Jump to content

Derby finally accept 21 point deduction.


taggy180

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Supporters have bought the club and they're expected to be in the National League next season.

That's some great news, Re-instate all property rights and history...excluding an FA Cup Final where they beat a team 6-0?

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11774/12441514/bury-fc-administrators-confirm-buyer-found-for-beleaguered-club-and-ground

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Crewton said:

But Rick needs the collapse of a Big Club in the EFL to prove his point. Why people can't see this, I don't know.

you think the chairman of the EFL wants one of the biggest clubs in the EFL to collapse? what point would it prove beyond the fact he's been utterly useless at his job.... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

you think the chairman of the EFL wants one of the biggest clubs in the EFL to collapse? what point would it prove beyond the fact he's been utterly useless at his job.... 

We've already seen from his responses to RamsTrust questions that he's adopting a "before my time" approach. It's the previous regime, who failed to spot what Derby (and others) were doing and who acted far too sluggishly who are to blame for any issues, not him and his current team. You can also see from his recently publicised agenda for change that we're the perfect example of the "failed owner-financed" model that helps to back up his calls for a new approach and a different financial model. Ask yourself what he's done so far to help either Morris or the Administrators mitigate the club's financial difficulties (it's an easy one) and that provides further evidence that the liquidation of DCFC could be quite useful to him, or at the very least would be of no great concern to him.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

That's some great news, Re-instate all property rights and history...excluding an FA Cup Final where they beat a team 6-0?

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11774/12441514/bury-fc-administrators-confirm-buyer-found-for-beleaguered-club-and-ground

Great news. But why not back into EFL?

No wait . It’s the Efl we are talking about. they have to maintain their “integrity “ … like Ridsdale did. a supporter owned debt free club just won’t tick that box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Great news. But why not back into EFL?

No wait . It’s the Efl we are talking about. they have to maintain their “integrity “ … like Ridsdale did. a supporter owned debt free club just won’t tick that box.

For me I believe they should be re admitted from where they were thrown out, Nice to see(from yourlink)that the EFL were told/asked to pay Bury lost revenue or similar...but i'll not hold my breath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 14/10/2021 at 00:38, RAM1966 said:

The Administrators are ruthless, there is no way on this earth they would risk £300K if they did not think there was a reasonable prospect of a result.   Not only that it may slow down the negotiations for prospective buyers!

Firstly the EFL have to defer this to an independent panel and they also have zero right to appeal if we win!  Unlike there other kangaroo disciplinary processes.........

Like the ruthless Wigan ones?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Crewton said:

We've already seen from his responses to RamsTrust questions that he's adopting a "before my time" approach. It's the previous regime, who failed to spot what Derby (and others) were doing and who acted far too sluggishly who are to blame for any issues, not him and his current team. You can also see from his recently publicised agenda for change that we're the perfect example of the "failed owner-financed" model that helps to back up his calls for a new approach and a different financial model. Ask yourself what he's done so far to help either Morris or the Administrators mitigate the club's financial difficulties (it's an easy one) and that provides further evidence that the liquidation of DCFC could be quite useful to him, or at the very least would be of no great concern to him.

 

I think the question of what Rick Parry has done to help Derby can be answered very quickly indeed. What he has done to harm the club is more to the point. Trying to penalise the club (and mostly so far failing when it comes to points deductions despite two years of trying ) for gaining an unfair disadvantage is something of a smokescreen I would say when the club is  in such distress.

 

Especially as he is  now simultaneuosly trying to punish the club for gaining an unfair advantage (which we didn't , and if we did it's because EFL didnt tell us we were doing anything wrong) and at the same time punishing us for being in a very disadvantaged position.

 

Crazy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I agree with many things that are said regarding our predicament, I just can't think that we gained no advantage with our methodology. We never got promoted, but we didn't get relegated either, which we may have done without the players that we signed/retained. At the very least we probably wouldn't have reached the play offs. We definitely did gain an advantage, but that doesn't mean that we broke, or even bent, any rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, richinspain said:

Although I agree with many things that are said regarding our predicament, I just can't think that we gained no advantage with our methodology. We never got promoted, but we didn't get relegated either, which we may have done without the players that we signed/retained. At the very least we probably wouldn't have reached the play offs. We definitely did gain an advantage, but that doesn't mean that we broke, or even bent, any rules.

I'm not sure how anyone would go about proving we gained an advantage though. I could also say that between 2015-2018, we got progressively worse as a team (certainly, the quality of football diminished and the results/league placing fluctuated), but I couldn't prove that our signings caused that. I think it could only ever be an opinion and not one that anyone could claim was unanimous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Crewton said:

I'm not sure how anyone would go about proving we gained an advantage though. I could also say that between 2015-2018, we got progressively worse as a team (certainly, the quality of football diminished and the results/league placing fluctuated), but I couldn't prove that our signings caused that. I think it could only ever be an opinion and not one that anyone could claim was unanimous.

We did get progressively worse, which sort of supports my comment that we could have been relegated without retaining certain players and also signing Bielik and Joswiak. Surely we gained an advantage, if not why did we try something different (not against the rules, just different)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Crewton said:

I'm not sure how anyone would go about proving we gained an advantage though. I could also say that between 2015-2018, we got progressively worse as a team (certainly, the quality of football diminished and the results/league placing fluctuated), but I couldn't prove that our signings caused that. I think it could only ever be an opinion and not one that anyone could claim was unanimous.

I might be, and probably am, talking garbage (as usual) but, I'm not exactly sure how this thread has developed but, does it matter if we have been seen to gain an advantage? If we broke the rules we should be punished. If we didn't, then we shouldn't. It seems irrelevant to me what the outcome of the actions were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

I might be, and probably am, talking garbage (as usual) but, I'm not exactly sure how this thread has developed but, does it matter if we have been seen to gain an advantage? If we broke the rules we should be punished. If we didn't, then we shouldn't. It seems irrelevant to me what the outcome of the actions were.

As far as "the case" is concerned it shouldn't make any difference, but I keep reading that we didn't gain any advantage because we didn't get promoted. As I said, if we didn't gain any advantage, why would we even consider doing it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, richinspain said:

We did get progressively worse, which sort of supports my comment that we could have been relegated without retaining certain players and also signing Bielik and Joswiak. Surely we gained an advantage, if not why did we try something different (not against the rules, just different)?

I think if we hadn't signed Butterfield, Anya, Blackman and co we would have been in a better place in the later years and not been anywhere near relegation. And probably still ended up in the playoffs at least. 

 

The overspend , even using EFL's preferred amortisation method was only £4 million for three years up to 2017/18. That's not even the transfer fee for one of those players leave alone the wages that went with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, richinspain said:

As far as "the case" is concerned it shouldn't make any difference, but I keep reading that we didn't gain any advantage because we didn't get promoted. As I said, if we didn't gain any advantage, why would we even consider doing it?

I guess, when "we did it" we intended to gain advantage but we failed to make it pay off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

I might be, and probably am, talking garbage (as usual) but, I'm not exactly sure how this thread has developed but, does it matter if we have been seen to gain an advantage? If we broke the rules we should be punished. If we didn't, then we shouldn't. It seems irrelevant to me what the outcome of the actions were.

A few years back Millwall broke the FFP rules through ovesrpending but still got relegated,. So they got no punishment at all not even a fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, richinspain said:

As far as "the case" is concerned it shouldn't make any difference, but I keep reading that we didn't gain any advantage because we didn't get promoted. As I said, if we didn't gain any advantage, why would we even consider doing it?

That's the totally laughable, inept outcome - we did try and lever an advantage and we couldn't even get that right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

That's the totally laughable, inept outcome - we did try and lever an advantage and we couldn't even get that right.

Sorry all this self flaggelation is really annoying. We narrowly lost four play off ties in six years to teams who all spent more than us. So the point was we never had any financial advantage over the teams we were competing with (including Middlesborough) however hard we may have tried.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Sorry all this self flaggelation is really annoying. We narrowly lost four play off ties in six years to teams who all spent more than us. So the point was we never had any financial advantage over the teams we were competing with (including Middlesborough) however hard we may have tried.

Do you think that for us to even be in those playoffs meant we levered an advantage over the majority of the other teams in the Championship.

Ultimately we failed to realise what we were attempting to do absolutely agree with you on that point.

As another poster has already stated ultimately it's irrelevant if we did gain an advantage or not it's whether we broke any rules in the process. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...