Derby finally accept 21 point deduction.

[i-Ram]

4 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I have always assumed were budgeting to stay within FFP and only didnt do so due to reasons we could not possibly have foreseen, namely the EFL charging us on the amortsiation issue and even more surprising the panel accepting the charge. Then we have COVID of course.

If neither of these had happened we would not have had an FFP penalty or an admin penalty .. unless someone has any evidence to the contrary in which case I will stand corrected. .

We had effectively in real time exceeded FFP limits (using whichever amortisation policy of the 2 you want to choose) before 1) we were charged by the EFL and 2) COVID hit us all. Did you also assume that Morris flogging the stadium was also nothing to do with FFP?

[Jourdan]

Everything will be fine.

Rooney’s at the wheel.

[NottsRam77]

39 minutes ago, Crewton said:

As if to demonstrate the lack of understanding of which "rules" Derby have broken, we have this pile of nonsense from The Grauniad :

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/nov/16/Derby-deducted-another-nine-points-for-breaches-of-efl-rules-over-pride-park-sale

What a dreadful excuse for journalism and editing.

 

Well thats about as poor as it gets for reporting doesnt it 

[RadioactiveWaste]

36 minutes ago, Crewton said:

As if to demonstrate the lack of understanding of which "rules" Derby have broken, we have this pile of nonsense from The Grauniad :

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/nov/16/Derby-deducted-another-nine-points-for-breaches-of-efl-rules-over-pride-park-sale

What a dreadful excuse for journalism and editing.

 

The sale of the stadium being the one thing Derby were vindicated on having been actually clever enough to do it properly....

I'd love to make a case for us, I really would, but can't. I think it's legitimate to have questions about the EFL process but realistically the outcome is what it is and it's hard to say it's particually unjust.

What is particually grinding my gears is we could've agreed the 9 points *some time ago* and Mel could be looking to sell the club with EFL sanctions resolved and still an outside chance of staying in the division, but going this way has properly fXXXXd the club, the club's employees and supporters.

All that matters now, and if we're totally honest, the only thing that mattered as soon as Mel put the club into administration, is finding someone to take the club on and avoiding liquidation.

 

[kevinhectoring]

57 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Proper remedy should have been to refer back to the IDC which had an accountant on it.

So there is a detailed set of procedural rules designed to ensure everyone knows how disputes will be resolved. And those rules are (obviously) applied universally, because it’s fair for everyone’s disputes to be handled the same way. And you’re saying that for  ‘proper remedy’ you should depart from those rules in our case ? Really??

[kevinhectoring]

1 hour ago, LeedsCityRam said:

3 hours ago, angieram said:

 

It seems Quantuma have accepted what the EFL reportedly wanted all along in terms of FFP punishment, they've

Not sure this is right. Don’t think the 9 points previously proposed by EFL brought us up to date, we still had the possibility of yet further breaches. What Quantuma has done is put us in a position where we should have no further penalties - the slate is wiped clean, the new owner doesn’t need to fear past breaches will bite him 

[duncanjwitham]

4 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

So there is a detailed set of procedural rules designed to ensure everyone knows how disputes will be resolved. And those rules are (obviously) applied universally, because it’s fair for everyone’s disputes to be handled the same way. And you’re saying that for  ‘proper remedy’ you should depart from those rules in our case ? Really??

Ordering a new hearing before a new DC is one of the powers the LAP had under the existing rules.

[SBW]

28 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I have always assumed were budgeting to stay within FFP and only didnt do so due to reasons we could not possibly have foreseen, namely the EFL charging us on the amortsiation issue and even more surprising the panel accepting the charge. Then we have COVID of course.

If neither of these had happened we would not have had an FFP penalty or an admin penalty .. unless someone has any evidence to the contrary in which case I will stand corrected. .

I think the evidence that we broke the rules is the club have accepted a penalty owing to the rules being broken.  

 

We can create conspiracy theories but the reality is the club acted entirely immorally.  I've seen suggestions that the EFL enforced an embargo, to push us into this position to then force a concession for the points deduction.  But the club hasn't been paying HMRC and hasn't produced it's accounts for a number of years, that's why an embargo/conditions were enforced.

 

The EFL have most certainly gone for the jugular.  Largely because of how Morris and co acted, but ultimately the club acted in bad faith for a sustained period of time.

 

It sucks.  But if we won the play-offs a few years back we'd all be enjoying the success that came with it, ignoring the immoral actions of the club.  

 

I think we just have to take this on the chin, it's caught up and it's no-ones fault but the decision makers at the club as to why. 

 

 

 

[Chester40]

8 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

The sale of the stadium being the one thing Derby were vindicated on having been actually clever enough to do it properly....

I'd love to make a case for us, I really would, but can't. I think it's legitimate to have questions about the EFL process but realistically the outcome is what it is and it's hard to say it's particually unjust.

What is particually grinding my gears is we could've agreed the 9 points *some time ago* and Mel could be looking to sell the club with EFL sanctions resolved and still an outside chance of staying in the division, but going this way has properly fXXXXd the club, the club's employees and supporters.

All that matters now, and if we're totally honest, the only thing that mattered as soon as Mel put the club into administration, is finding someone to take the club on and avoiding liquidation.

 

This is a really interesting post...I have been thinking the same thing am I missing something?

Couldn't Mel have admitted the FFP charge,  taken the 9 point deduction and then sold the club as a going concern. 

What has been gained by going into administration?

[LeedsCityRam]

Just now, kevinhectoring said:

Not sure this is right. Don’t think the 9 points previously proposed by EFL brought us up to date, we still had the possibility of yet further breaches. What Quantuma has done is put us in a position where we should have no further penalties - the slate is wiped clean, the new owner doesn’t need to fear past breaches will bite him 

Is that definitively the case? I read the EFL statement & that wasnt apparent from the text.

Also we don't know what the 9 points previously proposed by the EFL encompassed.

[SBW]

1 minute ago, Chester40 said:

This is a really interesting post...I have been thinking the same thing am I missing something?

Couldn't Mel have admitted the FFP charge,  taken the 9 point deduction and then sold the club as a going concern. 

What has been gained by going into administration?

I can only assume it's because of one of two reasons;

 

- He wanted to save money he'd have continued to pump into the club between then and the club being sold

- He naively thought that they would win the appeal against admin; considering his outlandish approach to business and arrogance, maybe he thought the appeal based on Covid impacts would win over?

[Curtains]

Just now, Chester40 said:

This is a really interesting post...I have been thinking the same thing am I missing something?

Couldn't Mel have admitted the FFP charge,  taken the 9 point deduction and then sold the club as a going concern. 

What has been gained by going into administration?

Mel didn’t want to keep funding the club for the tune of 8 Million a month until it was sold .

We all know the EFL we’re going after him if wages were late during the period he was trying to sell the club and then Covid struck 

I think Mel just got fed up of being criticized plus he had Covid himself etc 

[Tyler Durden]

3 minutes ago, Chester40 said:

This is a really interesting post...I have been thinking the same thing am I missing something?

Couldn't Mel have admitted the FFP charge,  taken the 9 point deduction and then sold the club as a going concern. 

What has been gained by going into administration?

Mel has absolved himself from his financial responsibilities?

Totally agree hindsight being a wonderful thing.

[Philmycock]

Why didn't Stephen Pearce, just once, knock on Mel's door and say "You know this FFP malarkey..."

What a ducking poo accountant he is

[JfR]

3 minutes ago, LeedsCityRam said:

Is that definitively the case? I read the EFL statement & that wasnt apparent from the text.

Also we don't know what the 9 points previously proposed by the EFL encompassed.

I would imagine, but can't be certain, that any punishment discussed prior to this season would have purely been a punishment solely for adopting the amortisation policy used, rather than any P&S breaches as a consequence of it. After all, the EFL were asking for a "substantial deduction of points (...) applied in the 2020/2021 season" in the sanctioning hearing for that charge. If the club had accepted a points punishment at that time, it would likely have been in place of the £100k fine received, rather than being an earlier implementation of this points deduction, which would likely have still occurred following the resubmission of accounts and the tabling of another charge.

[plymouthram]

30 minutes ago, Jourdan said:

Everything will be fine.

Rooney’s at the wheel.

But there's no fuel in the tank, we are'nt allowed to refuel. We can't replace any parts, the MOT runs out at the end of the season.

[RoyMac5]

3 minutes ago, plymouthram said:

But there's no fuel in the tank, we are'nt allowed to refuel. We can't replace any parts, the MOT runs out at the end of the season.

Rooney knows a Jag when he sees one, if he stays we'll be right! #COYR

[Rev]

11 minutes ago, Curtains said:

Mel didn’t want to keep funding the club for the tune of 8 Million a month until it was sold .

We all know the EFL we’re going after him if wages were late during the period he was trying to sell the club and then Covid struck 

I think Mel just got fed up of being criticized plus he had Covid himself etc 

I'm not sure £8m a month is correct?

Wasn't it £8m a week?

[PistoldPete]

21 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

So there is a detailed set of procedural rules designed to ensure everyone knows how disputes will be resolved. And those rules are (obviously) applied universally, because it’s fair for everyone’s disputes to be handled the same way. And you’re saying that for  ‘proper remedy’ you should depart from those rules in our case ? Really??

The procedural rules require an accountant to be on the IDC. Which are then made a mockery of if an alterantive panel without an accounatnt on it over-rule them on a matter about an accounting standard.

Plus I think as an overall principle , proper remedy for a wrong is that the wronged party is put back in the same position as if that wrong had not happened. In that case, if the wrong was that the IDC did not consider the EFL's expert report, the remedy would be to order the IDC to consider the expert report. And then Derby's legal team could have cross examined in the obvious flaws within it.       

 

[kevinhectoring]

23 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

Ordering a new hearing before a new DC is one of the powers the LAP had under the existing rules.

That’s true and I didn’t remember that. But what @PistoldPete was advocating was that it go back to the same panel 

Edited November 16, 2021 by kevinhectoring