|
Post by xchpotter on Jul 2, 2021 17:41:46 GMT
They seem to be in a right state whatever, so hopefully that’s one relegation spot taken care of this season to help.
|
|
|
Post by redandwhitetundra on Jul 3, 2021 12:39:14 GMT
Sounds like the EFL decided to help one of the bigger boys over one of the minnows, what a surprise. £100k! If I was Wycombe I'd be fuming, and I don't imagine Wigan are that impressed either... Purely coincidental Sky announced a load of Derby TV fixtures before this was announced...
|
|
|
Post by cheadlepotter on Jul 3, 2021 12:43:01 GMT
So a poxy 100k fine then...Crap. Joe Allen’s wages for two weeks if it needs any perspective 😡
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Jul 3, 2021 18:51:49 GMT
So a poxy 100k fine then...Crap. The thing is that although there is no doubt Derby tried to hide their overspend by using amortisation in a different way from the rest of the league they did nothing illegal or against Football League rules. The worst they can be accused of is behaving against the spirit of the competition but I am not sure that could be given a stronger punishment without Derby appealing and winning the appeal. If the League wanted all clubs to use a certain method then it should say so in the rules. As in the case of selling their ground there is no doubt that Derby have tried to circumvent financial fair play but it has to be said that they have been very cleverer than the Football League (who by the way are run by a chartered accountant) in not doing anything which would be found illegal in a court of law. Apparently the method they used for amortisation is used in other businesses and is perfectly acceptable. I think back to a conversation I had in January with someone involved in Derby's finances. I was bemoaning the fact that Stoke were unable to buy players despite the Coates family having the cash to invest in what is their business. The response I got was that they weren't creative enough in their accounting, there were ways they could do it.
|
|
|
Post by themistocles on Jul 4, 2021 8:02:09 GMT
Not just Derby it seems.
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Jul 4, 2021 8:02:22 GMT
So a poxy 100k fine then...Crap. The thing is that although there is no doubt Derby tried to hide their overspend by using amortisation in a different way from the rest of the league they did nothing illegal or against Football League rules. The worst they can be accused of is behaving against the spirit of the competition but I am not sure that could be given a stronger punishment without Derby appealing and winning the appeal. If the League wanted all clubs to use a certain method then it should say so in the rules. As in the case of selling their ground there is no doubt that Derby have tried to circumvent financial fair play but it has to be said that they have been very cleverer than the Football League (who by the way are run by a chartered accountant) in not doing anything which would be found illegal in a court of law. Apparently the method they used for amortisation is used in other businesses and is perfectly acceptable. I think back to a conversation I had in January with someone involved in Derby's finances. I was bemoaning the fact that Stoke were unable to buy players despite the Coates family having the cash to invest in what is their business. The response I got was that they weren't creative enough in their accounting, there were ways they could do it. Perhaps EFL realised their silly rules are killing ambition!
|
|
|
Post by This is the year on Jul 4, 2021 8:03:48 GMT
I reckon we’re going be one of the ten
|
|
|
Post by This is the year on Jul 4, 2021 8:12:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by theonlooker on Jul 4, 2021 10:19:12 GMT
I'd be surprised if we weren't one of the 10 clubs under scrutiny, although equally we've demonstrated steps to correct our position with both ins and outs.
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Jul 4, 2021 18:57:46 GMT
I'd be surprised if we weren't one of the 10 clubs under scrutiny, although equally we've demonstrated steps to correct our position with both ins and outs. Believe it or not but this is one of Scholes area's of expertise, moving money around and it wouldn't surprise me if we weren't one of the 10.
|
|
|
Post by Sfance on Jul 4, 2021 19:32:38 GMT
I'd be surprised if we weren't one of the 10 clubs under scrutiny, although equally we've demonstrated steps to correct our position with both ins and outs. Believe it or not but this is one of Scholes area's of expertise, moving money around and it wouldn't surprise me if we weren't one of the 10. One of? There are others?
|
|
|
Post by theonlooker on Jul 4, 2021 19:34:42 GMT
I'd be surprised if we weren't one of the 10 clubs under scrutiny, although equally we've demonstrated steps to correct our position with both ins and outs. Believe it or not but this is one of Scholes area's of expertise, moving money around and it wouldn't surprise me if we weren't one of the 10. Sorry, you lost me at "Scholes" and "expertise". The sides are aching.
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Jul 4, 2021 19:38:24 GMT
I'd be surprised if we weren't one of the 10 clubs under scrutiny, although equally we've demonstrated steps to correct our position with both ins and outs. Believe it or not but this is one of Scholes area's of expertise, moving money around and it wouldn't surprise me if we weren't one of the 10. Very true he’s move is from the 31st richest club in the world to not being able to renew Nick Powell’s contract he’s moved millions and millions and millions just in the wrong direction be devastating if we were om the wrong end of one his weaknesses on that basis .
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Jul 4, 2021 20:22:41 GMT
Believe it or not but this is one of Scholes area's of expertise, moving money around and it wouldn't surprise me if we weren't one of the 10. Very true he’s move is from the 31st richest club in the world to not being able to renew Nick Powell’s contract he’s moved millions and millions and millions just in the wrong direction be devastating if we were om the wrong end of one his weaknesses on that basis . Yet he still has a job benji !
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Jul 4, 2021 20:42:27 GMT
Very true he’s move is from the 31st richest club in the world to not being able to renew Nick Powell’s contract he’s moved millions and millions and millions just in the wrong direction be devastating if we were om the wrong end of one his weaknesses on that basis . Yet he still has a job benji ! Quite staggering really the trajectory I outlined is exactly the case no interpretation amd yet your spot
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Jul 4, 2021 20:58:11 GMT
Yet he still has a job benji ! Quite staggering really the trajectory I outlined is exactly the case no interpretation amd yet your spot It's not staggering really, Scholes is far from perfect but he is only a small part of the where we are now, 3 managers spunking shit loads of money the board trying to do the best by backing them but sadly it didn't work, at least they are still here, Thankfully, and we will start to be a force again once we can rid the club of ghosts from xmas pasr!
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Jul 4, 2021 21:00:06 GMT
Quite staggering really the trajectory I outlined is exactly the case no interpretation amd yet your spot It's not staggering really, Scholes is far from perfect but he is only a small part of the where we are now, 3 managers spunking shit loads of money the board trying to do the best by backing them but sadly it didn't work, at least they are still here, Thankfully, and we will start to be a force again once we can rid the club of ghosts from xmas pasr! Who was managing the three managers ? As the word clearly stated the chief executive is responsible for all football electors matters
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2021 21:19:58 GMT
No one knows what goes on behind the scenes and where we are at financially with FFP or anything else and pointing the finger and making assumptions doesn't really help
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Jul 4, 2021 22:06:55 GMT
It's not staggering really, Scholes is far from perfect but he is only a small part of the where we are now, 3 managers spunking shit loads of money the board trying to do the best by backing them but sadly it didn't work, at least they are still here, Thankfully, and we will start to be a force again once we can rid the club of ghosts from xmas pasr! Who was managing the three managers ? As the word clearly stated the chief executive is responsible for all football electors matters Ben just let it go friend let it go, the board and directors have been in place for some time now and I'd hazard a guess it isn't changing anytime soon mate!
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Jul 4, 2021 22:10:29 GMT
Who was managing the three managers ? As the word clearly stated the chief executive is responsible for all football electors matters Ben just let it go friend let it go, the board and directors have been in place for some time now and I'd hazard a guess it isn't changing anytime soon mate! Agree your spot on bit then again someone abs to carry the torch and I’m 100% clear the owners have been abs hopefully will be for yard to come magnificent in their support of the club
|
|
|
Post by samwidge on Jul 4, 2021 22:42:20 GMT
🤔 I'd bet Birmingham City and Qpr are in that 10. Boro perhaps? 🤔
|
|
|
Post by marylandstoke on Jul 4, 2021 23:00:17 GMT
So a poxy 100k fine then...Crap. The thing is that although there is no doubt Derby tried to hide their overspend by using amortisation in a different way from the rest of the league they did nothing illegal or against Football League rules. The worst they can be accused of is behaving against the spirit of the competition but I am not sure that could be given a stronger punishment without Derby appealing and winning the appeal. If the League wanted all clubs to use a certain method then it should say so in the rules. As in the case of selling their ground there is no doubt that Derby have tried to circumvent financial fair play but it has to be said that they have been very cleverer than the Football League (who by the way are run by a chartered accountant) in not doing anything which would be found illegal in a court of law. Apparently the method they used for amortisation is used in other businesses and is perfectly acceptable. I think back to a conversation I had in January with someone involved in Derby's finances. I was bemoaning the fact that Stoke were unable to buy players despite the Coates family having the cash to invest in what is their business. The response I got was that they weren't creative enough in their accounting, there were ways they could do it. It’s mid evening over here on the Fourth so…draw your own conclusions and I will apologize tomorrow. Surely the point your making is a bunch of dodgy accountants thought they could get away with something, your friends say we should do the same thing. Derby get caught and…what? We’re still wrong?
|
|
|
Post by bertiestan on Jul 5, 2021 16:31:07 GMT
If derby really are in deep shit I wouldn't mind taking advantage of that with a bid for bielik....would be a great replacement for Mikel.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jul 5, 2021 16:34:12 GMT
If derby really are in deep shit I wouldn't mind taking advantage of that with a bid for bielik....would be a great replacement for Mikel. long term injured
|
|
|
Post by bertiestan on Jul 5, 2021 16:37:16 GMT
If derby really are in deep shit I wouldn't mind taking advantage of that with a bid for bielik....would be a great replacement for Mikel. long term injured Fair enough....cheers Lord👍
|
|
|
Post by ohbottom on Jul 6, 2021 15:08:45 GMT
If derby really are in deep shit I wouldn't mind taking advantage of that with a bid for bielik....would be a great replacement for Mikel. long term injured So perfect for us then...
|
|
|
Post by chigstoke on Jul 6, 2021 16:22:40 GMT
Derby have had Jagielka training with them with a view to sign. He’s 38. And I thought Stoke had an age problem with signings
|
|
|
Post by callas12 on Jul 6, 2021 23:02:37 GMT
Derby have had Jagielka training with them with a view to sign. He’s 38. And I thought Stoke had an age problem with signings Rooneys never been shy in coming forward when it comes to the old'uns.. 🤣 Noticed they've got Richard Stearman training with them too, he's 34 in August!
|
|
|
Post by lancashirelad on Jul 9, 2021 20:59:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on Jul 9, 2021 21:14:37 GMT
So a poxy 100k fine then...Crap. The thing is that although there is no doubt Derby tried to hide their overspend by using amortisation in a different way from the rest of the league they did nothing illegal or against Football League rules. The worst they can be accused of is behaving against the spirit of the competition but I am not sure that could be given a stronger punishment without Derby appealing and winning the appeal. If the League wanted all clubs to use a certain method then it should say so in the rules. As in the case of selling their ground there is no doubt that Derby have tried to circumvent financial fair play but it has to be said that they have been very cleverer than the Football League (who by the way are run by a chartered accountant) in not doing anything which would be found illegal in a court of law. Apparently the method they used for amortisation is used in other businesses and is perfectly acceptable. I think back to a conversation I had in January with someone involved in Derby's finances. I was bemoaning the fact that Stoke were unable to buy players despite the Coates family having the cash to invest in what is their business. The response I got was that they weren't creative enough in their accounting, there were ways they could do it. I was under the impression that Derby cleared it with the EFL before they did it as well but then a couple of other clubs cottoned onto what they were doing and challenged it which made the EFL backtrack, having already approved if.
|
|