Derby (16 Viewers)

Bugsy

Well-Known Member

Anyone else seen this when Derby fans thought it couldn't get worse
 

Terry Gibson's perm

Well-Known Member

better days

Well-Known Member

Anyone else seen this when Derby fans thought it couldn't get worse
Fucking hell
I thought it was impossible for Al Jazeera to look like the good guys
Football really is a cesspit at times
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
It’s a bit of a silly rule to be honest
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
39 years of age, had no pre-season to speak of, and hasn’t played regular 90 minutes for 3 years or so. ........ what could possibly go wrong?
Or... played more English top flight games last season than our entire squad has in their careers, trained with Derby all pre-season and, let's be honest, is probably there as a favour to a mate until January, in the hope they don't need to use him that often.
 

jim20

Well-Known Member
I don’t understand how they are being allowed to sign players when they still haven’t filed their accounts. Also will they be getting a points deduction or not? It seems that if it was most other clubs they would have had a 10 point deduction already, I don’t get why Derby aren’t being treated the same
 

KenilworthSkyBlue

Well-Known Member
They're a brand that the EFL feels is within their commercial interest to keep in the division. Both due to club size and the fact Rooney is in charge.

It's as simple as that unfortunately.
 

Bugsy

Well-Known Member
No it is because they are acting within embargo rules

Yeah Wayne Rooney derby embargo rules, should have been done months ago the crafty barstools. How long ago did they last file the accounts....PUSB
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
And you're horribly naive if you don't believe that.

The embargo allows players to be signed - this is clearly within the EFL rules. The issue is around professional standing. The EFL have conceded that the squad only had 18 players of professional standing and therefore had to sign 5 more to an already reduced squad of 23.

Points deductions can only come into force if the FFP rules have proved to be broken on submission of the accounts

The EFL cannot just ignore its rules because it is Wayne Rooney - the rules are agreed amongst all members
 

skybluegod

Well-Known Member
The embargo allows players to be signed - this is clearly within the EFL rules. The issue is around professional standing. The EFL have conceded that the squad only had 18 players of professional standing and therefore had to sign 5 more to an already reduced squad of 23.

Points deductions can only come into force if the FFP rules have proved to be broken on submission of the accounts

The EFL cannot just ignore its rules because it is Wayne Rooney - the rules are agreed amongst all members

Didn't they then relax their ruling again to allow the replace kazim-richards with Baldock?

I actually think the EFL did the right thing allowing them to bring themselves up to 23 players, but then to relax it again because of an injury seemed a bit lenient to me.
 

KenilworthSkyBlue

Well-Known Member
The embargo allows players to be signed - this is clearly within the EFL rules. The issue is around professional standing. The EFL have conceded that the squad only had 18 players of professional standing and therefore had to sign 5 more to an already reduced squad of 23.

Points deductions can only come into force if the FFP rules have proved to be broken on submission of the accounts

The EFL cannot just ignore its rules because it is Wayne Rooney - the rules are agreed amongst all members

It can mould or relax the punishment to suit their own agenda though - which they did with Sheffield Wednesday. It reduced the 12 point deduction when there was absolutely zero grounds for it to be and the reasoning they gave was pathetic.

If they find anything untoward in their accounts then I expect similar leniency.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
It can mould or relax the punishment to suit their own agenda though - which they did with Sheffield Wednesday. It reduced the 12 point deduction when there was absolutely zero grounds for it to be and the reasoning they gave was pathetic.

If they find anything untoward in their accounts then I expect similar leniency.

I don't believe in points reductions anyway unless clubs fail to pay players for a period of time or fall into administration - I don't see the point in the FFP rules
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
I don't believe in points reductions anyway unless clubs fail to pay players for a period of time or fall into administration - I don't see the point in the FFP rules

So you're happy with clubs totally taking the piss and running unlimited losses to chase the dragon
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
No it is because they are acting within embargo rules

Us and a few other clubs were in embargo for not filing accounts on time despite govt legislation allowing for it. No extension was given despite the club not having to legally submit them.

So why were Derby given an extension? After all their's was only to resubmit parts of the accounts, not all of them and the original fault was the clubs for massaging the figures. Something like that should have been simple to rectify and the only reason it could be taking longer is cos the actual figures don't tell the story they want. Well, tough shit.

It's like a kid being caught cheating in an exam and then been given extra time at the end to finish.
 

Frostie

Well-Known Member
It can mould or relax the punishment to suit their own agenda though - which they did with Sheffield Wednesday. It reduced the 12 point deduction when there was absolutely zero grounds for it to be and the reasoning they gave was pathetic.

If they find anything untoward in their accounts then I expect similar leniency.

Not quite true & a common misconception.

The EFL didn't decide on the amount of points to deduct from Wednesday or the decision to later half that deduction, it's all decided by an independent panel. I believe EFL actually campaigned against the penalty being reduced.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Us and a few other clubs were in embargo for not filing accounts on time despite govt legislation allowing for it. No extension was given despite the club not having to legally submit them.

So why were Derby given an extension? After all their's was only to resubmit parts of the accounts, not all of them and the original fault was the clubs for massaging the figures. Something like that should have been simple to rectify and the only reason it could be taking longer is cos the actual figures don't tell the story they want. Well, tough shit.

It's like a kid being caught cheating in an exam and then been given extra time at the end to finish.

They are in embargo what are you on about?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
So you're happy with clubs totally taking the piss and running unlimited losses to chase the dragon

If they are able to support this through other sources yes. Stoke are not going bankrupt - they are bankrolled.

I worked for a company that regularly lost hundreds of millions a year
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top