Utah Owl Posted February 27, 2020 Share Posted February 27, 2020 6 minutes ago, The only way is S6 said: Dare I ask if promotion would solve all this bollx? Crazy, but which bit of this isn’t?! It would, but it won't cos' it ain't happening! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The only way is S6 Posted February 27, 2020 Share Posted February 27, 2020 1 minute ago, Utah Owl said: It would, but it won't cos' it ain't happening! As a Wednesday fan, you should know better than to make bold predictions Utah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andytrig Posted February 27, 2020 Share Posted February 27, 2020 4 minutes ago, Royal_D said: Well look at Aston Villa Be interesting to see if they are charged by the EFL if they are relegated. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveyboy66 Posted February 27, 2020 Share Posted February 27, 2020 3 hours ago, Ever the pessimist said: My guess is that we will start next season on minus 12 or something similar. You don't have to befucking Nostradamus to predict your guesses on anything to do with the club 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarrowbyOwl Posted February 27, 2020 Share Posted February 27, 2020 1 hour ago, Royal_D said: Yeah that’s fair enough, well explained to someone who’s in over there head with the whole FFP scenario if am honest I just wonder why if it’s as clear cut as you explain, why after been consulted didn’t the EFL just say ‘no that’s not allowed’ ? Not just to us but to Derby aswell who am aware aren’t accused of misconduct in backdating the accounts like us, but have still surely calculated the sale of pride park into there FFP figures ? Aston Villa also did this, before 2016 ? Am not too sure , but seems wether it’s a loophole or not it’s something the EFL have turned a blind eye to and are now wanting to change the goalposts In Derby’s case it seems to be the ground valuation that’s the issue. With us it’s the timing of the ground sale transaction and allocation to the previous years accounts. I wouldn’t be surprised if it also about what we included (or omitted) in the forward financial projections required under the P&S rules - just guessing there though. All cases are about how things have been done, not because a ‘loophole’ has been exploited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utah Owl Posted February 27, 2020 Share Posted February 27, 2020 1 hour ago, The only way is S6 said: As a Wednesday fan, you should know better than to make bold predictions Utah. My predictions are usually way out which is why I said it! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 13 hours ago, HarrowbyOwl said: In Derby’s case it seems to be the ground valuation that’s the issue. With us it’s the timing of the ground sale transaction and allocation to the previous years accounts. I wouldn’t be surprised if it also about what we included (or omitted) in the forward financial projections required under the P&S rules - just guessing there though. All cases are about how things have been done, not because a ‘loophole’ has been exploited. But whichever way these deals were done , the sales have still been used to offset FFP issues ? Which your saying is point blank not allowed after the rule change in 2016 ? Or have I misunderstood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mogbad Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 1 minute ago, Royal_D said: But whichever way these deals were done , the sales have still been used to offset FFP issues ? Which your saying is point blank not allowed after the rule change in 2016 ? Or have I misunderstood It wasn't allowed before 2016 with the old FFP rules, but it is allowed since 2016 with the P&S rules we are now subject to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 8 minutes ago, mogbad said: It wasn't allowed before 2016 with the old FFP rules, but it is allowed since 2016 with the P&S rules we are now subject to. hahaah yeah , just re-read the posts , this whole thing is just over my head I can’t be doing with it What happened to just supporting your team playing football Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarrowbyOwl Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 8 minutes ago, Royal_D said: But whichever way these deals were done , the sales have still been used to offset FFP issues ? Which your saying is point blank not allowed after the rule change in 2016 ? Or have I misunderstood Yes, you've got it the wrong way round. It was point blank not allowed under the old FFP rules but is point blank allowed in the new P&S rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 3 minutes ago, HarrowbyOwl said: Yes, you've got it the wrong way round. It was point blank not allowed under the old FFP rules but is point blank allowed in the new P&S rules Yeah fair one , literally can’t be bothered with the whole thing anymore Still feel the EFL have to make it stick for the supposed ‘integrity’ of the competition , just flippingget on with it and let’s move on even if it is from League One Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarrowbyOwl Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 17 minutes ago, Royal_D said: Yeah fair one , literally can’t be bothered with the whole thing anymore Still feel the EFL have to make it stick for the supposed ‘integrity’ of the competition , just flippingget on with it and let’s move on even if it is from League One Yes, the stakes are high - a lot riding on the outcome for us and the EFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teddybeararmy Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 16 hours ago, Harrysgame said: Could be wrong but almost sounds like you think we shouldn't be challenging. If it's wrong it's wrong. What the EFL should have done was have clear rules that don't leave any wriggle room. And none of this up to so many points etc just be clear do this 9 points or do that 22 points etc. Anything else just smacks of self interest. Having club reps who could benefit from any deductions is just made for self interest in high punishments. There is clear rules for breaking ffp/p&s. Think its a sliding scale starting at 12 points depending on how much you go over the 39m limit. The other 9 points I believe is the maximum punishment for misconduct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingsidney Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 On 25/02/2020 at 06:25, sherlyegg said: Don't think I have blamed gibson per se, although he is a w@ nker. My main issue is that you appear to be on his side. Without even knowing the result of the enquiry. The best we can hope for is getting off on a technicality. The way we have been run is shambolic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauchief Owl Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 45 minutes ago, teddybeararmy said: There is clear rules for breaking ffp/p&s. Think its a sliding scale starting at 12 points depending on how much you go over the 39m limit. The other 9 points I believe is the maximum punishment for misconduct Birmingham were deducted 9 points so 12 points is not the starting point it rather is the maximum. Unfortunately, I believe up to another 9 points can be added for what is termed 'aggravation' which I'm assuming will apply if DC is found guilty of 'cooking the books' with his back dating of the sale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teddybeararmy Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 6 minutes ago, Beauchief Owl said: Birmingham were deducted 9 points so 12 points is not the starting point it rather is the maximum. Unfortunately, I believe up to another 9 points can be added for what is termed 'aggravation' which I'm assuming will apply if DC is found guilty of 'cooking the books' with his back dating of the sale. Sorry I ment 12 was the maximum sliding down, I believe Birmingham got 7 for the p&s breach 3 for misconduct with 1 suspended for compliance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wilyfox Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 1 hour ago, kingsidney said: The best we can hope for is getting off on a technicality. The way we have been run is shambolic. Yep, that's what I said last week. The overall picture is a damning indictment of the decisions Chansiri has made over the years. If we're hit hard and face further embargoes or possibly relegation, I don't think he'd regain the fans' trust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauchief Owl Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 14 minutes ago, teddybeararmy said: Sorry I ment 12 was the maximum sliding down, I believe Birmingham got 7 for the p&s breach 3 for misconduct with 1 suspended for compliance. Yes, that sounds about right. I think they were deducted the extra points re a player they signed for over a million whilst in an embargo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Road Runner Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 I think the EFL have lost this case. Didn't the lawyer put the case on his website then remove it? Usually they only put cases on they win. And putting two and two together and living in hope The case was a week or so ago, the players know the result and a sudden up turn in form and results since the hearing like it's a relief and they can crack on with the season knowing there is no deduction coming. But I actually do think the EFL have lost this, whether they can appeal I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teddybeararmy Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 3 minutes ago, Road Runner said: I think the EFL have lost this case. Didn't the lawyer put the case on his website then remove it? Usually they only put cases on they win. And putting two and two together and living in hope The case was a week or so ago, the players know the result and a sudden up turn in form and results since the hearing like it's a relief and they can crack on with the season knowing there is no deduction coming. But I actually do think the EFL have lost this, whether they can appeal I don't know. Thought that was our lawyer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now