Comrade 86 Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 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 More sharing options...
Wolfie20 Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 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 More sharing options...
Comrade 86 Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 6 minutes ago, LazloW said: They’ve obviously decided they were wrong about everything and have agreed to rescind the whole points deduction. Well played EFL. Premier ram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 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 More sharing options...
May Contain Nuts Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 (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 November 8, 2021 by Coconut's Beard rynny 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mucker1884 Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 (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 November 8, 2021 by Mucker1884 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 1 minute ago, Mucker1884 said: "they adjourned to a local pub" Joiners Arms Kathcairns, Rammy03, Mucker1884 and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hintonsboots Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 38 minutes ago, I know nuffin said: Nixson just tweeted penalty points on ice more news shortly A new cocktail he is marketing ? europia and Ram-Alf 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mucker1884 Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 40 minutes ago, I know nuffin said: Nixson just tweeted penalty points on ice more news shortly More crap Saturday night TV! About time the Beeb came up with something original! ? Andrew3000 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade 86 Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 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 More sharing options...
Abu Derby Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 If Percy and Nixon were able to write in plain English without leaving room for speculation then they’d be doing themselves out of a job. RAM1966, europia, MuespachRam and 1 other 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Contain Nuts Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 (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 November 8, 2021 by Coconut's Beard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hintonsboots Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 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. Ram-Alf, Gritstone Ram, RoyMac5 and 5 others 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade 86 Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 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 More sharing options...
Philmycock Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 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 More sharing options...
hintonsboots Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 1 minute ago, Philmycock said: Best case scenario. Unfortunately not gonna happen Why not ? RAM1966 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I know nuffin Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 1 minute ago, Philmycock said: Best case scenario. Unfortunately not gonna happen We can dream! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hintonsboots Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 1 minute ago, I know nuffin said: We can dream! Don’t underestimate Nick De Marco. Philmycock and Ram-Alf 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philmycock Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 2 minutes ago, hintonsboots said: Why not ? Because the EFL do what Gibson tells them to hintonsboots 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Contain Nuts Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 (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 November 8, 2021 by Coconut's Beard kevinhectoring and RAM1966 2 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