Jump to content

Derby finally accept 21 point deduction.

taggy180

By taggy180
in Derby County Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

Comrade 86

Comrade 86

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Coconut's Beard said:

The amortisation stuff is done and dusted having gone through all of the various appeals processes. We've had our punishment for it, end of story, no go-backs unless the EFL are feeling very generous and decide to revisit a past decision they've already won!

It's fully in the EFL's control at this point to make things as easy or difficult for us as possible.

So us.

Then we fight the admin deduction and the EFL run the risk of us creating a precedent for every other club and completely upsetting the apple cart in the process.

I don't believe it's anywhere near as cut and dried as you do but then I am a deluded, happy-clapper who needs to 'get a grip' apparently, so there's that... ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Most active in this topic

Popular Days

Most active in this topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Yani P
Yani P

Baby Joshua born just over an hour ago..Nice and healthy and the wife is fine too..couldn't be there as have 2 girls under 4 but they are excited..cheers for all the kind reactions..might find time fo

Day
Day

I get the feeling some fans do not want us to be successful in this appeal, and then want the EFL to throw the book at us which would guarantee relegation and why?....Well we apparently deserve it.

Day
Day

It's rules such as above that builds this "vendetta" that some believe the EFL have towards us. Let's not forget here, the EFL signed off on our accounts, they only became an issue when they look

Posted Images

Wolfie20

Wolfie20

Posted
Posted

If some sort of deal is being considered which helps speed up the sale of the Club, hopefully the embargo is lifted in time for the January window - without significant strengthening (specifically in the striking positions) i feel our ability to stave off relegation may well be beyond our current squad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ram-Alf

Ram-Alf

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

Then we fight the admin deduction and the EFL run the risk of us creating a precedent for every other club and completely upsetting the apple cart in the process.

 

This.

The EFL could be running scared, They would have a Taxi Driver who does a little legal work on the side telling them that DCFC have a very good case with Force Majeure, So you'd better get in touch with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
May Contain Nuts

May Contain Nuts

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

Then we fight the admin deduction and the EFL run the risk of us creating a precedent for every other club and completely upsetting the apple cart in the process.

I don't believe it's anywhere near as cut and dried as you do but then I am a deluded, happy-clapper who needs to 'get a grip' apparently, so there's that... ?

Merely commenting on your idea of us having something to hold over them with regards to the ERV, it's impossible. Nothing to do with being a happy clapper or getting a grip!

Say we fight the admin deduction and lose, what then? EFL won't go easy on us after that, they'll try slap a further 6-9 points on.

We could appeal that and have the whole thing drag on another 3-6 months, totally scuppering any potential sale.

Do you really think it's worth the risk? 

I think the setting of a precedent is a massive red herring anyway. If a club were going to be forced into admin by Covid it would have already happened by now. Barring another lengthy period of there being no fans in stadiums or another wide scale event I can't see how they'd get away with it.

Edited by Coconut's Beard
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mucker1884

Mucker1884

Posted
Posted (edited)

adjourn  /əˈdʒəːn/ verb past tense: adjourned; past participle: adjourned

break off (a meeting, legal case, or game) with the intention of resuming it later.
"the meeting was adjourned until December 4"

(of a group of people) go somewhere for rest or refreshment.
"they adjourned to a local pub"

 

Well, according to Google, it's either been put back until 4th December, or they've all ducked off down the pub!  ?

Edited by Mucker1884
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Comrade 86

Comrade 86

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Coconut's Beard said:

Merely commenting on your idea of us having something to hold over them with regards to the ERV, it's impossible.

Say we fight the admin deduction and lose, what then? EFL won't go easy on us after that, they'll slap a further 6-9 points on.

We could appeal that and have the whole thing drag on another 3-6 months, totally scuppering any potential sale.

Do you really think it's worth the risk?

Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree then as I don't see any potential outcome as 'impossible', nor do I understand why the sanctions have not been made official if it's as cut and died as you make it sound. Time will tell. 

The happy clapper stuff was tongue in cheek and not directed at you btw. 'Self-deprecating' or summat... ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
May Contain Nuts

May Contain Nuts

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree then as I don't see any potential outcome as 'impossible', nor do I understand why the sanctions have not been made official if it's as cut and died as you make it sound. Time will tell. 

The happy clapper stuff was tongue in cheek and not directed at you btw. 'Self-deprecating' or summat... ?

The sanctions for us using an improper amortisation policy has been made official though. We were officially guilty and fined £100k, warned of our future contact and instructed to rework our P&S statements.

I don't think it's a matter of agreeing to disagree (although you may disagree), the above simply can't be reversed and even if it could it would never be done in time.

What makes you think otherwise?

Edited by Coconut's Beard
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hintonsboots

hintonsboots

Posted
Posted

I would only be happy with the admin team accepting the 12 point penalty for entering administration, if agreement is made with the EFL to honour the decision of the independent panel re the 100k fine and warning about future accounting practices. Also I would expect the EFL to advise Wycombe and Boro that any legal action would be futile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Comrade 86

Comrade 86

Posted
Posted
Just now, Coconut's Beard said:

The sanctions for us using an improper amortisation policy has been made official though. We were officially guilty and fined £100k, warned of our future contact and instructed to rework our P&S statements.

I don't think it's a matter of agreeing to disagree, the above simply can't be reversed and even if it could it would never be done in time.

They're trying to levy a points sanction on top of the fine for the same 'crime'. I'm not talking about the £100k fine!!!

Never mind anyway. This is a pointless debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Philmycock

Philmycock

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, hintonsboots said:

I would only be happy with the admin team accepting the 12 point penalty for entering administration, if agreement is made with the EFL to honour the decision of the independent panel re the 100k fine and warning about future accounting practices. Also I would expect the EFL to advise Wycombe and Boro that any legal action would be futile.

Best case scenario. Unfortunately not gonna happen

Link to comment
Share on other sites
May Contain Nuts

May Contain Nuts

Posted
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

They're trying to levy a points sanction on top of the fine for the same 'crime'. I'm not talking about the £100k fine!!!

Never mind anyway. This is a pointless debate.

They're not though?

a) Punishment for adopting an improper accounting policy. Done.

b) Punishment for breaking FFP / overspending following restating the accounts. Ongoing.

c) Punishment for administration. Ongoing.

They're all treated as separate crimes - a) didn't necessarily have to lead to b), it just did in our case.

They're trying leverage b) against potential outcomes of c) which makes a bit of a mockery of the validity and evenness of b) but that's why they have the agree decision rule in place.

Sorry if you feel it's pointless, was just trying to understand your logic and explaining mine. There's no need to reply further to this message btw, I don't mind ?


 

Edited by Coconut's Beard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...