cowl Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 You've probably read the commission's written reasons for their conclusion by now, do you agree with the club's intention to appeal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jp1981 Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 We've got nothing to lose (hopefully) so why not? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthefish2002 Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 6 minutes ago, jp1981 said: We've got nothing to lose (hopefully) so why not? Doesnt it just drag it out for a few months longer and create uncertainty? Both EFL and Wednesday have already made themselves look daft enough. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChinaOwl Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 Appealing is always a positive trait to have. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindygrOWLer Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 Voted yes because we're slightly less incompetent than the EFL....so we'll probably win. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wednesday_Jack Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 For me it’s about consistency and standards across the whole of football and if you judge what’s happened/happening at Derby and other clubs...it needs to be appealed. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scilly owl Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 When we were handed down the deferred 12 points deduction how many of us came to the conclusion that we were quite fortunate and breathed a sigh of relief. Then we get the Wednesday statement and the slightly racist findings from the EFL and, I don’t know about the rest of you, but I am now thinking that because of the way the EFL have behaved I am more inclined to think that we should fight our corner. I’m of the opinion that the EFL’s case contains more inconsistencies and underhandedness than Wednesday’s. ( and that’s saying something ) 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daleblue Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 To be honest I am still not convinced the purchase of Hillsborough was conducted correctly, from what I have read leads me to believe that following EFL (guide lines) were not the legal way to go and that we should have employed legal experts in this field to make the purchase. Are the EFL wrong to bring chargers relating to incorrect legal requirements on the sale, probably not. Are we guilty of not having the correct legal documentation of said purchase, probably yes. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauchief Owl Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 If the outcome could possibly be a 21 point deduction, then no. If it's a free shot, though costly, then fair enough. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrickyTrev Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 Going from the report in the Sun yesterday I thought the club had grounds for appeal. Reading the written reasons today however I’m not so sure. We have clearly exceeded FFP and have been deducted the number of points the rules say need to be deducted for such a breach. I honestly don’t think the club has a leg to stand on here. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbob1867 Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 No. Based on my reading of the judgment we didn't have a binding contract in place by the 31 July deadline so I can't see on what basis we can win. If you're over the FFP amount by £15m or more (we were £18m) it's a 12 point deduction except where there are exceptional circumstances which doesn't seem to be the case here, so it seems unlikely we're have the number of deducted points reduced. Can I suggest we save all the money we would otherwise spaff on an appeal and use it to recruit a CEO/COO/CFO/counsel etc who can actually avoid this nonsense happening again. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeonLeon Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 Voted no because the findings seem to render it completely pointless. As useless as they are, the EFL did try to help us at the start and we shot ourselves in the foot, big time. Take your medicine and move on. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soldierboyblue Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 3 minutes ago, TrickyTrev said: Going from the report in the Sun yesterday I thought the club had grounds for appeal. Reading the written reasons today however I’m not so sure. We have clearly exceeded FFP and have been deducted the number of points the rules say need to be deducted for such a breach. I honestly don’t think the club has a leg to stand on here. The appeal will be fought around legal permission and the total incompetence of the EFL and them not being fair with the Derby issue. In short the legal basis is sound and if that's the case the EFL rules should reflect legal process. This is going to get messy and the EFL will be found wanting here IMHO 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowl Posted August 17, 2020 Author Share Posted August 17, 2020 3 minutes ago, Jimbob1867 said: Can I suggest we save all the money we would otherwise spaff on an appeal and use it to recruit a CEO/COO/CFO/counsel etc who can actually avoid this nonsense happening again. We can recruit them, just as one time or another we have done in the last five years or so, but it's pointless unless their advice and wisdom is something that will be followed by DC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeonLeon Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 1 minute ago, soldierboyblue said: The appeal will be fought around legal permission and the total incompetence of the EFL and them not being fair with the Derby issue. In short the legal basis is sound and if that's the case the EFL rules should reflect legal process. This is going to get messy and the EFL will be found wanting here IMHO But as far as fairness in Derby’s case goes the panel found in our favour and put the deduction into next season. For me, the panel has righted the wrong there already. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelcityowlsfan Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 The thing is won’t DC have asked Nick De Marco if it’s worth appealing? If so you’d expect him to be honest in his assessment and not just say yes to tender services once more? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Django Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 This is the bit that I can’t get my head around. If they were aware of it and let it go through, then why have they come back months later and charged us? 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbob1867 Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 1 minute ago, cowl said: We can recruit them, just as one time or another we have done in the last five years or so, but it's pointless unless their advice and wisdom is something that will be followed by DC. Fair point, but in the past the recruitment seems to have been half hearted - remember the reaction when KM was brought in? Other than getting in a couple of strikers you could argue getting a competent and experienced exec team into the club is the number one priority. it's been long said by a number of people that the club won't go anywhere until they get the upstairs management side of things sorted out and I think this is totally borne out by what's happened with the EFL. I don't honestly know how other clubs are set up but I'd be interested to find out and see how it compares with us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbob1867 Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 Just now, Django said: This is the bit that I can’t get my head around. If they were aware of it and let it go through, then why have they come back months later and charged us? What this doesn't say is the auditors signed off on the assumption the heads of terms was dated 15 July and was a binding contract - neither of which actually turned out to be the case, it appears - and the EFL's approval was based on the same conditions - so we didn't fulfil them. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeonLeon Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 Just now, Django said: This is the bit that I can’t get my head around. If they were aware of it and let it go through, then why have they come back months later and charged us? They set out the guidelines for us to work too. We told them we’d completed the sale as per the guidelines they’d set out. They didn’t check our paperwork there and then, letting it go through on the assumption that we’d done as agreed. When they’ve sat down at a later date and reviewed the paperwork they’ve seen we’ve not done as we said we would. Then they brought the charge. It’s understandable, they have to guard against deceit really. We could’ve been trying to pull the wool over their eyes with a ‘fake’ ground sale in the accounts. 1 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