Derby finally accept 21 point deduction.

[PistoldPete]

1 hour ago, Archie said:

I'd happily chip in for this. 

I agree with the sentiment. 

[PistoldPete]

8 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

The athletic article would have been written a few days ago, probably then on the basis of intel that was not current. Sadly you have to think Percy has the latest news 

Both the athletic article and the Percy one seem to be based on Efl sources so you have to wonder why they are different. 

[G STAR RAM]

6 minutes ago, Carnero said:

Totally agree that on the face of it weve been shoddily treated by the EFL in all of this, at the behest of other club chairmen

However... we would have failed at some point anyway though wouldn't we, kicking the can down the road from the 3 years ending 2018 would have only ended up increasing losses in the outstanding submissions for 3 years ending 2019, 2020 & 2021. There's still the same amount of total transfer cost to amortise at some point in time. We are probably ending up where we were always going to end up in respect of the -9.

The -12 for administration is the killer.

Would be interesting to have known what the P&S submissions had shown had we been allowed to carry on with our amortisation method.

I'm not so certain we would have failed any periods based on the ground sale along with the sales of our star players 3 years in a row.

[NottsRammy]

Going exactly as i predicted remember we have to agree to -9 on the 2nd charge to stop us appealing and getting less . But in return we get the admin reduced under covid . Just wait and see it all play out . Sir pratt of boro will be happy but he will be hopping mad about admin fail . All being sorted behind closed doors i tell you . Independent panel my ar*e.

I predict -15 or only -9 . Its just being hyped up to sell articles as -21.

Edited November 11, 2021 by NottsRammy

[CBRammette]

19 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I don’t think that accounts for the nine point deduction though. Not sure what that is for .  And there wouldn’t be any deduction if the Efl hadn’t changed their minds about how they wanted the accounts done. Or if there had been an accountant on the appeals panel.

Wasnt it our fault that we didnt take an accountant to represent us at the appeal? All of this is rubbish to put it politely but if we have a buyer ready and waiting who is as good as we are going to get and they say look can we just finalise everything for good so I can take over a club with no further EFL threats so we can get going in January with no fire sale for cash, then it may be in creditors interests (which is who the admins are supposed to be working for) to accept, get a clean slate and move on with a buyer?  Perhaps this also means other clubs stop their spiteful legal threats if we accept? If we won the -12 appeal do you really think EFL bullies and other clubs would have accepted it and moved on or carried on until we were relegated and more pulverised? 

[cheron85]

31 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Maybe the EFL should start challenging the sales values of players? I can think if plenty that have been sold at inflated values. 

That's brilliant - although probably a Mel-esque tactic...

We'd be well within FFP regulations if we could showcase that some of the dross we paid out on wasn't worth what we paid - Blackman and Anya immediately spring to mind 

[Indy]

17 minutes ago, CBRammette said:

Wasnt it our fault that we didnt take an accountant to represent us at the appeal? All of this is rubbish to put it politely but if we have a buyer ready and waiting who is as good as we are going to get and they say look can we just finalise everything for good so I can take over a club with no further EFL threats so we can get going in January with no fire sale for cash, then it may be in creditors interests (which is who the admins are supposed to be working for) to accept, get a clean slate and move on with a buyer?  Perhaps this also means other clubs stop their spiteful legal threats if we accept? If we won the -12 appeal do you really think EFL bullies and other clubs would have accepted it and moved on or carried on until we were relegated and more pulverised? 

That was the appeal panel’s view (who considered it as a point of law, rather than accountancy), as they didn’t have an accountant on the panel. Our view (from a qualified accountant) and that of the original disciplinary (which did include an accountant) was that our point was so self-evident, that it didn’t need an expert witness to confirm it. 
 

Regardless of whether we had a witness, the original panel said the EFL’s witness testimony should be ignored as he had little practical experience of preparing accounts, and little knowledge of the football industry. When the point they’re trying to make us that our amortisation didn’t reflect the real world of the transfer business, that’s pretty important. If I remember, they also instructed that he should familiarise himself with the role of an expert witness if ever called in the future - ie they were supposed to establish facts, not present one side’s case. He was asked if the accounts were compliant with FRS102, but he basically argued why the EFL didn’t like them - two totally different things. 
 

If we had been told at the first panel we needed to field our own expert, we would have adjourned to appoint one. To rule against later, and now accept testimony from a witness that had been trashed by the accountant in the first panel is another example of moving the goalposts retrospectively. 

Edited November 11, 2021 by Indy

[G STAR RAM]

31 minutes ago, NottsRammy said:

Going exactly as i predicted remember we have to agree to -9 on the 2nd charge to stop us appealing and getting less . But in return we get the admin reduced under covid . Just wait and see it all play out . Sir pratt of boro will be happy but he will be hopping mad about admin fail . All being sorted behind closed doors i tell you . Independent panel my ar*e.

I predict -15 or only -9 . Its just being hyped up to sell articles as -21.

We have not been charged with anything have we?

[RedSox]

33 minutes ago, NottsRammy said:

Going exactly as i predicted remember we have to agree to -9 on the 2nd charge to stop us appealing and getting less . But in return we get the admin reduced under covid . Just wait and see it all play out . Sir pratt of boro will be happy but he will be hopping mad about admin fail . All being sorted behind closed doors i tell you . Independent panel my ar*e.

I predict -15 or only -9 . Its just being hyped up to sell articles as -21.

[RadioactiveWaste]

30 minutes ago, NottsRammy said:

Going exactly as i predicted remember we have to agree to -9 on the 2nd charge to stop us appealing and getting less . But in return we get the admin reduced under covid . Just wait and see it all play out . Sir pratt of boro will be happy but he will be hopping mad about admin fail . All being sorted behind closed doors i tell you . Independent panel my ar*e.

I predict -15 or only -9 . Its just being hyped up to sell articles as -21.

I remember before the first judgment there were stories in the papers about how "things don't look good for Derby" and "Derby face massive deduction of 21 points".

Lets see what happens.

Probably end up with -15 or -18 with some of the dedution "suspended" out of "positive negotiations with administrators" because the EFL "want us to be sustainable" which will still probably kill us off in terms of this season.

[RadioactiveWaste]

2 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

We have not been charged with anything have we?

Exactly. The proper way to do it would be to charge us and have the IDC hearing.

[i-Ram]

46 minutes ago, Carnero said:

Totally agree that on the face of it weve been shoddily treated by the EFL in all of this, at the behest of other club chairmen

However... we would have failed at some point anyway though wouldn't we, kicking the can down the road from the 3 years ending 2018 would have only ended up increasing losses in the outstanding submissions for 3 years ending 2019, 2020 & 2021. There's still the same amount of total transfer cost to amortise at some point in time. We are probably ending up where we were always going to end up in respect of the -9.

The -12 for administration is the killer.

Agreed. Excess losses over a 3 year period, even after a £40m stadium windfall.

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Exactly. The proper way to do it would be to charge us and have the IDC hearing.

Agreed. As I said in an ealier post they should not be negotiating with the administrators as their ultimate goal is not what is in the best interests of the club, whereas the EFLs should be.

[NottsRammy]

9 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

We have not been charged with anything have we?

Blimey splitting hairs G STAR or what . O.k i got them the wrong way round .To clear it up which im pretty sure everyone bar you knows what i mean is the over spending we have to accept -9 to stop an appeal and getting it lessened . The 2nd offence which is actually the admin one ( which i put wrong in my 1st post ) will either be abolished or halved .

Blimey hope that clears it up . 

All this -21 is click bait and paper selling and the efl are happy with that is it looks better for the efl when it gets announced to get a takeover done there going to give us lea way under covid and either totally abolish the admin one or halve it .Giving us half a chance when we get players in in jan . 

 

My personal bet is -15 , which with how the current squad has played last few match's is more than enough to send us down .The facts are if you cant come out and play better against Barnsley than that we are DOWN !! . It wasnt the result that mattered it was the attitude in the 1st half , if you cant get the right mindset for that its all over .Jan with new players will come to late and Mr Rooney is still unproven when it comes to money and signing players .We are down and need to rebuild . 

Edited November 11, 2021 by NottsRammy

[VulcanRam]

I'm probably in the minority, but I'll take the minus 21 now if it means a clean slate, if it means a sale can go through and if it means we can finally stop this constant merry-go-round of claim, counter-claim, charge, appeal, claim etc. The uncertainty is killing the club and having this hanging over us for the best part of two years does nobody any favours. 

We have been poorly treated by the EFL. Mel has made huge mistakes. But the circus has to move on at some point and having negotiations and appeals hanging over us for the next few months, maybe even into next season, with no sale because of it, is worse than taking the hit now.

The fact is we've tried to take the EFL on at every turn and failed at every turn, costing huge amounts of money and time. It doesn't make it fair, or right necessarily, but it does tell you something - know when you're beaten and sometimes it's better to cut your losses and start again. 

 

[G STAR RAM]

1 minute ago, i-Ram said:

Agreed. Excess losses over a 3 year period, even after a £40m stadium windfall.

Agreed that we would have failed P&S at some point?

Then the EFL should have asked us to present all of the future years accounts and charged us for when we did actually fail?

[i-Ram]

43 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

The 9 points will be for failing P&S across more than one period.

What the EFL are doing is disgraceful though. If we have failed then they should charge us and let the case be heard by an IDC immediately due to our situation.

They should not be negotiating anything with the administrators as they do not have the best interests of us as a football club at the top of their agenda. 

It is in the best interests of the football club for the EFL to now be negotiating with the administrators. We do not have cash reserves. We owe much more than we own. The administration is for the benefit of the creditors not the club. If the administrators do not get a buyer in soonest the club will fold.

[Woodley Ram]

lets put this into context.-12 really hard not to be relegated

additional -3 defiantly relegated

additional -9 makes no difference

additional -50 makes no difference

One note here, if you over spend, do it big and I mean by 10's of millions if not more because all you will get is -9 points. I think there is even more incentive to really overspend now. if buying a £60m strike force and a £20m midfielder will probably get you to the prem go for it. it will only cost 9 points if it dosnt happen

[NottsRammy]

4 minutes ago, Woodley Ram said:

lets put this into context.-12 really hard not to be relegated

additional -3 defiantly relegated

additional -9 makes no difference

additional -50 makes no difference

One note here, if you over spend, do it big and I mean by 10's of millions if not more because all you will get is -9 points. I think there is even more incentive to really overspend now. if buying a £60m strike force and a £20m midfielder will probably get you to the prem go for it. it will only cost 9 points if it dosnt happen

Unless its makes you go bust if it doesnt happen ? . 

[Kathcairns]

6 minutes ago, VulcanRam said:

I'm probably in the minority, but I'll take the minus 21 now if it means a clean slate, if it means a sale can go through and if it means we can finally stop this constant merry-go-round of claim, counter-claim, charge, appeal, claim etc. The uncertainty is killing the club and having this hanging over us for the best part of two years does nobody any favours. 

We have been poorly treated by the EFL. Mel has made huge mistakes. But the circus has to move on at some point and having negotiations and appeals hanging over us for the next few months, maybe even into next season, with no sale because of it, is worse than taking the hit now.

The fact is we've tried to take the EFL on at every turn and failed at every turn, costing huge amounts of money and time. It doesn't make it fair, or right necessarily, but it does tell you something - know when you're beaten and sometimes it's better to cut your losses and start again. 

 

Don't think you are in the minority, maybe on this forum but i think the majority of fans will agree with you.