Derby finally accept 21 point deduction.

[Comrade 86]

26 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

Look I’m no great fan of the way the EFl has handled this. But no THEY DID NOT SAY THEY REGRETTED THAT WE WERENT RELEGATED.  Nor did they say anything close to that. 

That's not strictly true... They went as far as saying that it was regrettable that they could not sanction us further, on the advice of their own counsel.

Not sure why you are arguing otherwise to be honest, we all read it at the time ?‍♂️

 

[Rich84]

42 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

Look I’m no great fan of the way the EFl has handled this. But no THEY DID NOT SAY THEY REGRETTED THAT WE WERENT RELEGATED.  Nor did they say anything close to that. 

What they said was: they thought the penalty was too lenient for the offence, but they regretted that they had been advised they should not appeal. 

Don’t forget that the EFl have a load of stakeholders (clubs) paying for all of the disputes and they need to manage those relationships. What they said was measured and reasonable 
 

if you want to read an outrageous and misleading press statement, read the LAP judgement and then the misleading pile of poo in the statement the club put out in response. Appalling from MM and Pearce as well as foolish 

I think you are clearly reading the EFL statement differently to the vast majority. 

Not saying anything close to regretting we weren't relegated....?

They used the term they regrettably were told they couldn't appeal the decision and that they felt the fine was insufficient,  along with the final statement that as a result the final positions in the league would remain as they were, ergo they expected a points deduction which would have relegated us so therefore they clearly expected us to be in league 1 and they regrettably were legally advised they shouldn't try to appeal, how anyone can see that any differently is beyond me.

But we are all entitled to our own opinions. 

The real killer in the statement though was qualifying the restated accounts needed to be FRS102 compliant (which the original ones were) but also P+S compliant which is where they effectively have moved the goal posts after the fact by inferring it has to be straight-line amortisation and no other variation allowed despite accountancy rules allowing it.

I do agree with you though that the club statements under MM were arguably disingenuous at best. 

Edited October 12, 2021 by Rich84
@86 hair island got in before me, and more succinctly!

[Crewton]

The EFL wanted to make an example of Derby, to set down a marker and head off potential legal action from Middlesbrough and possibly others over their handling of the whole FFP monitoring process, and to give substance to Rick Parry's reforming agenda, and were disappointed with the sanctions applied by the tribunal. Hence their subsequent attempts to strangle the club with restrictions hastily introduced in June of this year and their desire to force the club to accept further points deductions by "negotiation" rather than go through another uncertain tribunal process. 

Stop kidding yourselves that these people are on the side of Derby fans - they're not. 

[PistoldPete]

8 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

Look I’m no great fan of the way the EFl has handled this. But no THEY DID NOT SAY THEY REGRETTED THAT WE WERENT RELEGATED.  Nor did they say anything close to that. 

What they said was: they thought the penalty was too lenient for the offence, but they regretted that they had been advised they should not appeal. 

Don’t forget that the EFl have a load of stakeholders (clubs) paying for all of the disputes and they need to manage those relationships. What they said was measured and reasonable 
 

if you want to read an outrageous and misleading press statement, read the LAP judgement and then the misleading pile of poo in the statement the club put out in response. Appalling from MM and Pearce as well as foolish 

This isn’t the first time that EFL expresses  its “disappointment”. .. why should a football body be disappointed in the outcome of an independent process .. why doesn’t the EFL itself show itself to be independent?

 

That is why it is in its dying days as a regulator . After the BUry debacle , Parliament heavily criticised EFL for its practices. It just seems the EFL represents the interests of rival clubs who all join in and give other clubs a kicking. Especially unattractive when you are kicking a club when it is down. It’s not independent at all, and is just self destructive.

I cannot recall anything wrong in Derby ‘s own media statements .. except them saying the amortisation thing was no big deal well plainly it is if it means we fail FFP and get penalty points deductions.

 

 

 

 

[PistoldPete]

9 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

Look I’m no great fan of the way the EFl has handled this. But no THEY DID NOT SAY THEY REGRETTED THAT WE WERENT RELEGATED.  Nor did they say anything close to that. 

What they said was: they thought the penalty was too lenient for the offence, but they regretted that they had been advised they should not appeal. 

Don’t forget that the EFl have a load of stakeholders (clubs) paying for all of the disputes and they need to manage those relationships. What they said was measured and reasonable 
 

if you want to read an outrageous and misleading press statement, read the LAP judgement and then the misleading pile of poo in the statement the club put out in response. Appalling from MM and Pearce as well as foolish 

I think you are being disingenuous here about the EFL. They said they regretted . were disappointed etc about our punishment.. they had been pushing for a penalty points deduction and pushing for that deduction to be be applied retrospectively to the season gone... which would have relegated us, of course as we only dodged relegation by one point.

Yet previously, they wanted to apply the points deduction not retrospectively to us for the 2019-20 season as that would have had no effect on our season. But they did want to apply the points deduction retrospectively to 2019-20 for Sheffield Wednesday as that would have relegated then in that season. Fortunately for Wendies, the LAP was having none of that .. EFL arbitraging to get maximum penalty it possibly can..  stance from EFL rightly called out by the LAP as disgraceful. So Wendies avoided a retrospective punishment.. although it was  temporary stay of execution of course, they were relegated in 2020/1 anyway.

It is not reasonable in anyway for EFL to be expressing sentiments, spinning lines to the media and briefing them against the Rams... and worse.. leaking selectively to the press stories that ultimately prove to be untrue.

Nor should they be seeking to give maximum punishments they can get away with , especially to clubs in distress, and especially when any fault lies with the owners (in fact now former owners) , not with the club itself. 

 

 

 

[kevinhectoring]

9 hours ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

This isn’t the first time that EFL expresses  its “disappointment”. .. why should a football body be disappointed in the outcome of an independent process .. why doesn’t the EFL itself show itself to be independent?

As you rightly point out, the panel is independent.  In this proceeding, the EFL is not independent, it is a party fighting its corner. That’s why it’s entitled in a measured way to express a view on the finding. Which it did.
Not to mention that they are speaking to the likes of Gibson, explaining to him that the decision not to appeal is not spineless but that it reflects the advice the EFL has received 

 

[PistoldPete]

13 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

As you rightly point out, the panel is independent.  In this proceeding, the EFL is not independent, it is a party fighting its corner. That’s why it’s entitled in a measured way to express a view on the finding. Which it did.
Not to mention that they are speaking to the likes of Gibson, explaining to him that the decision not to appeal is not spineless but that it reflects the advice the EFL has received 

 

If you compare other regulators , I don’t know of any comparable behaviour. 
 

if the legal advice is your case against Derby is weak, why would you express your disappointment about that? 
 

Derby is a member of the Efl , indeed a founder member . They shouldn’t be so obviously trying to do us down… in fact they shouldn’t be trying to do us down at all.

[basilrobbie]

3 hours ago, Crewton said:

The EFL wanted to make an example of Derby, to set down a marker and head off potential legal action from Middlesbrough and possibly others over their handling of the whole FFP monitoring process, and to give substance to Rick Parry's reforming agenda, and were disappointed with the sanctions applied by the tribunal. Hence their subsequent attempts to strangle the club with restrictions hastily introduced in June of this year and their desire to force the club to accept further points deductions by "negotiation" rather than go through another uncertain tribunal process. 

Stop kidding yourselves that these people are on the side of Derby fans - they're not. 

I think this is a bit paranoid, if you don't mind me saying so.

I fully agree with you that the EFL seek to deflect blame for, and attention from, whatever poo show they happen to be presiding over at any one time.  It's a technique that was developed under Harvey, along with unconscionable delay, in an attempt to cover the fact that they aren't up to the regulatory aspects of their job and - culturally - aren't all that keen on doing them either. When Tracey Crouch recommends that they lose all responsibility for regulatory maters, I think their Board will be secretly relieved.

But incompetence is a long way from the kind of calculated poohousery that you are accusing them of. They may listen far too much to the likes of Gibson, but as a glorified shop steward they are obliged to listen to all their Members, and not just some of them. It's the Achilles Heel in the way they have chosen to set themselves up as competition organisers (Yes, I know) and revenue generators (not very good at that either). Had Harvey still been CEO, I'd have been far more sympathetic to your view - but he isn't.

What a lot of your fans want to gloss over is why the EFL and its constituent clubs currently view your club with so much suspicion. And I'm afraid that on this point, all roads lead back to Mr. Morris, who has turned your club into a by-word in questionable practices that seem unashamedly about giving your club an unfair advantage. It's one of life ironies that he was so bad at it.

None of this is the fault of your fans. I stood in the away end at PP not so long ago and heard you lead chants of "We want Oyston out", and think a lot of you for it. But setting that aside, the fans of other clubs are heartily sick of this saga (two years old, isn't it?), in the Championship we are even more sick of the uncertainty.  My personal view is that as fans you could do more to call the club out on the way it has behaved. I understand why a siege mentality has developed - but your club is very largely in the wrong, and however badly the matter is being handled by others doesn't change that.

The administrators - unfortunately - seem to be playing to the gallery at the moment . I don't understand why they would commit so much money that you can't afford on a case that seems shaky at best, unless it was because they wanted to generate some good PR.  And they do seem to love a public statement that doesn't say very much of substance, don't they? 

I wish you a speedy outcome, even if it is a points deduction that sends you down. The January window is not far away, and there is a real danger that the club won't be a progressive player in it, as things stand. And you need to start planning for a fresh start that gives you hope for the future. Without hope, there isn't much point in following any football club.

 

 

 

[angieram]

1 minute ago, basilrobbie said:

I think this is a bit paranoid, if you don't mind me saying so.

I fully agree with you that the EFL seek to deflect blame for, and attention from, whatever poo show they happen to be presiding over at any one time.  It's a technique that was developed under Harvey, along with unconscionable delay, in an attempt to cover the fact that they aren't up to the regulatory aspects of their job and - culturally - aren't all that keen on doing them either. When Tracey Crouch recommends that they lose all responsibility for regulatory maters, I think their Board will be secretly relieved.

But incompetence is a long way from the kind of calculated poohousery that you are accusing them of. They may listen far too much to the likes of Gibson, but as a glorified shop steward they are obliged to listen to all their Members, and not just some of them. It's the Achilles Heel in the way they have chosen to set themselves up as competition organisers (Yes, I know) and revenue generators (not very good at that either). Had Harvey still been CEO, I'd have been far more sympathetic to your view - but he isn't.

What a lot of your fans want to gloss over is why the EFL and its constituent clubs currently view your club with so much suspicion. And I'm afraid that on this point, all roads lead back to Mr. Morris, who has turned your club into a by-word in questionable practices that seem unashamedly about giving your club an unfair advantage. It's one of life ironies that he was so bad at it.

None of this is the fault of your fans. I stood in the away end at PP not so long ago and heard you lead chants of "We want Oyston out", and think a lot of you for it. But setting that aside, the fans of other clubs are heartily sick of this saga (two years old, isn't it?), in the Championship we are even more sick of the uncertainty.  My personal view is that as fans you could do more to call the club out on the way it has behaved. I understand why a siege mentality has developed - but your club is very largely in the wrong, and however badly the matter is being handled by others doesn't change that.

The administrators - unfortunately - seem to be playing to the gallery at the moment . I don't understand why they would commit so much money that you can't afford on a case that seems shaky at best, unless it was because they wanted to generate some good PR.  And they do seem to love a public statement that doesn't say very much of substance, don't they? 

I wish you a speedy outcome, even if it is a points deduction that sends you down. The January window is not far away, and there is a real danger that the club won't be a progressive player in it, as things stand. And you need to start planning for a fresh start that gives you hope for the future. Without hope, there isn't much point in following any football club.

 

 

 

You're starting to annoy me now with your pious outside observations, which are neither accurate nor timely.

Nothing happening in Blackpool?

[Woodley Ram]

It would be good to have a comparison of the Covid losses for the last 2 seasons for all clubs in the championship.

- debts

- Income

- Wages and operational expenses

- Loss compared with non covid seasons

- amount funded by owners

I think that way we can gain a better understanding of possible success against the 12 points . Also other clubs and supporters might understand that we don't have the biggest debt, biggest wages etc etc  

 

[basilrobbie]

2 minutes ago, angieram said:

You're starting to annoy me now with your pious outside observations, which are neither accurate nor timely.

Nothing happening in Blackpool?

Sorry Angie, I try to be dispassionate, rather than pious. I'd be absolutely no good at it. ?

[kevinhectoring]

10 hours ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

That's not strictly true... They went as far as saying that it was regrettable that they could not sanction us further, on the advice of their own counsel.

Not sure why you are arguing otherwise to be honest, we all read it at the time ?‍♂️

 

Hopefully  people will read this quote and see that the EFL did NOT indicate in the statement that they wanted to see us relegated. That’s all 

[kevinhectoring]

2 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

It just seems the EFL represents the interests of rival clubs who all join in and give other clubs a kicking.

This is the point that really is worth debating. I wish the rams trust had raised it more forcefully when they met the efl 

[kevinhectoring]

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

I think you are being disingenuous here about the EFL. They said they regretted . were disappointed etc about our punishment.. they had been pushing for a penalty points deduction and pushing for that deduction to be be applied retrospectively to the season gone... which would have relegated us, of course as we only dodged relegation by one point.

Yet previously, they wanted to apply the points deduction not retrospectively to us for the 2019-20 season as that would have had no effect on our season. But they did want to apply the points deduction retrospectively to 2019-20 for Sheffield Wednesday as that would have relegated then in that season. Fortunately for Wendies, the LAP was having none of that .. EFL arbitraging to get maximum penalty it possibly can..  stance from EFL rightly called out by the LAP as disgraceful. So Wendies avoided a retrospective punishment.. although it was  temporary stay of execution of course, they were relegated in 2020/1 anyway.

It is not reasonable in anyway for EFL to be expressing sentiments, spinning lines to the media and briefing them against the Rams... and worse.. leaking selectively to the press stories that ultimately prove to be untrue.

Nor should they be seeking to give maximum punishments they can get away with , especially to clubs in distress, and especially when any fault lies with the owners (in fact now former owners) , not with the club itself. 

 

 

 

I’m not being disingenuous I’m just pointing out what was actually said in their statement. 

The enormous irony is that if the DC had given us a six point deduction that just might have satisfied the EFl, led to a quick deal on FFP (a few more points) and perhaps avoided administration  

[OohMartWright]

5 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

Hopefully  people will read this quote and see that the EFL did NOT indicate in the statement that they wanted to see us relegated. That’s all 

The substance of that statement is that they wanted a harsher sanction, i.e. a points deduction. Any points deduction would have seen us relegated. They did not expressly say "We want to see Derby relegated" in those exact words, but the substance is absolutely clear .

[Crewton]

12 minutes ago, basilrobbie said:

I think this is a bit paranoid, if you don't mind me saying so.

I can see how it might look to an outsider, but I'm simply applying logic to the catalogue of things that the EFL have said and done since the whole saga started with Gibson announcing he was intending to sue Derby and the EFL, 2 days before the 2019 play-off final. I can't blame either of them for the decision to start the game with Mason Bennett instead of an in-form Jack Marriott (thanks Frankie!), but since that day it's been clear that they want to destroy Derby, by hook or by crook, because it suits their agenda to a T. It's worth reminding all visitors to this forum that no EFL (or other) rules were broken in respect of the stadium sale or the method of player amortisation adopted. The EFL finally nailed us on a technicality, for which the punishment will far exceed the 'breach'. It's worth remembering that, while clubs like DCFC and SWFC are regarded as 'cheats' who "deserve everything they get", successful cheats happily ply their trade in the Premier League, raking in hundreds of millions of pounds, and face no sanction in the event of their relegation back to the EFL, not even the cancellation of their Parachute Payments!! It's perverse.

I note your general good wishes and don't want it to sound like I'm berating you, but there really is more to this than the EFL simply "upholding the rules" - it's highly political and it will have implications for other clubs whose fans are currently sticking the boot into DCFC at every opportunity, though they don't realise it yet.

 

[PistoldPete]

12 minutes ago, basilrobbie said:

I think this is a bit paranoid, if you don't mind me saying so.

I fully agree with you that the EFL seek to deflect blame for, and attention from, whatever poo show they happen to be presiding over at any one time.  It's a technique that was developed under Harvey, along with unconscionable delay, in an attempt to cover the fact that they aren't up to the regulatory aspects of their job and - culturally - aren't all that keen on doing them either. When Tracey Crouch recommends that they lose all responsibility for regulatory maters, I think their Board will be secretly relieved.

But incompetence is a long way from the kind of calculated poohousery that you are accusing them of. They may listen far too much to the likes of Gibson, but as a glorified shop steward they are obliged to listen to all their Members, and not just some of them. It's the Achilles Heel in the way they have chosen to set themselves up as competition organisers (Yes, I know) and revenue generators (not very good at that either). Had Harvey still been CEO, I'd have been far more sympathetic to your view - but he isn't.

What a lot of your fans want to gloss over is why the EFL and its constituent clubs currently view your club with so much suspicion. And I'm afraid that on this point, all roads lead back to Mr. Morris, who has turned your club into a by-word in questionable practices that seem unashamedly about giving your club an unfair advantage. It's one of life ironies that he was so bad at it.

None of this is the fault of your fans. I stood in the away end at PP not so long ago and heard you lead chants of "We want Oyston out", and think a lot of you for it. But setting that aside, the fans of other clubs are heartily sick of this saga (two years old, isn't it?), in the Championship we are even more sick of the uncertainty.  My personal view is that as fans you could do more to call the club out on the way it has behaved. I understand why a siege mentality has developed - but your club is very largely in the wrong, and however badly the matter is being handled by others doesn't change that.

The administrators - unfortunately - seem to be playing to the gallery at the moment . I don't understand why they would commit so much money that you can't afford on a case that seems shaky at best, unless it was because they wanted to generate some good PR.  And they do seem to love a public statement that doesn't say very much of substance, don't they? 

I wish you a speedy outcome, even if it is a points deduction that sends you down. The January window is not far away, and there is a real danger that the club won't be a progressive player in it, as things stand. And you need to start planning for a fresh start that gives you hope for the future. Without hope, there isn't much point in following any football club.

 

 

 

As to why the Efl are picking on Derby , the simple answer is they aren’t. 
 

they made a similar mess of Bury .. the best that can be said about that is that it was a swift end for Bury rather than a death by a thousand cuts .

 

whatever your views on Mel Morris , ( which I don’t share by the way) the first objection is why should the club suffer for the wrongdoing of the owner? Precisely the issue that As you say true football fans would understand regardless of who they support… which is why Derby fans sympathised with you over oyston.

 

but despite my first statement I think Derby fans feel aggrieved that the club are wrongly accused of things that were perfectly fine ( eg stadium sale) , things like amortisation are minor things at worst that Efl wanted points deduction .. and relegation .., for yet the independent panel thought only a fine was appropriate . 
 

so at every turn Efl seem to want to beat us up and max out on punishments. 
 

all for what? A professional disagreement between accountants over amortisation policy, and a disagreement between another set of accountants over what has caused our latest financial problems? Is it COVID or our historic overspending? 
 

why should the club , and the fans be punished for any of this?

[PistoldPete]

12 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

I’m not being disingenuous I’m just pointing out what was actually said in their statement. 

The enormous irony is that if the DC had given us a six point deduction that just might have satisfied the EFl, led to a quick deal on FFP (a few more points) and perhaps avoided administration  

I think you have to put together a series of EFL statements to get to the truth. They wanted a tougher penalty . They wanted a points deduction . they wanted it backdated it to last season. They issued an alternative fixture list, in case they appealed successfully ,, but legal advice was they  had no chance, much to their disappointment.
 

when the boot was on the other foot they didn’t want a retrospective  points deduction for us in 2019 /20 but did for wendies as that would have relegated them. 
 

I don’t see how anyone can say it isn’t pretty clear that EFL were trying  to get us relegated , just as they were wendies.

[duncanjwitham]

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

If you compare other regulators , I don’t know of any comparable behaviour. 
 

if the legal advice is your case against Derby is weak, why would you express your disappointment about that? 
 

Derby is a member of the Efl , indeed a founder member . They shouldn’t be so obviously trying to do us down… in fact they shouldn’t be trying to do us down at all.

It's even worse than that.  The only grounds for appeal are if the panel made a mistake in the way they adjudicated the case, so the EFL are actually expressing their disappointment that they're appointed panel didn't sufficiently screw up to make them do it all again.  They are actually disappointed that the panel made the correct decision.

[basilrobbie]

12 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

As to why the Efl are picking on Derby , the simple answer is they aren’t. 
 

they made a similar mess of Bury .. the best that can be said about that is that it was a swift end for Bury rather than a death by a thousand cuts .

 

whatever your views on Mel Morris , ( which I don’t share by the way) the first objection is why should the club suffer for the wrongdoing of the owner? Precisely the issue that As you say true football fans would understand regardless of who they support… which is why Derby fans sympathised with you over oyston.

 

but despite my first statement I think Derby fans feel aggrieved that the club are wrongly accused of things that were perfectly fine ( eg stadium sale) , things like amortisation are minor things at worst that Efl wanted points deduction .. and relegation .., for yet the independent panel thought only a fine was appropriate . 
 

so at every turn Efl seem to want to beat us up and max out on punishments. 
 

all for what? A professional disagreement between accountants over amortisation policy, and a disagreement between another set of accountants over what has caused our latest financial problems? Is it COVID or our historic overspending? 
 

why should the club , and the fans be punished for any of this?

You make some interesting points Pete, as does Crewton.

Starting with your last point, in a perfect world the regulatory regime would be far more forensic and targeted than it is. It is one of the reasons why Tracey Crouch's work is so important ; the framework we have is not fit for purpose. And that is compounded by the breathtaking ineptitude of the body that has control over it. This is where I depart from Crewton - I completely understand his frustrations with the EFL (more on that in a minute). But I think it is just incompetence, rather than anything more sinister.

I actually think your club is suffering more than it has to because the EFL knows its regulatory powers are under threat. At my club, our frustration towards them stemmed from what we saw as a wilful refusal to take ANY action, despite overwhelming evidence that they should. I think the pendulum has swung in that they are now trying to be proactive without having the skills wherewithal and general political nous to do that properly.  They are struggling to show that they are relevant - but that ship has long sailed, I hope.

I think what is really needed now is a rapid and clear conclusion, for everybody's sake. Your new owners might be unknown, at present, but every day that this lingers on makes their job harder when they come in.  And I think your administrators should have considerations like that at the front of their minds, and be acting accordingly. I have my doubts about them doing this as they should.

Crewton, I don't feel berated, I feel as though we are having a civilised discussion from very different viewpoints.  Your case feels especially poignant for me ; I started watching live football in 1968 and what I loved about that era was that provincial clubs like Derby County could legitimately aspire to be Champions of England. I watched you win 3-2 at Bloomfield Road in your promotion season in my early days and it was completely enthralling. Memories like that count for a lot.