel is still the owner. So once he sells up the agreed business plan gets removed.

Would be a sensible approach by the EFL as they know Mel wants out so just putting something in place so the club doesnt go under.

[Sparkle]

13 minutes ago, DCFC1388 said:

I wonder if this 'business plan' fits in with what Nixon has previously said about the EFL wanting assurances from Mel?

Maybe the business plan is simply proof of funding and a structure to fund the club, cover the cost of any more incomings plus any payments of outstanding money (Cocu, HMRC & Keogh) whilst Mel is still the owner. So once he sells up the agreed business plan gets removed.

Would be a sensible approach by the EFL as they know Mel wants out so just putting something in place so the club doesnt go under.

So the EFL telling somebody how to spend his money - if it was me get stuffed would be the answer 

[Spanish]

6 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

So the EFL telling somebody how to spend his money - if it was me get stuffed would be the answer 

start your own league then, will be the response

[Sparkle]

A devilish side of me would like Mel to re look at things in terms of paying the debts off, operating at a very low cost base that is sustainable whilst building the value of our very promising youngsters, in turn the side doing well and we actually make it to the play off by the next three seasons and be successful ( unlikely with clubs in receipt of parachute payments) where a buyer may well come in for the club at a decent amount. 
if I was him I would consider it if feasible whilst I would absolutely take the EFL to a court of law if they impose sanctions against us based on things they agreed to and they signed of as ok that were simply perfectly legal, how the EFL could defend their actions would be very interesting and unsuccessful I imagine.

[TheSlate]

14 minutes ago, Spanish said:

start your own league then, will be the response

Er... we did start the Football League

[Spanish]

Just now, TheSlate said:

Er... we did start the Football League

yes then all those late comers arrived and kicked our ar5e

[DCFC1388]

29 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

So the EFL telling somebody how to spend his money - if it was me get stuffed would be the answer 

Not so much how he spends his money, just that he will cover the bills whilst he is owner, i dont think that is too much to ask

[Comrade 86]

Be interesting to know whether this 'business plan' thingy is something other clubs have been forced to submit, or whether this is another entirely new precedent the EFL are 'trialling' with Derby.

Bamfords...