Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Wayne Rooney's Derby County - not any more (p41)
Comments
-
The football clubCafc43v3r said:
But that's the point, they can't prove them without the cooperation of the club. They don't have anyway of doing it.ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s a very fair point. My only response is that if and when the irregularities are proven, even if that’s years from the start of the irregularity occurring and even under different ownership, then the penalty should not involve points deductions negotiable with the club but automatic relegation two divisions. Any business can fail without irregularities and of course that needs to be recognised but it’s the shenanigans Derby and others have been engaged in that has to be completely stopped.Cafc43v3r said:
I don't disagree but you have got to prove it. Most of the irregularities are basically accounting methods to pass FFP. If these were done to avoid tax it would take nearly 10 years to exhaust all the possible appeals. The EFL don't have the powers of discovery or the resource and expertise, nor can they retrospectively change the law, like HMRC can/has.ShootersHillGuru said:It’s really quite straightforward in my opinion. Make the penalties for financial irregularities and cheating as instant as possible and draconian. No negotiations with the offending club.
The one change that would stop all this nonsense is to say you can spend as much as you like but it has to be in equity, not loans, from the owner/investers.
They can't prove it beyond reasonable doubt, nor the lower threshold of civil law, without negotiating. The only leverage they have is on a quip pro quo basis else the whole thing would be tied up in the courts, with a massive back log, for years.
If you waited until it was proven who would you actually be punishing?0 -
They'll probably find a new buyer with money to spend, debts wiped out, embargo lifted..........meaning they will then be able to go and buy new players. Same as Wigan did.Dazzler21 said:Could this mean players available cheap in January?
I know it's a bit like vultures at a dead carcass... But we could do with a few January signings to strengthen our squad further.0 -
Alternatively why don’t the EFL just say anything goes. ? Let everyone do exactly what they want however they want. At least then that would actually be a level playing field. Allowing cheats to prosper when others follow the rules will be the end of the sport.4 -
Premier League won't allow that.ShootersHillGuru said:
Alternatively why don’t the EFL just say anything goes. ? Let everyone do exactly what they want however they want. At least then that would actually be a level playing field. Allowing cheats to prosper when others follow the rules will be the end of the sport.0 -
Can put em i touch with the following prospective owners!
1. A Manchester based lawyer
2. A secret dentist
3. A fake skeikh
4. A Belgian
5. A bald brainless twat and his brass.11 -
You forgot the twat who closes Schoolssoapy_jones said:Can put em i touch with the following prospective owners!
1. A Manchester based lawyer
2. A secret dentist
3. A fake skeikh
4. A Belgian
5. A bald brainless twat and his brass.5 -
L1 next season seems a certainty .. another example of a club collapsing when a rich sugar daddy decides he's spent enough and wants out0
-
And a FIFI2021 expert.ForeverAddickted said:
You forgot the twat who closes Schoolssoapy_jones said:Can put em i touch with the following prospective owners!
1. A Manchester based lawyer
2. A secret dentist
3. A fake skeikh
4. A Belgian
5. A bald brainless twat and his brass.3 -
As always it is a really difficult situation. The fans are always the ones that suffer at the end of the day.
Fans have no choice about who buys their club. They have no choice how it is run at the end of the day. But it is the fans that have to watch their club fall from grace in terms of league standings.
If TS had come along where would we be now ? I would be willing to bet that if we still existed we would be under embargoes and points deductions. Would that have been our fault?1 -
Dunno I find that its a difficult one with the fans.AndyG said:As always it is a really difficult situation. The fans are always the ones that suffer at the end of the day.
Fans have no choice about who buys their club. They have no choice how it is run at the end of the day. But it is the fans that have to watch their club fall from grace in terms of league standings.
If TS had come along where would we be now ? I would be willing to bet that if we still existed we would be under embargoes and points deductions. Would that have been our fault?
Could argue the fans can occasionally be at fault themselves... This summer, especially on social media there were a lot of complaints that Sandgaard didnt have any money and needed to spend. Am sure some will be unimpressed even still by the signings we've made and will think again before renewing - Less STs as a result might make an owner more rash in the transfer market in a desperate attempt to get the fans back.
To an extent wasnt that what our owners did when we brought in Simonsen
Wanted a really big signing to get fans back, only it didnt work as much as needed.2 - Sponsored links:
-
No it wouldn’t have been our fault but certainly the consequence of having a footballing pyramid that is so skewed in terms of money that all sorts of unscrupulous characters and chancers are attracted to the possibility of getting into the ridiculous money available in the Premier League. The rewards for a success however unlikely are enormous. Until football is brought back into the real world and the dodgy characters are discouraged from getting involved then we’ll continue to see the likes of Southall and Farnell chasing the ambulances and clubs ripe for plucking.AndyG said:As always it is a really difficult situation. The fans are always the ones that suffer at the end of the day.
Fans have no choice about who buys their club. They have no choice how it is run at the end of the day. But it is the fans that have to watch their club fall from grace in terms of league standings.
If TS had come along where would we be now ? I would be willing to bet that if we still existed we would be under embargoes and points deductions. Would that have been our fault?2 -
soapy_jones said:Can put em i touch with the following prospective owners!
1. A Manchester based lawyer
2. A secret dentist
3. A fake skeikh
4. A Belgian
5. A bald brainless twat and his brass.
6. Twat who closes schools
7. A FIFI2021 expert
6. A Range Rover salesman
0 -
Rooney will be ok, as long as the EFL don't deduct his Fuzzy Felt, Crayons, Hot wheels set!
Has been promised some in line skate for Xmas form Coleen, as long as he doesn't have any more sleep overs with the ladies that show their bottoms!2 -
I think like the EFL you are falling for it.Cafc43v3r said:
But that's the point, they can't prove them without the cooperation of the club. They don't have anyway of doing it.ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s a very fair point. My only response is that if and when the irregularities are proven, even if that’s years from the start of the irregularity occurring and even under different ownership, then the penalty should not involve points deductions negotiable with the club but automatic relegation two divisions. Any business can fail without irregularities and of course that needs to be recognised but it’s the shenanigans Derby and others have been engaged in that has to be completely stopped.Cafc43v3r said:
I don't disagree but you have got to prove it. Most of the irregularities are basically accounting methods to pass FFP. If these were done to avoid tax it would take nearly 10 years to exhaust all the possible appeals. The EFL don't have the powers of discovery or the resource and expertise, nor can they retrospectively change the law, like HMRC can/has.ShootersHillGuru said:It’s really quite straightforward in my opinion. Make the penalties for financial irregularities and cheating as instant as possible and draconian. No negotiations with the offending club.
The one change that would stop all this nonsense is to say you can spend as much as you like but it has to be in equity, not loans, from the owner/investers.
They can't prove it beyond reasonable doubt, nor the lower threshold of civil law, without negotiating. The only leverage they have is on a quip pro quo basis else the whole thing would be tied up in the courts, with a massive back log, for years.
If you waited until it was proven who would you actually be punishing?
The EFL need to change the way they do things so it is not them that have to prove anything.
Charge a club, announce the punishment and set a time for an appeal to be in by.
It would be then for a Club to produce the evidence.
It is that simple to take control. It is ridiculous for a so called governing body to be begging for information and negotiating penalties.5 -
Do you see making any difference? Derby County being a team that is going to be lower table championship club- with the point deduction, and Charlton (the wrong side of the league one table)Dazzler21 said:Could this mean players available cheap in January?
I know it's a bit like vultures at a dead carcass... But we could do with a few January signings to strengthen our squad further.0 -
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/16178081/derby-wayne-rooney/
DERBY’S administrators must pay Wayne Rooney and his players in days or see their points deduction spiral to at least 24 points.
The Rams already have a three-point suspended punishment for late payments last season.And that could kick in if funds are not found for this month’s pay.
That would go on top of the 12 points being deducted for going into administration.
And further Financial Fair Play charges are likely to increase that total by at least another nine.6 -
Charge them with what? Being a bit dodgy? Thinking they might have done something?Redrobo said:
I think like the EFL you are falling for it.Cafc43v3r said:
But that's the point, they can't prove them without the cooperation of the club. They don't have anyway of doing it.ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s a very fair point. My only response is that if and when the irregularities are proven, even if that’s years from the start of the irregularity occurring and even under different ownership, then the penalty should not involve points deductions negotiable with the club but automatic relegation two divisions. Any business can fail without irregularities and of course that needs to be recognised but it’s the shenanigans Derby and others have been engaged in that has to be completely stopped.Cafc43v3r said:
I don't disagree but you have got to prove it. Most of the irregularities are basically accounting methods to pass FFP. If these were done to avoid tax it would take nearly 10 years to exhaust all the possible appeals. The EFL don't have the powers of discovery or the resource and expertise, nor can they retrospectively change the law, like HMRC can/has.ShootersHillGuru said:It’s really quite straightforward in my opinion. Make the penalties for financial irregularities and cheating as instant as possible and draconian. No negotiations with the offending club.
The one change that would stop all this nonsense is to say you can spend as much as you like but it has to be in equity, not loans, from the owner/investers.
They can't prove it beyond reasonable doubt, nor the lower threshold of civil law, without negotiating. The only leverage they have is on a quip pro quo basis else the whole thing would be tied up in the courts, with a massive back log, for years.
If you waited until it was proven who would you actually be punishing?
The EFL need to change the way they do things so it is not them that have to prove anything.
Charge a club, announce the punishment and set a time for an appeal to be in by.
It would be then for a Club to produce the evidence.
It is that simple to take control. It is ridiculous for a so called governing body to be begging for information and negotiating penalties.
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/business/financial-reporting/arbitrator-red-cards-derbys-amortisation-policy
It's not as clear cut as the EFL v Derby County its in effect a test case for the accounting treatment. Signed off by the auditors. Who I think are these people https://www.pkfsmithcooper.com/our-experts/.
It's a whole can of worms that the EFL are not fit to investigate. They don't have the resource to do it. If this ends up going through the courts it could take decades. It could take so long that there is a strong case there wouldn't be a Derby County left at the end of it.0 -
Miss paying the staff once and it’s tut tut. Twice and it’s a slap on the wrist. Three times and it’s a 12 points deduction. Don’t produce audited accounts on time. 6 points deduction. Failure to pay HMRC on demand is a 12 point deduction. Proven irregularities in finances like dodgy stadium deals is relegation by two divisions.Cafc43v3r said:
Charge them with what? Being a bit dodgy? Thinking they might have done something?Redrobo said:
I think like the EFL you are falling for it.Cafc43v3r said:
But that's the point, they can't prove them without the cooperation of the club. They don't have anyway of doing it.ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s a very fair point. My only response is that if and when the irregularities are proven, even if that’s years from the start of the irregularity occurring and even under different ownership, then the penalty should not involve points deductions negotiable with the club but automatic relegation two divisions. Any business can fail without irregularities and of course that needs to be recognised but it’s the shenanigans Derby and others have been engaged in that has to be completely stopped.Cafc43v3r said:
I don't disagree but you have got to prove it. Most of the irregularities are basically accounting methods to pass FFP. If these were done to avoid tax it would take nearly 10 years to exhaust all the possible appeals. The EFL don't have the powers of discovery or the resource and expertise, nor can they retrospectively change the law, like HMRC can/has.ShootersHillGuru said:It’s really quite straightforward in my opinion. Make the penalties for financial irregularities and cheating as instant as possible and draconian. No negotiations with the offending club.
The one change that would stop all this nonsense is to say you can spend as much as you like but it has to be in equity, not loans, from the owner/investers.
They can't prove it beyond reasonable doubt, nor the lower threshold of civil law, without negotiating. The only leverage they have is on a quip pro quo basis else the whole thing would be tied up in the courts, with a massive back log, for years.
If you waited until it was proven who would you actually be punishing?
The EFL need to change the way they do things so it is not them that have to prove anything.
Charge a club, announce the punishment and set a time for an appeal to be in by.
It would be then for a Club to produce the evidence.
It is that simple to take control. It is ridiculous for a so called governing body to be begging for information and negotiating penalties.
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/business/financial-reporting/arbitrator-red-cards-derbys-amortisation-policy
It's not as clear cut as the EFL v Derby County its in effect a test case for the accounting treatment. Signed off by the auditors. Who I think are these people https://www.pkfsmithcooper.com/our-experts/.
It's a whole can of worms that the EFL are not fit to investigate. They don't have the resource to do it. If this ends up going through the courts it could take decades. It could take so long that there is a strong case there wouldn't be a Derby County left at the end of it.
Football is a sport and clubs have no entitlement to anything other than what is agreed by the other member clubs. I still think it’s a lot more simple to discourage the chancers than you’re portraying.1 -
Problem is that the people who have to vote on making those changes are the other owners.ShootersHillGuru said:
Miss paying the staff once and it’s tut tut. Twice and it’s a slap on the wrist. Three times and it’s a 12 points deduction. Don’t produce audited accounts on time. 6 points deduction. Failure to pay HMRC on demand is a 12 point deduction. Proven irregularities in finances like dodgy stadium deals is relegation by two divisions.Cafc43v3r said:
Charge them with what? Being a bit dodgy? Thinking they might have done something?Redrobo said:
I think like the EFL you are falling for it.Cafc43v3r said:
But that's the point, they can't prove them without the cooperation of the club. They don't have anyway of doing it.ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s a very fair point. My only response is that if and when the irregularities are proven, even if that’s years from the start of the irregularity occurring and even under different ownership, then the penalty should not involve points deductions negotiable with the club but automatic relegation two divisions. Any business can fail without irregularities and of course that needs to be recognised but it’s the shenanigans Derby and others have been engaged in that has to be completely stopped.Cafc43v3r said:
I don't disagree but you have got to prove it. Most of the irregularities are basically accounting methods to pass FFP. If these were done to avoid tax it would take nearly 10 years to exhaust all the possible appeals. The EFL don't have the powers of discovery or the resource and expertise, nor can they retrospectively change the law, like HMRC can/has.ShootersHillGuru said:It’s really quite straightforward in my opinion. Make the penalties for financial irregularities and cheating as instant as possible and draconian. No negotiations with the offending club.
The one change that would stop all this nonsense is to say you can spend as much as you like but it has to be in equity, not loans, from the owner/investers.
They can't prove it beyond reasonable doubt, nor the lower threshold of civil law, without negotiating. The only leverage they have is on a quip pro quo basis else the whole thing would be tied up in the courts, with a massive back log, for years.
If you waited until it was proven who would you actually be punishing?
The EFL need to change the way they do things so it is not them that have to prove anything.
Charge a club, announce the punishment and set a time for an appeal to be in by.
It would be then for a Club to produce the evidence.
It is that simple to take control. It is ridiculous for a so called governing body to be begging for information and negotiating penalties.
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/business/financial-reporting/arbitrator-red-cards-derbys-amortisation-policy
It's not as clear cut as the EFL v Derby County its in effect a test case for the accounting treatment. Signed off by the auditors. Who I think are these people https://www.pkfsmithcooper.com/our-experts/.
It's a whole can of worms that the EFL are not fit to investigate. They don't have the resource to do it. If this ends up going through the courts it could take decades. It could take so long that there is a strong case there wouldn't be a Derby County left at the end of it.
Football is a sport and clubs have no entitlement to anything other than what is agreed by the other member clubs. I still think it’s a lot more simple to discourage the chancers than you’re portraying.
Owners who often don't want outside "interference" or "meddling" in "their" businesses, who don't want to be told how to spend their money and who want to be left alone to bend and break the rules as they see fit.
Do we think Mel Morris would have voted for those rule changes at the last EFL AGM? Or the Sheffield Wednesday owner, or Farnell, or the Salford owner?
Lots of owners who would welcome more stringent regulation but as we saw with the salary cap and the now the squad cap those changes aren't always good for everyone.3 -
Just read that Rooney found out Derby had gone into administration after seeing it on Sky Sports news!
How do you not tell the manager?!0 - Sponsored links:
-
I can't argue with what you say up until the emboldened bit. It was proven they sold their stadium, what wasn't proven is that it was against the rules. That's part of the problem.ShootersHillGuru said:
Miss paying the staff once and it’s tut tut. Twice and it’s a slap on the wrist. Three times and it’s a 12 points deduction. Don’t produce audited accounts on time. 6 points deduction. Failure to pay HMRC on demand is a 12 point deduction. Proven irregularities in finances like dodgy stadium deals is relegation by two divisions.Cafc43v3r said:
Charge them with what? Being a bit dodgy? Thinking they might have done something?Redrobo said:
I think like the EFL you are falling for it.Cafc43v3r said:
But that's the point, they can't prove them without the cooperation of the club. They don't have anyway of doing it.ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s a very fair point. My only response is that if and when the irregularities are proven, even if that’s years from the start of the irregularity occurring and even under different ownership, then the penalty should not involve points deductions negotiable with the club but automatic relegation two divisions. Any business can fail without irregularities and of course that needs to be recognised but it’s the shenanigans Derby and others have been engaged in that has to be completely stopped.Cafc43v3r said:
I don't disagree but you have got to prove it. Most of the irregularities are basically accounting methods to pass FFP. If these were done to avoid tax it would take nearly 10 years to exhaust all the possible appeals. The EFL don't have the powers of discovery or the resource and expertise, nor can they retrospectively change the law, like HMRC can/has.ShootersHillGuru said:It’s really quite straightforward in my opinion. Make the penalties for financial irregularities and cheating as instant as possible and draconian. No negotiations with the offending club.
The one change that would stop all this nonsense is to say you can spend as much as you like but it has to be in equity, not loans, from the owner/investers.
They can't prove it beyond reasonable doubt, nor the lower threshold of civil law, without negotiating. The only leverage they have is on a quip pro quo basis else the whole thing would be tied up in the courts, with a massive back log, for years.
If you waited until it was proven who would you actually be punishing?
The EFL need to change the way they do things so it is not them that have to prove anything.
Charge a club, announce the punishment and set a time for an appeal to be in by.
It would be then for a Club to produce the evidence.
It is that simple to take control. It is ridiculous for a so called governing body to be begging for information and negotiating penalties.
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/business/financial-reporting/arbitrator-red-cards-derbys-amortisation-policy
It's not as clear cut as the EFL v Derby County its in effect a test case for the accounting treatment. Signed off by the auditors. Who I think are these people https://www.pkfsmithcooper.com/our-experts/.
It's a whole can of worms that the EFL are not fit to investigate. They don't have the resource to do it. If this ends up going through the courts it could take decades. It could take so long that there is a strong case there wouldn't be a Derby County left at the end of it.
Football is a sport and clubs have no entitlement to anything other than what is agreed by the other member clubs. I still think it’s a lot more simple to discourage the chancers than you’re portraying.
The problem with thier blatant breach of FFP is you can't prove that they actually did, even though we all know they did, with out Derby resubmitting the accounts. Even the public aqusation by the EFL would be problematic, as they would essentially be accusing the directors and auditors of fraud.
If they had done it the other way round and infalited their loss to claim tax relief, or avoid tax, it would take nearly 10 years from the offence to a final settlement that had exhausted the appeals process. The EFL have neither the power nor resource of HMRC to do that.1 -
Regulation 16.2 Failure to produce audited accountsCafc43v3r said:
Charge them with what? Being a bit dodgy? Thinking they might have done something?Redrobo said:
I think like the EFL you are falling for it.Cafc43v3r said:
But that's the point, they can't prove them without the cooperation of the club. They don't have anyway of doing it.ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s a very fair point. My only response is that if and when the irregularities are proven, even if that’s years from the start of the irregularity occurring and even under different ownership, then the penalty should not involve points deductions negotiable with the club but automatic relegation two divisions. Any business can fail without irregularities and of course that needs to be recognised but it’s the shenanigans Derby and others have been engaged in that has to be completely stopped.Cafc43v3r said:
I don't disagree but you have got to prove it. Most of the irregularities are basically accounting methods to pass FFP. If these were done to avoid tax it would take nearly 10 years to exhaust all the possible appeals. The EFL don't have the powers of discovery or the resource and expertise, nor can they retrospectively change the law, like HMRC can/has.ShootersHillGuru said:It’s really quite straightforward in my opinion. Make the penalties for financial irregularities and cheating as instant as possible and draconian. No negotiations with the offending club.
The one change that would stop all this nonsense is to say you can spend as much as you like but it has to be in equity, not loans, from the owner/investers.
They can't prove it beyond reasonable doubt, nor the lower threshold of civil law, without negotiating. The only leverage they have is on a quip pro quo basis else the whole thing would be tied up in the courts, with a massive back log, for years.
If you waited until it was proven who would you actually be punishing?
The EFL need to change the way they do things so it is not them that have to prove anything.
Charge a club, announce the punishment and set a time for an appeal to be in by.
It would be then for a Club to produce the evidence.
It is that simple to take control. It is ridiculous for a so called governing body to be begging for information and negotiating penalties.
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/business/financial-reporting/arbitrator-red-cards-derbys-amortisation-policy
It's not as clear cut as the EFL v Derby County its in effect a test case for the accounting treatment. Signed off by the auditors. Who I think are these people https://www.pkfsmithcooper.com/our-experts/.
It's a whole can of worms that the EFL are not fit to investigate. They don't have the resource to do it. If this ends up going through the courts it could take decades. It could take so long that there is a strong case there wouldn't be a Derby County left at the end of it.
Regulation 16.3 Annual accounts not filed with Companies House
Regulation 17 Default in payments to HMRC
Profit and sustainability rules - non submission of audited accounts.
The above are clear failures committed by Derby.
If they had the rules the rest would have come to light quicker and the EFL would be driving the pace. Valuing players reducing value in a different way for example. Just say no and disallow. The fact is that by not submitting the accounts it did not come to light until much much later. It then complicates and delays everything and when it is all sorted the club appeals and says they have been living under investigation for so long any additional punishment is harsh, and gets away with what they 100% were culpable of.
If the irregularities I listed had a (say) three point penalty automatically applied, even with an appeal process, it would have been cleaner, quicker and fairer. More importantly, transparent.If you think all this faffing about and negotiation is the correct way for football to be governed I think you are wildly out of touch. I think it is bo**ok@1 -
They did submit the accounts for the years in question!!!!!!Redrobo said:
Regulation 16.2 Failure to produce audited accountsCafc43v3r said:
Charge them with what? Being a bit dodgy? Thinking they might have done something?Redrobo said:
I think like the EFL you are falling for it.Cafc43v3r said:
But that's the point, they can't prove them without the cooperation of the club. They don't have anyway of doing it.ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s a very fair point. My only response is that if and when the irregularities are proven, even if that’s years from the start of the irregularity occurring and even under different ownership, then the penalty should not involve points deductions negotiable with the club but automatic relegation two divisions. Any business can fail without irregularities and of course that needs to be recognised but it’s the shenanigans Derby and others have been engaged in that has to be completely stopped.Cafc43v3r said:
I don't disagree but you have got to prove it. Most of the irregularities are basically accounting methods to pass FFP. If these were done to avoid tax it would take nearly 10 years to exhaust all the possible appeals. The EFL don't have the powers of discovery or the resource and expertise, nor can they retrospectively change the law, like HMRC can/has.ShootersHillGuru said:It’s really quite straightforward in my opinion. Make the penalties for financial irregularities and cheating as instant as possible and draconian. No negotiations with the offending club.
The one change that would stop all this nonsense is to say you can spend as much as you like but it has to be in equity, not loans, from the owner/investers.
They can't prove it beyond reasonable doubt, nor the lower threshold of civil law, without negotiating. The only leverage they have is on a quip pro quo basis else the whole thing would be tied up in the courts, with a massive back log, for years.
If you waited until it was proven who would you actually be punishing?
The EFL need to change the way they do things so it is not them that have to prove anything.
Charge a club, announce the punishment and set a time for an appeal to be in by.
It would be then for a Club to produce the evidence.
It is that simple to take control. It is ridiculous for a so called governing body to be begging for information and negotiating penalties.
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/business/financial-reporting/arbitrator-red-cards-derbys-amortisation-policy
It's not as clear cut as the EFL v Derby County its in effect a test case for the accounting treatment. Signed off by the auditors. Who I think are these people https://www.pkfsmithcooper.com/our-experts/.
I
It's a whole can of worms that the EFL are not fit to investigate. They don't have the resource to do it. If this ends up going through the courts it could take decades. It could take so long that there is a strong case there wouldn't be a Derby County left at the end of it.
Regulation 16.3 Annual accounts not filed with Companies House
Regulation 17 Default in payments to HMRC
Profit and sustainability rules - non submission of audited accounts.
The above are clear failures committed by Derby.
If they had the rules the rest would have come to light quicker and the EFL would be driving the pace. Valuing players reducing value in a different way for example. Just say no and disallow. The fact is that by not submitting the accounts it did not come to light until much much later. It then complicates and delays everything and when it is all sorted the club appeals and says they have been living under investigation for so long any additional punishment is harsh, and gets away with what they 100% were culpable of.
If the irregularities I listed had a (say) three point penalty automatically applied, even with an appeal process, it would have been cleaner, quicker and fairer. More importantly, transparent.If you think all this faffing about and negotiation is the correct way for football to be governed I think you are wildly out of touch. I think it is bo**ok@
They said they didn't break FFP. Which Stevie Wonder could see was wrong
I didn't say, at any point it was the correct way for football to be governed. We all know it's not governed because the EFL aren't a governing body, no matter how many times people wish they were, or say they are.
I am not arguing that the EFL are right, or Derby have done nothing wrong with the play amortisation aspect (which is the specific issue I am talking about) I am saying, why it's more difficult than just saying "guilty".
I do this for a living, or something very close, if you think you can publicly accuse auditors of fraud and that the EFL have the authority and resources to find the answers themselves, then I am afraid its you that's out of touch with reality.0 -
Seeing it in pictoral form probably helped him to understand it.Chris_from_Sidcup said:Just read that Rooney found out Derby had gone into administration after seeing it on Sky Sports news!
How do you not tell the manager?!14 -
Who accused auditors of fraud FFS 🤦♂️Cafc43v3r said:
They did submit the accounts for the years in question!!!!!!Redrobo said:
Regulation 16.2 Failure to produce audited accountsCafc43v3r said:
Charge them with what? Being a bit dodgy? Thinking they might have done something?Redrobo said:
I think like the EFL you are falling for it.Cafc43v3r said:
But that's the point, they can't prove them without the cooperation of the club. They don't have anyway of doing it.ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s a very fair point. My only response is that if and when the irregularities are proven, even if that’s years from the start of the irregularity occurring and even under different ownership, then the penalty should not involve points deductions negotiable with the club but automatic relegation two divisions. Any business can fail without irregularities and of course that needs to be recognised but it’s the shenanigans Derby and others have been engaged in that has to be completely stopped.Cafc43v3r said:
I don't disagree but you have got to prove it. Most of the irregularities are basically accounting methods to pass FFP. If these were done to avoid tax it would take nearly 10 years to exhaust all the possible appeals. The EFL don't have the powers of discovery or the resource and expertise, nor can they retrospectively change the law, like HMRC can/has.ShootersHillGuru said:It’s really quite straightforward in my opinion. Make the penalties for financial irregularities and cheating as instant as possible and draconian. No negotiations with the offending club.
The one change that would stop all this nonsense is to say you can spend as much as you like but it has to be in equity, not loans, from the owner/investers.
They can't prove it beyond reasonable doubt, nor the lower threshold of civil law, without negotiating. The only leverage they have is on a quip pro quo basis else the whole thing would be tied up in the courts, with a massive back log, for years.
If you waited until it was proven who would you actually be punishing?
The EFL need to change the way they do things so it is not them that have to prove anything.
Charge a club, announce the punishment and set a time for an appeal to be in by.
It would be then for a Club to produce the evidence.
It is that simple to take control. It is ridiculous for a so called governing body to be begging for information and negotiating penalties.
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/business/financial-reporting/arbitrator-red-cards-derbys-amortisation-policy
It's not as clear cut as the EFL v Derby County its in effect a test case for the accounting treatment. Signed off by the auditors. Who I think are these people https://www.pkfsmithcooper.com/our-experts/.
I
It's a whole can of worms that the EFL are not fit to investigate. They don't have the resource to do it. If this ends up going through the courts it could take decades. It could take so long that there is a strong case there wouldn't be a Derby County left at the end of it.
Regulation 16.3 Annual accounts not filed with Companies House
Regulation 17 Default in payments to HMRC
Profit and sustainability rules - non submission of audited accounts.
The above are clear failures committed by Derby.
If they had the rules the rest would have come to light quicker and the EFL would be driving the pace. Valuing players reducing value in a different way for example. Just say no and disallow. The fact is that by not submitting the accounts it did not come to light until much much later. It then complicates and delays everything and when it is all sorted the club appeals and says they have been living under investigation for so long any additional punishment is harsh, and gets away with what they 100% were culpable of.
If the irregularities I listed had a (say) three point penalty automatically applied, even with an appeal process, it would have been cleaner, quicker and fairer. More importantly, transparent.If you think all this faffing about and negotiation is the correct way for football to be governed I think you are wildly out of touch. I think it is bo**ok@
They said they didn't break FFP. Which Stevie Wonder could see was wrong
I didn't say, at any point it was the correct way for football to be governed. We all know it's not governed because the EFL aren't a governing body, no matter how many times people wish they were, or say they are.
I am not arguing that the EFL are right, or Derby have done nothing wrong with the play amortisation aspect (which is the specific issue I am talking about) I am saying, why it's more difficult than just saying "guilty".
I do this for a living, or something very close, if you think you can publicly accuse auditors of fraud and that the EFL have the authority and resources to find the answers themselves, then I am afraid its you that's out of touch with reality.The four charges I quote is from the EFL. The fifth is the failure to pay another club for a player. (They have just paid Arsenal the fee). Paying it late does not mitigate the fact that it was outside the rules though.
Five simple and straight forward charges.
I would also suggest that the EFL can make their own rules to ensure that every club is treated fairly. The amortisation of players value for example. They could say that for the purposes of FFP it has to be done this way, or this is the maximum we will allow.What they allow for FFP could be completely different from what is allowed by law.1 -
Think they need to call Chef Wendy for some advice... on how to take the absolute piss and get away with it!4
-
If they auditor says the accounts are proper and correct and you say they aren't what exactly are you accusing them of?Redrobo said:
Who accused auditors of fraud FFS 🤦♂️Cafc43v3r said:
They did submit the accounts for the years in question!!!!!!Redrobo said:
Regulation 16.2 Failure to produce audited accountsCafc43v3r said:
Charge them with what? Being a bit dodgy? Thinking they might have done something?Redrobo said:
I think like the EFL you are falling for it.Cafc43v3r said:
But that's the point, they can't prove them without the cooperation of the club. They don't have anyway of doing it.ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s a very fair point. My only response is that if and when the irregularities are proven, even if that’s years from the start of the irregularity occurring and even under different ownership, then the penalty should not involve points deductions negotiable with the club but automatic relegation two divisions. Any business can fail without irregularities and of course that needs to be recognised but it’s the shenanigans Derby and others have been engaged in that has to be completely stopped.Cafc43v3r said:
I don't disagree but you have got to prove it. Most of the irregularities are basically accounting methods to pass FFP. If these were done to avoid tax it would take nearly 10 years to exhaust all the possible appeals. The EFL don't have the powers of discovery or the resource and expertise, nor can they retrospectively change the law, like HMRC can/has.ShootersHillGuru said:It’s really quite straightforward in my opinion. Make the penalties for financial irregularities and cheating as instant as possible and draconian. No negotiations with the offending club.
The one change that would stop all this nonsense is to say you can spend as much as you like but it has to be in equity, not loans, from the owner/investers.
They can't prove it beyond reasonable doubt, nor the lower threshold of civil law, without negotiating. The only leverage they have is on a quip pro quo basis else the whole thing would be tied up in the courts, with a massive back log, for years.
If you waited until it was proven who would you actually be punishing?
The EFL need to change the way they do things so it is not them that have to prove anything.
Charge a club, announce the punishment and set a time for an appeal to be in by.
It would be then for a Club to produce the evidence.
It is that simple to take control. It is ridiculous for a so called governing body to be begging for information and negotiating penalties.
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/business/financial-reporting/arbitrator-red-cards-derbys-amortisation-policy
It's not as clear cut as the EFL v Derby County its in effect a test case for the accounting treatment. Signed off by the auditors. Who I think are these people https://www.pkfsmithcooper.com/our-experts/.
I
It's a whole can of worms that the EFL are not fit to investigate. They don't have the resource to do it. If this ends up going through the courts it could take decades. It could take so long that there is a strong case there wouldn't be a Derby County left at the end of it.
Regulation 16.3 Annual accounts not filed with Companies House
Regulation 17 Default in payments to HMRC
Profit and sustainability rules - non submission of audited accounts.
The above are clear failures committed by Derby.
If they had the rules the rest would have come to light quicker and the EFL would be driving the pace. Valuing players reducing value in a different way for example. Just say no and disallow. The fact is that by not submitting the accounts it did not come to light until much much later. It then complicates and delays everything and when it is all sorted the club appeals and says they have been living under investigation for so long any additional punishment is harsh, and gets away with what they 100% were culpable of.
If the irregularities I listed had a (say) three point penalty automatically applied, even with an appeal process, it would have been cleaner, quicker and fairer. More importantly, transparent.If you think all this faffing about and negotiation is the correct way for football to be governed I think you are wildly out of touch. I think it is bo**ok@
They said they didn't break FFP. Which Stevie Wonder could see was wrong
I didn't say, at any point it was the correct way for football to be governed. We all know it's not governed because the EFL aren't a governing body, no matter how many times people wish they were, or say they are.
I am not arguing that the EFL are right, or Derby have done nothing wrong with the play amortisation aspect (which is the specific issue I am talking about) I am saying, why it's more difficult than just saying "guilty".
I do this for a living, or something very close, if you think you can publicly accuse auditors of fraud and that the EFL have the authority and resources to find the answers themselves, then I am afraid its you that's out of touch with reality.The four charges I quote is from the EFL. The fifth is the failure to pay another club for a player. (They have just paid Arsenal the fee). Paying it late does not mitigate the fact that it was outside the rules though.
Five simple and straight forward charges.
I would also suggest that the EFL can make their own rules to ensure that every club is treated fairly. The amortisation of players value for example. They could say that for the purposes of FFP it has to be done this way, or this is the maximum we will allow.What they allow for FFP could be completely different from what is allowed by law.
The could, they probably should, but they didn't. That's the fact you can't undo, or rewrite the rules retrospectively.
0 -
At no point have I said that the accounts are not proper or correct. I am not accusing them of anything.Cafc43v3r said:
If they auditor says the accounts are proper and correct and you say they aren't what exactly are you accusing them of?Redrobo said:
Who accused auditors of fraud FFS 🤦♂️Cafc43v3r said:
They did submit the accounts for the years in question!!!!!!Redrobo said:
Regulation 16.2 Failure to produce audited accountsCafc43v3r said:
Charge them with what? Being a bit dodgy? Thinking they might have done something?Redrobo said:
I think like the EFL you are falling for it.Cafc43v3r said:
But that's the point, they can't prove them without the cooperation of the club. They don't have anyway of doing it.ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s a very fair point. My only response is that if and when the irregularities are proven, even if that’s years from the start of the irregularity occurring and even under different ownership, then the penalty should not involve points deductions negotiable with the club but automatic relegation two divisions. Any business can fail without irregularities and of course that needs to be recognised but it’s the shenanigans Derby and others have been engaged in that has to be completely stopped.Cafc43v3r said:
I don't disagree but you have got to prove it. Most of the irregularities are basically accounting methods to pass FFP. If these were done to avoid tax it would take nearly 10 years to exhaust all the possible appeals. The EFL don't have the powers of discovery or the resource and expertise, nor can they retrospectively change the law, like HMRC can/has.ShootersHillGuru said:It’s really quite straightforward in my opinion. Make the penalties for financial irregularities and cheating as instant as possible and draconian. No negotiations with the offending club.
The one change that would stop all this nonsense is to say you can spend as much as you like but it has to be in equity, not loans, from the owner/investers.
They can't prove it beyond reasonable doubt, nor the lower threshold of civil law, without negotiating. The only leverage they have is on a quip pro quo basis else the whole thing would be tied up in the courts, with a massive back log, for years.
If you waited until it was proven who would you actually be punishing?
The EFL need to change the way they do things so it is not them that have to prove anything.
Charge a club, announce the punishment and set a time for an appeal to be in by.
It would be then for a Club to produce the evidence.
It is that simple to take control. It is ridiculous for a so called governing body to be begging for information and negotiating penalties.
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/business/financial-reporting/arbitrator-red-cards-derbys-amortisation-policy
It's not as clear cut as the EFL v Derby County its in effect a test case for the accounting treatment. Signed off by the auditors. Who I think are these people https://www.pkfsmithcooper.com/our-experts/.
I
It's a whole can of worms that the EFL are not fit to investigate. They don't have the resource to do it. If this ends up going through the courts it could take decades. It could take so long that there is a strong case there wouldn't be a Derby County left at the end of it.
Regulation 16.3 Annual accounts not filed with Companies House
Regulation 17 Default in payments to HMRC
Profit and sustainability rules - non submission of audited accounts.
The above are clear failures committed by Derby.
If they had the rules the rest would have come to light quicker and the EFL would be driving the pace. Valuing players reducing value in a different way for example. Just say no and disallow. The fact is that by not submitting the accounts it did not come to light until much much later. It then complicates and delays everything and when it is all sorted the club appeals and says they have been living under investigation for so long any additional punishment is harsh, and gets away with what they 100% were culpable of.
If the irregularities I listed had a (say) three point penalty automatically applied, even with an appeal process, it would have been cleaner, quicker and fairer. More importantly, transparent.If you think all this faffing about and negotiation is the correct way for football to be governed I think you are wildly out of touch. I think it is bo**ok@
They said they didn't break FFP. Which Stevie Wonder could see was wrong
I didn't say, at any point it was the correct way for football to be governed. We all know it's not governed because the EFL aren't a governing body, no matter how many times people wish they were, or say they are.
I am not arguing that the EFL are right, or Derby have done nothing wrong with the play amortisation aspect (which is the specific issue I am talking about) I am saying, why it's more difficult than just saying "guilty".
I do this for a living, or something very close, if you think you can publicly accuse auditors of fraud and that the EFL have the authority and resources to find the answers themselves, then I am afraid its you that's out of touch with reality.The four charges I quote is from the EFL. The fifth is the failure to pay another club for a player. (They have just paid Arsenal the fee). Paying it late does not mitigate the fact that it was outside the rules though.
Five simple and straight forward charges.
I would also suggest that the EFL can make their own rules to ensure that every club is treated fairly. The amortisation of players value for example. They could say that for the purposes of FFP it has to be done this way, or this is the maximum we will allow.What they allow for FFP could be completely different from what is allowed by law.
The could, they probably should, but they didn't. That's the fact you can't undo, or rewrite the rules retrospectively.
My original post that you picked up on says “the EFL need to change the way they do things”. I was talking about the need for the EFL to take control.
I can only assume you are pissed and are making things up to have an argument with yourself.0 -
No but your asking the EFL to and I have explained why they can't and why some negotiation is a necessary evil.
The only argument I have had is the EFL can't investigate it, in a timely manner, unless they have more powers of discovery than HMRC currently have. The EFL can't change that, can they?
If you want to take some actual insight into the why it is the way it is (not the way everyone wants it to be) as an argument fair enough.0 -
Interesting interview with the owner on local radio today.
Must say there are certain situations in life where you need to take your medicine, regardless of whether he feels he is to blame or not I think some contrition and an apology might have gone a little way to subsiding the anger from fans however I'm not sure the interview was his finest hour. He finally managed to utter an apology but only after some cajoling from the presenter after initially stating he 'felt' for supporters and local businesses.
He stated his biggest mistake over and above every other one was stating he'd sell the club for no return on his investment which left no room for negotiation, and now the club is in administration he is convinced many interested parties will now show their hand and make an offer.
Interestingly he also stated he owns the stadium and he will be negotiating directly with any new owners around the purchase of the stadium, not the administrators. Spoke to a few of my friends who support Derby and they are very cynical about that and suspect the stadium is how he plans to recoup the money he's invested (Which he says is over £200 Million). Not sure he will get anywhere near that however I think there is a lot of debate around whether or not the £200 million figure is accurate or not.
Link for anyone interested, I listened to the audio on the radio however I think the below is a word for word write up.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/derby-county-mel-morris-interview-5939387.amp
4
