Derby finally accept 21 point deduction.

[Eddie]

10 minutes ago, basilrobbie said:

The other way of looking at it is that he is relatively objective and professionally well placed to form judgements. How many fans can say the same?

I don't really understand the vitriol, given that through his Podcast he does rather more to inform you an your own club management has historically done. He's also better placed to perceive how your club are regarded than you are (understandably, it's not a criticism per se). Do you not think that there is a strong element of you not wanting to hear the message?

Most things can be summed up by the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Also, "Derbyshire born and Derbyshire bred, strong in t'arm and weak in t'head".

[Gaspode]

4 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Most things can be summed up by the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Also, "Derbyshire born and Derbyshire bred, strong in t'arm and weak in t'head".

Apart from the fact it's actually "Derbyshire born and Derbyshire bred, strong in t'arm and wick in t'head" (with wick meaning 'quick')

[Tyler Durden]

20 minutes ago, basilrobbie said:

I don't really understand the vitriol, given that through his Podcast he does rather more to inform you an your own club management has historically done. He's also better placed to perceive how your club are regarded than you are (understandably, it's not a criticism per se). Do you not think that there is a strong element of you not wanting to hear the message?

If you don't understand the vitriol being directed towards someone with a view that flies in the face of populist opinion then you haven't been on this forum long enough.

[PistoldPete]

29 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

Nope wrong. The plug was no longer big enough for the sink drainhole. 
 

in simplistic terms, putting in the (for argument sake) £1m a month - the plug - which was keeping the club going pre-Covid, would not have kept the club going post-Covid. 

Exactly. The plug was no longer enough, as the hole in the sink suddenly got much bigger.

[Tyler Durden]

31 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

Nope wrong. The plug was no longer big enough for the sink drainhole. 
 

in simplistic terms, putting in the (for argument sake) £1m a month - the plug - which was keeping the club going pre-Covid, would not have kept the club going post-Covid. 

Think it's best that we agree to disagree.

Ultimately I hope that at least the majority of people on here accept the outcome of the appeal to the EFL whatever it is.

I just get the feeling that this won't happen if our points deduction is upheld and will be put forward as another example of the EFL shafting us rather then looking at actually how we got us into this mess in the first place 

Anyway here's in hope that it does get reduced. 

[OohMartWright]

2 minutes ago, basilrobbie said:

The other way of looking at it is that he is relatively objective and professionally well placed to form judgements. How many fans can say the same?

I don't really understand the vitriol, given that through his Podcast he does rather more to inform you an your own club management has historically done. He's also better placed to perceive how your club are regarded than you are (understandably, it's not a criticism per se). Do you not think that there is a strong element of you not wanting to hear the message?

He is neither objective nor professional. The club's auditors and the Independent Panel (which included a qualified accountant) both confirmed that the club's amortisation policy was compliant with FRS 102. Maguire sought to make a name for himself by repeatedly pointing out that the policy was slightly different to that used by other clubs and inferring that we were cheating. The EFL saw this as an opportunity to get back at Mel Morris and took it to the Panel, only for us to be exonerated (save for a need to expand the notes in the accounts). Unwilling to lose face in this matter, the EFL appealed the decision (so much for the independent review process) and set up another panel with no accountants asked to rule on an accounting matter which then (unsurprisingly) found us guilty. It is this which infuriates most of our fans.

As for the stadium sale, this was a one-off opportunity to realise the increase in value of the stadium to ease the FFP situation. The valuation was professionally obtained, and both submitted to and adjusted in accordance with the stipulations of the EFL, before the transaction went ahead. Whether or not the transaction was in the best interests of the club is a moot point, but it was categorically NOT cheating. That has not stopped the media and the EFL trying to smear it as such. For the EFL to bring a disciplinary charge against the club for carrying out a transaction which they had not only sanctioned, but which had actually been adjusted in accordance with their stipulations, beggars belief and can only have been motivated by vindictiveness.

For all of their stated desire for fair play, we have seen precious little of it from the EFL so far. They have an opportunity to redeem themselves if they give the Administrators' appeal against the 12 point deduction a fair hearing. We shall see.

[basilrobbie]

5 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

If you don't understand the vitriol being directed towards someone with a view that flies in the face of populist opinion then you haven't been on this forum long enough.

Fair point. I actually think the EFL are as much to blame for this as anyone ; it seems to have been going on for ever and that is largely their fault because of the way they dither and because of their (very) shaky grasp of their own rules. But your club's reputation suffers at the same time because you also get "blamed".

I just think Maguire is the wrong target. He's far more objective than most.

 

[Foreveram]

3 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

Think it's best that we agree to disagree.

Ultimately I hope that at least the majority of people on here accept the outcome of the appeal to the EFL whatever it is.

I just get the feeling that this won't happen if our points deduction is upheld and will be put forward as another example of the EFL shafting us rather then looking at actually how we got us into this mess in the first place 

Anyway here's in hope that it does get reduced. 

If only the EFL had accepted the decision when we first got a telling off.

[PistoldPete]

27 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

In my head this appeal is simple.

Would we have gone in to administration had the pandemic not happened? No.

Is the pandemic the only reason we ended up going in to administration? No.

The way our club has been run as a business meant we were much less resilient to external factors than other clubs and this is why I believe the appeal is a waste of time. The EFL or whoever looks at this will simply point out that we were a basket case going in to the pandemic, so it's our own fault we were unable to survive it.

Your analysis is wrong logically and in law. If the answer to 1) is No then how could the EFL claim we were a basket case going into the pandemic? We may have been weak but we would have survived financially if the pandemic hadn't happened and that is the proper legal test.

[basilrobbie]

3 minutes ago, OohMartWright said:

He is neither objective nor professional. The club's auditors and the Independent Panel (which included a qualified accountant) both confirmed that the club's amortisation policy was compliant with FRS 102. Maguire sought to make a name for himself by repeatedly pointing out that the policy was slightly different to that used by other clubs and inferring that we were cheating. The EFL saw this as an opportunity to get back at Mel Morris and took it to the Panel, only for us to be exonerated (save for a need to expand the notes in the accounts). Unwilling to lose face in this matter, the EFL appealed the decision (so much for the independent review process) and set up another panel with no accountants asked to rule on an accounting matter which then (unsurprisingly) found us guilty. It is this which infuriates most of our fans.

As for the stadium sale, this was a one-off opportunity to realise the increase in value of the stadium to ease the FFP situation. The valuation was professionally obtained, and both submitted to and adjusted in accordance with the stipulations of the EFL, before the transaction went ahead. Whether or not the transaction was in the best interests of the club is a moot point, but it was categorically NOT cheating. That has not stopped the media and the EFL trying to smear it as such. For the EFL to bring a disciplinary charge against the club for carrying out a transaction which they had not only sanctioned, but which had actually been adjusted in accordance with their stipulations, beggars belief and can only have been motivated by vindictiveness.

For all of their stated desire for fair play, we have seen precious little of it from the EFL so far. They have an opportunity to redeem themselves if they give the Administrators' appeal against the 12 point deduction a fair hearing. We shall see.

So, according to you :

1. KM points out a demonstrable fact

2. the EFL tries to exploit it

3. the EFL then tries to rig the process

 

and yet you still blame him?

As for the rest of it, in my view separating off your main asset as a device to get round rules governing spending is not sensible, acceptable or anything other than an existential threat to the long term health of the club. And Mel Morris should be ashamed of himself for doing it. As an outsider, I find the fact that there isn't more anger about that very odd. I obviously need to stick around to improve my understanding. ?

 

 

[PistoldPete]

15 minutes ago, OohMartWright said:

He is neither objective nor professional. The club's auditors and the Independent Panel (which included a qualified accountant) both confirmed that the club's amortisation policy was compliant with FRS 102. Maguire sought to make a name for himself by repeatedly pointing out that the policy was slightly different to that used by other clubs and inferring that we were cheating. The EFL saw this as an opportunity to get back at Mel Morris and took it to the Panel, only for us to be exonerated (save for a need to expand the notes in the accounts). Unwilling to lose face in this matter, the EFL appealed the decision (so much for the independent review process) and set up another panel with no accountants asked to rule on an accounting matter which then (unsurprisingly) found us guilty. It is this which infuriates most of our fans.

As for the stadium sale, this was a one-off opportunity to realise the increase in value of the stadium to ease the FFP situation. The valuation was professionally obtained, and both submitted to and adjusted in accordance with the stipulations of the EFL, before the transaction went ahead. Whether or not the transaction was in the best interests of the club is a moot point, but it was categorically NOT cheating. That has not stopped the media and the EFL trying to smear it as such. For the EFL to bring a disciplinary charge against the club for carrying out a transaction which they had not only sanctioned, but which had actually been adjusted in accordance with their stipulations, beggars belief and can only have been motivated by vindictiveness.

For all of their stated desire for fair play, we have seen precious little of it from the EFL so far. They have an opportunity to redeem themselves if they give the Administrators' appeal against the 12 point deduction a fair hearing. We shall see.

As I've posted elswehere Maguire is a known work assiociate of Rick Parry , so his views on Derby's battles with EFL will always be indintinguishable from theirs, he will always side wth them. So no he is not objective or reasonable in his views.

 

On the stadium sale how come Derby were the only ones challenged on valuation? Why were Villa and Hillsborough valuations not challenged. They were lower than Derby's but that's because their stadiums are much older.

 

Strange how the world's experts in accounting depreciation did not twig that Villa Park had depreciated by a lot more than Pride Park on account of it being about 50 years older. Duh!   

 

 

[OohMartWright]

Just now, basilrobbie said:

So, according to you :

1. KM points out a demonstrable fact

2. the EFL tries to exploit it

3. the EFL then tries to rig the process

 

and yet you still blame him?

As for the rest of it, in my view separating off your main asset as a device to get round rules governing spending is not sensible, acceptable or anything other than an existential threat to the long term health of the club. And Mel Morris should be ashamed of himself for doing it. As an outsider, I find the fact that there isn't more anger about that very odd. I obviously need to stick around to improve my understanding. ?

 

 

Where did I say that I blame him? I dislike the fact that he tried to "big up" his reputation by incorrectly inferring that we were cheating but I don't blame him.

If the EFL had accepted the decision of the independent panel then we could all have moved on. It is their decision to appeal and take it to another panel which (cynics might say deliberately) lacked the necessary expertise which is so infuriating.

I also don't agree with the decision to sell the stadium, for the same reasons you point out. Nevertheless, however unwise and short-sighted the decision was, my point is that it was NOT cheating and should not have been portrayed as such by the media or, more importantly, the EFL.

[Leeds Ram]

1 minute ago, PistoldPete said:

As I've posted elswehere Maguire is a known work assiociate of Rick Parry , so his views on Derby's battles with EFL will always be indintinguishable from theirs, he will always side wth them. So no he is not objective or reasonable in his views.

 

On the stadium sale how come Derby were the only ones challenged on valuation? Why were Villa and Hillsborough valuations not challenged. They were lower than Derby's but that's because their stadiums are much older.

 

Strange how the world's experts in accounting depreciation did not twig that Villa Park had depreciated by a lot more than Pride Park on account of it being about 50 years older. Duh!   

 

 

So because Parry and Maguire teach on the same course at liverpool uni therefore neither can be considered objective or fair minded? 

[PistoldPete]

13 minutes ago, basilrobbie said:

So, according to you :

1. KM points out a demonstrable fact

2. the EFL tries to exploit it

3. the EFL then tries to rig the process

 

and yet you still blame him?

As for the rest of it, in my view separating off your main asset as a device to get round rules governing spending is not sensible, acceptable or anything other than an existential threat to the long term health of the club. And Mel Morris should be ashamed of himself for doing it. As an outsider, I find the fact that there isn't more anger about that very odd. I obviously need to stick around to improve my understanding. ?

 

 

But EFL's argument was not to do with existential threat of selling the stadium , but in their book the argument was we gained an unfair advantage and broke the rules. We didn't do either and actually saying we gained an advantage really throws everyone off the threat you suggest as it is the opposite . 

We will see what happens with PPS soon I guess. If it is sold for housing well you may expect more anger including from me.

 

[LazloW]

20 minutes ago, Foreveram said:

If only the EFL had accepted the decision when we first got a telling off.

Exactly this. They could have simply accepted the findings, which would have appeased the other clubs as they’d done what they asked and took action against us. I continue to fail to understand the logic of the EFL trying as hard as they can to see one of its Members (and one of the bigger clubs) struggle - including the potential for going out of business. 
I understand trying to ensure the rules are adhered to, but they did that by going to the panel in the first pace.  I’m not sure it’s a vendetta, but it’s certainly a stupid way to run an organisation.

[PistoldPete]

4 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

So because Parry and Maguire teach on the same course at liverpool uni therefore neither can be considered objective or fair minded? 

They cannot be seen to be independent of each other in any professional sense.  And in fact Maguire isn't objective or reasonable which only makes it worse. 

Edited October 22, 2021 by PistoldPete

[Leeds Ram]

1 minute ago, PistoldPete said:

They cannot be seen to be independent of each other in any professional sense.  And in fact Maguire isn't objective or reasonable which only makes it worse. 

Just because they teach on the same course at Liverpool uni doesn't mean you can claim they're best buds or share the same opinions. You've no idea if they even see each other (if they're visiting academics they'll likely just pop in and then out) or if they share the same views, it's just wild conjecture from someone thinking they're Inspector Morse or something. 

[G STAR RAM]

2 hours ago, Tamworthram said:

but as I said, hardly a fair comparison to how sales are going now. For every team in the country (barring the big six for whom it must get a bit boring and expensive) a Wembley final brings out all the casual supporters. If we reached a Wembley final now you’d see the same level of demand.

Kind of my point. Lots of fans happy to declare themselves as fans for a day out at Wembley but don't seem that interested that we are teetering on the brink of going out of business.

[Leeds Ram]

4 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Kind of my point. Lots of fans happy to declare themselves as fans for a day out at Wembley but don't seem that interested that we are teetering on the brink of going out of business.

I get the annoyance, last time we were at wembley I saw plenty of people getting tickets that hadn't bothered with Derby in years and It did make me frustrated as i knew of genuine fans who missed out on the chance to go. But, I guess ultimately it's true of every club that when big events happen the fickle fans come out in their droves. 

[Kingpin]

Just the way it goes.  Otherwise we’d never sell a Wembley allocation out.