Derby finally accept 21 point deduction.

[PistoldPete]

16 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Weren't there rumoured to be 'non-footballing' issues that led to his dismissal?

Yes. We weren't playing football.

[The Key Club King]

48 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

5th. Which makes his dismissal by Morris more bizarre even by his standards. 

He's hardly covered himself in glory as a manager since. Retrospectively it's probably a rare correct decision by Mel. 

[Tyler Durden]

31 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Weren't there rumoured to be 'non-footballing' issues that led to his dismissal?

I dunno Roy. I do know Clement was sacked when we were 5th which was not long after Morris had said that promotion wasn't a priority that season and he cited the infamous Derby Way behind the decision.

Utterly bizarre even for Morris. 

[Ram-Alf]

29 minutes ago, The Key Club King said:

He's hardly covered himself in glory as a manager since. Retrospectively it's probably a rare correct decision by Mel. 

Maybe the Tom Toms were heard loud and clear

[GB SPORTS]

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

Johnson, Butterfield and Hendrick and I thought Thorne was fit again by 2015-16 so midfield pretty strong even when Hughes and Bryso got injured. Weimann, Martin, Bent and Ince up front, Jonny Russell too.  

George only missed three games through injury whilst Clement was here:

2 for a calf injury and Clement's last game (also his calf)

He was rested for a further two games, suspended for 1 (5 yellows) and an unused sub in 1 game.

[Van der MoodHoover]

2 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

Johnson, Butterfield and Hendrick and I thought Thorne was fit again by 2015-16 so midfield pretty strong even when Hughes and Bryso got injured. Weimann, Martin, Bent and Ince up front, Jonny Russell too.  

We wouldn't have bought Johnson and Butterfield had the injuries not occurred. Which was clearly designed to maintain the strength of the squad, but which undoubtedly contributed materially to the massive overspend and arguably was the beginning of all our issues. 

[Ram-Alf]

2 minutes ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

We wouldn't have bought Johnson and Butterfield had the injuries not occurred. Which was clearly designed to maintain the strength of the squad, but which undoubtedly contributed materially to the massive overspend and arguably was the beginning of all our issues. 

To be fare, I was as pleased as Punch when Johnson signed at the last minute, He had a great last season with Norwich, But we all know that went south with us from then on.

[PistoldPete]

3 minutes ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

We wouldn't have bought Johnson and Butterfield had the injuries not occurred. Which was clearly designed to maintain the strength of the squad, but which undoubtedly contributed materially to the massive overspend and arguably was the beginning of all our issues. 

Yeah, I mean desperately unlucky losing two key players to injury in the first game of season. but why not use the loan market FFS?  

[SecretDave]

12 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

Yeah, I mean desperately unlucky losing two key players to injury in the first game of season. but why not use the loan market FFS?  

We could have gone for Joey Barton at the time on a short term free transfer. He went to Burnley instead and was a key player in their promotion. Would have been a cheaper option for us. 

[cosmic]

15 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

Weren't there rumoured to be 'non-footballing' issues that led to his dismissal?

Yeah if I remember the “breakfast club” all it confirmed this. Something along the lines of “we can’t share the details but he definitely had to go”.

(I’m sure someone who went or remembers the thread on here afterwards will correct me if I’m wrong). 

[FlyBritishMidland]

14 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

Yeah, I mean desperately unlucky losing two key players to injury in the first game of season. but why not use the loan market FFS?  

Exactly that.  I think Bryson was out for 2 - 3 months and Hughes for the season.  A couple of season long loans would have seen us through.  It’s what we did the season before when Thorne was injured.

[Oldben]

So this is why the appeal was ended.

Game, set and match to the efl.

https://the72.co.uk/255427/nixon-reveals-further-details-about-Derby-countys-efl-punishment-rams-got-off-lightly/

[Ghost of Clough]

6 minutes ago, Oldben said:

So this is why the appeal was ended.

Game, set and match to the efl.

https://the72.co.uk/255427/nixon-reveals-further-details-about-Derby-countys-efl-punishment-rams-got-off-lightly/

It could only be 17 points if they don't make adjustments for failed years prior to moving on to the next period.

Ie 3 years to 2018 failed, years of p&s losses exceeding £13m should be reset. Then using those adjusted figures for the 3 years to 2019. This is what happend with Brum, when they failed their 3 years to 2018.

17 points would be using unadjusted figures the whole way through.

[Tamworthram]

5 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

It could only be 17 points if they don't make adjustments for failed years prior to moving on to the next period.

Ie 3 years to 2018 failed, years of p&s losses exceeding £13m should be reset. Then using those adjusted figures for the 3 years to 2019. This is what happend with Brum, when they failed their 3 years to 2018.

17 points would be using unadjusted figures the whole way through.

I'm refusing to get excited or despondent until I see the official outcomes for our appeal and potential additional points deductions. 

Whatever it is between 0 and 21+, I guess we, as fans, just have to accept it. One poster, can't remember who now, suggested such a reaction is spineless but there's nowt I can do about. No protests, chants against the EFL etc is going to change the outcome.

[Ram-Alf]

19 minutes ago, Oldben said:

So this is why the appeal was ended.

Game, set and match to the efl.

https://the72.co.uk/255427/nixon-reveals-further-details-about-Derby-countys-efl-punishment-rams-got-off-lightly/

Bla Bla Bla...there's nowt in that story that says WHY we could have been hit with -17 points

Shudda wudda cudda

"Nixon though writes in The Sun on Sunday this morning that the EFL ‘had the power’ to push for a much larger penalty for Derby County’s financial misconduct – he writes that, should the case have gone to an independent disciplinary commission, then the EFL could’ve pushed for a 17-point deduction rather than a 9-point deduction.

Derby County and the EFL don’t have the best relationship it seems. The club have broken the rules and are rightfully set to pay a heavy price, but in the midst of this ongoing saga between the two it seems like the EFL have started to throw their weight about somewhat.

As Derby look for ways around their points punishments it seems the EFL are trying to back them into a corner and show to them that they have no way out of their current predicament and that relegation is indeed the only outcome for them this season"

[Eatonram]

But the appeal was about the Admin punishment of 12 points wasn't it? Absolutely nothing to do with FFP for which, bizarrely, as far as I know we have not been charged with anything yet. Any chance of some transparency?

It seems the EFL, are desperate to see us relegated, rather than simply applying their own rules even handedly.

[24Charlie]

Pathetic again from Nixon. -9 or -90 it makes no difference as we’d still be down so why reluctantly accept -9 instead of -17 the outcome is the same.

 

Edited November 14, 2021 by 24Charlie

[tinman]

Whether it’s  9 points or 17 points, the extra 8 is largely irrelevant. It just takes us from a 1% chance of survival to 0%. 
 

the only way the admins should/would have agreed to it is if the EFL were pushing to have points knocked off next season as well. They’d have claimed Derby were acting maliciously and so deserve the extra punishment. The admins wouldn’t want to risk that so gave in. 

[Dimmu]

I think I'd prefer -17. 

It would make EFL look even more bloodthirsty. 

[RadioactiveWaste]

22 minutes ago, Eatonram said:

But the appeal was about the Admin punishment of 12 points wasn't it? Absolutely nothing to do with FFP for which, bizarrely, as far as I know we have not been charged with anything yet. Any chance of some transparency?

It seems the EFL, are desperate to see us relegated, rather than simply applying their own rules even handedly.

I'm starting to get annoyed at the media willfully misrepresenting and conflating differing issues around DCFC. Yes, it's a complicated situation but it's fair to assume football reporters are familier with it by now. But a "how outragous are DCFC now!" take plays better as a click.