tomorrow's fixture list will be provisional

That's potentially massive. Seems to be saying that Derby could now go down (subject to appeal) and Wycombe stay up? As for the hundred grand, what do the EFL just use that for - I'd like to think for the good of grassroots football but as we were told, "they're a membership club" so I guess it could be anything 🤨 🏝️
 
Whattt.

So Wycome might stay up?

I'm sure they'd be delighted but surely having gone down and maybe lost players and reduced their budget it would leave them in a shitty position unprepared for the championship as they expected league 1....
 
It is hard to say what will happen next, but it will have to happen quickly. Derby are probably - only probably - unlikely to be relegated. But there is the distinct possibility that they will face a points deduction. The timing could not be worse, but we will have to monitor events, and if we should happen to have an early away fixture against them it might be prudent not to rush to make travel arrangements.
 
My (incomplete) understanding was that there might be other Championship clubs with a case to answer on finance as well?
 
Not sure I understand.
So there’s a £100k fine. Yes, I get that.
But where does it say points deduction or relegated? Or would the ‘reprimand’ relate to the points from the end of last season when the accounts were filed, eg -5pts, effectively sending them down?
 
tangerine_neil said:
Not sure I understand.
So there’s a £100k fine. Yes, I get that.
But where does it say points deduction or relegated? Or would the ‘reprimand’ relate to the points from the end of last season when the accounts were filed, eg -5pts, effectively sending them down?
Click to expand...
This would come via a Wycombe appeal; punishment too light, should have been relegated…
 
Absolute madness. I presume that the EFL think there’s a possibility of a points deduction if there’s any irregularities in the previous years accounts now being demanded, otherwise why produce two fixture lists.

How long will it take Derby to produce those, then how long will it take to scrutinise them, then how long will it take to make e decision on penalties, and then there’s the question of appeals.
 
Matesrates said:
Absolute madness. I presume that the EFL think there’s a possibility of a points deduction if there’s any irregularities in the previous years accounts now being demanded, otherwise why produce two fixture lists.

How long will it take Derby to produce those, then how long will it take to scrutinise them, then how long will it take to make e decision on penalties, and then there’s the question of appeals.
Click to expand...
Don’t hold your breath, EFL are not fit for purpose. I suspect this will drag on and end up with a points deduction at some point. When that will be will be interesting.
 
In addition to the points raised above there is another big question relating to this that needs to be answered...
Why did the Disciplinary Commission 'dismiss the League’s expert accountancy evidence', (which demonstrated that the Club’s policy regarding the amortisation of player registrations was contrary to standard accounting rules) ?
 
So we will have either Wycombe who won’t be fully prepared for a season in the championship, and in any case are pretty poor as demonstrated last season. Or Derby who can’t really budget properly with this decision hanging over them and again were poor last season!
Whoever gets the nod from the EFL will be at a bit of a disadvantage and favourites in my book to go down. Good news for the rest of the clubs😉
 
As I read it, Derby will get a fine, reprimand andhave to refile their accounts on the correct basis. As there is no points penalty there will be no relegation for them, unless the EFL appeal for a more severve sanction. That is unlikly to succeed if they do.
I think it is a pathetic sanction, inconsidtent with other club treatment and the EFL should scrap this independent commission
 
bfcpete said:
As I read it, Derby will get a fine, reprimand andhave to refile their accounts on the correct basis. As there is no points penalty there will be no relegation for them, unless the EFL appeal for a more severve sanction. That is unlikly to succeed if they do.
I think it is a pathetic sanction, inconsidtent with other club treatment and the EFL should scrap this independent commission
Click to expand...
If it’s just the fine, why are they publishing two fixture lists? They surely must be thinking it’s a possibility.
 
The Catcher in the Rye said:
So we will have either Wycombe who won’t be fully prepared for a season in the championship, and in any case are pretty poor as demonstrated last season. Or Derby who can’t really budget properly with this decision hanging over them and again were poor last season!
Whoever gets the nod from the EFL will be at a bit of a disadvantage and favourites in my book to go down. Good news for the rest of the clubs😉
Click to expand...
Think Luton will struggle
KDH was their player of the season and the reason they were finishing mid table
 
Matesrates said:
If it’s just the fine, why are they publishing two fixture lists? They surely must be thinking it’s a possibility.
Click to expand...

There are a couple of things we don't know here :

1. Whether the re-presentation of accounts will disclose further breaches of rules ; and

2. What the EFL's expectations and intentions are if there are such further breaches.

Either way, it is not a great day for competition integrity, one that actually has a potential impact upon 48 clubs.
 
BlackpoolSupportersTrust said:
It is hard to say what will happen next, but it will have to happen quickly. Derby are probably - only probably - unlikely to be relegated. But there is the distinct possibility that they will face a points deduction. The timing could not be worse, but we will have to monitor events, and if we should happen to have an early away fixture against them it might be prudent not to rush to make travel arrangements.
Click to expand...
They were charged on the same day as Wednesday. They got a points deduction that applied last season. For consistency, so should Derby.
 
Mark_GT said:
If and (it's a biggish if) Wycombe stayed up you'd think Lincoln might not be happy?
Click to expand...
Shame. Derby should have been deducted points when Sheff Wed were but for whatever reason were not. For consistency it should apply to last season, which means Wycombe stay up.
 
Wizaard said:
Shame. Derby should have been deducted points when Sheff Wed were but for whatever reason were not. For consistency it should apply to last season, which means Wycombe stay up.
Click to expand...

The fact that we are having provisional lists suggests that the EFL thinks that is a possible conclusion. It's possible their difficulty is that they suspect that Derby may infringe FPP, but can't be sure they will, or by how much.
 
Atletico_Seasider said:
In addition to the points raised above there is another big question relating to this that needs to be answered...
Why did the Disciplinary Commission 'dismiss the League’s expert accountancy evidence', (which demonstrated that the Club’s policy regarding the amortisation of player registrations was contrary to standard accounting rules) ?
Click to expand...
Good question. Perhaps in the hope of keeping the lid on all of this. After all, they have a competition to run, don't you know?!
 
Thankfully we don't play Derby first up, that would be a nightmare for Critchley to prepare for. You have to feel for Wycombe, how can they plan for the Championship and L1 when the difference in revenue is more than £7M a season.
 
Scaramanga said:
Don’t hold your breath, EFL are not fit for purpose.
Click to expand...
The issue is with the independent arbiter who's made the decision and handed out a very small sanction that doesn't back up what is being called for, so blaming the EFL isnt balanced and strikes at the wrong target.

There are/were set rules on financial fair play which both Derby and Sheffield Wednesday cheated on by cooking up figures to get around that,which included the amortisation of players values and also the valuation on the stadia.
Thats not the EFLs fault either but they have try and pick up the pieces of financial mismanagement to a schedule and programme set by the clubs, which Blackpool FC were allowed to contribute to and vote on too.

Its clear to me that some sort of independent body wont be able to cope with this , not least because when sanctions are introduced it inevitably leads to legal action from the clubs in question.

@BlackpoolSupportersTrust might think they're doing the right thing in help pushing the authorities to go for an independent body to run football,but this gives us a little glimpse of what carnage that might result. Folk would be better off supporting the EFL and pressing their own clubs to vote on tough sanctions rather than simple self interest.
 
Plumbs said:
@BlackpoolSupportersTrust might think they're doing the right thing in help pushing the authorities to go for an independent body to run football,but this gives us a little glimpse of what carnage that might result. Folk would be better off supporting the EFL and pressing their own clubs to vote on tough sanctions rather than simple self interest.
Click to expand...

You think what we have at the moment isn't carnage then? I've never in my lifetime known any League dither over a case for 18 months and have to resort to either/or fixtures lists about twelve hours before they are due to come out.

These people at the EPL and EFL have proved time and time again that they can't regulate and now we know they can't be trusted to run the competitions either. I think your Trust are bang on the money, especially in their written evidence in which they specifically pointed out the Derby County issue. If you think trusting to luck that the EFL and others will miraculously sort themselves out is the best option, I think you are very, very naive.
 
Not naive. More that if the Trust says white, he says black.

It's a bloody mess, isn't it? I feel sorry for Wycombe. How do you cope with pre-season when you could be in one Division that gets six times more TV money than the other? And you still don't know either way in the last week in June? All through absolutely no fault of their own.
 
callmeshirley said:
You think what we have at the moment isn't carnage then? I've never in my lifetime known any League dither over a case for 18 months and have to resort to either/or fixtures lists about twelve hours before they are due to come out.

These people at the EPL and EFL have proved time and time again that they can't regulate and now we know they can't be trusted to run the competitions either. I think your Trust are bang on the money, especially in their written evidence in which they specifically pointed out the Derby County issue. If you think trusting to luck that the EFL and others will miraculously sort themselves out is the best option, I think you are very, very naive.
Click to expand...
Its actually a lot better than it used to be where Derby,Wendies and a few others have just about fallen short of self combusting;the EFL had nothing to do with the mess those clubs found themselves in, nor those of others like say Sunderland,Ipswich or Portsmouth who've sunk as they realise they couldnt take the admin route.

The EFL have in fact bowed to the pressure of letting an independent entity run the rule over its governance, but for some reason that is being overlooked. Leeds were fined 200k for 'binocular gate' but Derbys financial cheating on the rules is only half of that,and its clear to me that the original sanctions on both Derby and Wendies was fair an appropriate.

By the way @coppiceman I'd be happier with any proposed changed if we knew what the FSA and BST thought merited the constitution of the this proposed new regulator. Would they be happy if it was the same one as the EFL have in place, or will it include members its own National Council who also happen to be involved with the Kick it out people?

I'm not anti any group and would certainly welcome changes, but transparency and openness havent always been the watchword when the Trusts have been involved.
 
Plumbs, I've read that post half a dozen times and it still makes no sense. Since when have you been an apologist for the EFL?

One bit where I do agree with you - I'd like to see the detail of who manages the new regulator myself. But it won't be the FSA who decides it, let alone BST - will it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top