Michael ReevesOne of the key things that we heard about when the play off semi finals were being planned was that the EFL were keen to protect the integrity of their competitions. That was in relation to doubts as to whether fans would be allowed into stadiums in Wales for the semi finals. Common sense prevailed and the integrity was retained but events at Pride Park and Derby are starting to put that into doubt again.
Last week it emerged that the football league now have interchangeable fixture lists despite the new season being less than 6 weeks away from starting. One of those fixture lists has Derby County in the Championship and the other has them in League One with Wycombe taking their place.
It seems entirely possible now that events on the pitch in May that saw the Rams stay up at the expense of the Chairboys could be deemed irrelevant should the EFL win a case after Derby avoided a points deduction for their breach of the EFL’s accounting rules after an independent disciplinary commission hit them with a £100,000 fine. However, the EFL are appealing the decision and if they are successful then Derby will be relegated.
This leaves both sides – although it is difficult to have sympathy for Derby given their indiscretions – uncertain of what the new season will bring which becomes more of a challenge as the transfer budgets (and targets) at the two different levels are likely to be very different.
Last month the EFL won an appeal to have a disciplinary commission decision in Derby’s favour overturned, but when meting out their punishment that independent body has now opted to dole out a fine alone and not a points deduction like the twelve points Sheffield Wednesday were docked last year.
That was later reduced to six points but still made the difference between the Owls staying up or going down in the end, with Rotherham United and Wycombe joining them in dropping into League One.
A statement on the EFL website published last week said: “An independent Disciplinary Commission has delivered its verdict on sanctions for Derby County relating to ongoing disciplinary proceedings.
“In May, an Independent League Arbitration Panel ruled that the Disciplinary Commission was wrong to 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.
“More specifically, the panel determined that the club’s policy was not in accordance with accounting standard FRS102 because it failed to accurately reflect the manner in which the Club takes the benefit of player registrations over the lifetime of a player’s contract.
“The EFL can confirm that it has developed an interchangeable fixture list for Derby County and Wycombe Wanderers, while the disciplinary process is finalised.
“The fixture list for both the Championship and League One will be published in full based on the 2020/21 final standings, pending any appeals relating to this decision.”
These ongoing appeals and decisions without a doubt impact on the league’s integrity and there is little doubt that the League will want this resolved sooner rather than later or there is an increased risk of additional appeals behind heard not least from Wycombe Wanderers.
It seems – looking in from afar – a reasonably clear situation that Derby have broken the rules, something that doesn’t seem in any dispute. Behind that there are clear examples of points being an appropriate sanction for such rule breaks and that should happen. And that should mean the penalty being applied for last season which would see Derby relegated to League One which feels the right outcome based on everything we see in front of us.
And certainly for the continued integrity of the football league the decision needs to be quick and clear in what happens and that should be the end of the matter.
I fully admit to being biased as a Derby fan, but given there is absolutely zero precedence for a retroactive points deduction in such circumstances, I fail to see how it “feels like the right outcome”.
I in no way support what the club has done – in fact, I have had issues with the ownership pretty much since day one – but if a points deduction is to be applied, one going into the forth coming season is the only thing that seems appropriate – Wednesday, Birmingham etc. were not retroactively punished for cooking their books (and QPR, Aston Villa et al were not punished at all, as they were lucky enough to escape the questionable auspices of the EFL) so why should Derby be?
Given the squad and “management team” Derby have in place, relegation seems a certainty next season anyway, so why create an unwanted and unnecessary precedent when the EFL are going to get what they want within the next 12-months anyway?
EFL won an appeal to have a disciplinary commission decision in Derby’s favour overturned – A disciplinary commission decided no case to answer, EFL appeal
Derby avoided a points deduction for their breach of the EFL’s accounting rules after an independent disciplinary commission hit them with a £100,000 fine – An independent commission decided the punishment was £100,000 fine, EFL appeal
It seems – looking in from afar – a reasonably clear situation that Derby have broken the rules, something that doesn’t seem in any dispute. – Yes but nobody is interested in the independent outcome of the independent disciplinary commission?
Is this some kind of persecution or vendetta?
Plus we’re only guilty of an accounting technicality – not ‘cooking the books’! Hence the fine. Does the author not even vaguely understand the process?
Michael
You say “Derby have clearly broken the rules” and then conflate that to Sheffield Wednesdays situation and their points deduction. For clarity,
1) Derby went to the EFL years ago outlining its proposed amortisation accounting methodology, which was in line with standard business practice (It’s the EFL that wanted and had adopted a straight line amortisation policy differing from other business sectors) but at the time the EFL did not have a concern Derby would amortise the way they have. Ie;- the EFL by default has projected their amortisation may not be the best way. In any event, the EFL failed to flag Derby’s intended amortisation at the time Derby raised it with the EFL.
2) Derby duly filed their accounts and the EFL approved with the amortisation they used clearly evident.
3) The EFL then retrospectively (no doubt under influence from certain Championship clubs) reviewed Derbys amortisation and changed their minds, saying Derby broke the amortisation rules.
4) The Independent Panel the EFL assembled found in Derbys favour on both the major issue of the stadium sale (for £81m) AND amortisation given the EFL had earlier approved that accounting methodology.
5) The EFL objected to the lesser of the two, conceding on the stadium sale, but objecting to the amortisation.
6) Another meeting of an Independent panel then agreed with the EFL on the lesser amortisation issue, and fined Derby £100k based on the history of EFL approving Derbys earlier transparent interaction with the EFL on what it wanted to do re;- amortising players and that the EFL had approved it when the accounts were filed.
7) Its a minor infraction, hence £100k fine. But what the EFL want to do is project a much harsher penalty on Derby for two reasons.
7a) – That the stadium sale of £81m was adjudicated as fair and legitimate but the EFL wont let that go, so despite the EFL losing on that point, they are wishing to use the amortisation issue to punish Derby for the stadium sale.. and,
7b) Re-calculating the amortisation in the accounts from 2016-18 inclusive in the EFLs view will contravene the £39m limit. Until the re-stated accounts are calculated, we dont know if thats correct or not, but what the EFL are wanting to do, by inferring a points deduction is hold Derby guilty until proven innocent. Not the way society operates. A case of the cart before the horse.
Lastly,
8) There is ZERO precedent for retrospectively awarding a points deduction after the season ends. The season ended when the final whistle went when Brentford beat Swansea. If it happens (points deduction) it has to apply to the new season. Maccersfield is not applicable as that was a case of a club winding up. Sheffield Wednesday were given the grace of their points deduction applying to the new season, so if the EFL waiver from that, then i personally suspect they can go explain that to the High Court.
Good points made here, an interesting read but I suspect there is more to it than you have suggested Gordon?
Swansea City
Ive outlined what has publicly been discussed for the last 20 months.
If there is more to it, then the EFL should make that public. Either the EFL .. or maybe Stephen Gibson OBE?.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/sport/football/middlesbrough-fc/derby-county-hit-back-middlesbrough-and-owner-steve-gibson-after-efl-investigation-635814%3Famp
Another Derby County fan commenting.
You are comparing apples with oranges. Derby and Sheffield have been found guilty of very different offences. They broke the rules by selling their stadium in one year and reporting it in the accounts of the previous year. Derby have been guilty of misvaluing their assets (players) in the accounts and it is yet to be determined if this meant a breach of profit and sustainability rules and any kind of unfair advantage. Hence the fine and no points deduction until the accounts are resubmitted. It would be very unfair to deduct points under P+S if there is no breach.
It may well come out that there is a breach and a points deduction occurs, but the only qualified neutral opinion ive seen believes we will still be within the allowances of P+S as our stadium sale was found to be within the rules and we have a significant amount of profit in the bank for that sale to keep us within the losses allowed.
There is no precident to deduct points for the offence we are currently guilty of and it is yet to be decided if we broke P+S. Why do you think a retrospective points deduction is appropriate?
… add … the EFL are operating a restraint of trade on Derby.
x) Transfer Embargo.
y) Restraining Derby on understanding their budget for 2021/22 as it amounts to a more or less £6m penalty with their threat of relegation to L1. So restraining Derbys ability to spend any money.
z) Restrains Derbys ability to obtain quality loan players. Case in point Mengi, will only agree a loan from Man Utd based on him playing Championship football. Even the Derby manager is now uncertain if he will be the manager given the clubs league status has been thrown into doubt.
The EFLs action to this point are clearly done with the intention of hurting Derby now, during the crucial summer transfer window where the EFL knows Derby are needing to rebuild the playing roster.
Pretty nasty stuff if you ask me. Guilty and punished despite not having the matter fully sorted out. I think .. despite some things not done correctly at Derby, the EFL have undermined their credibility beyond repair.
Another life-long Derby fan:
There is now a personal conflict being played out here – the EFL want Mel Morris, and DCFC are the scapegoat. The EFLs behaviour is what should be being questioned.
The derby fans commenting make some interesting points but the key part of this is that it is surely a farce that there are two fixture lists in operation and, as a direct result of this, means that two sides have no idea what the next season will hold for them in terms of the level they play at which will impact hugely on their summer plans.
The fact it has got to this stage is the biggest farce and a decision needs to be made and quickly. I don’t really care if Derby are guilty or not, the decision just needs to be made that keeps the league right.
You’re right. An offence committed in the 2016/17 season shouldn’t be punished in the 2020/21 season or even the 2021/22 season!
I won’t repeat what others have said above but too many external factors have got involved like Steve Gibson which has delayed and delayed the process.
Two independent committees, appointed by the EFL. The first dismissed the 3 charges, but the EFL appealed, and on appeal the player amortisation was deemed wrong, even though EFL had approved it and there was nothing in their rules about it. The second committee decided a 100k fine was required. It’s unclear why the EFL produced two fixtures but assume they are going to appeal again until they get a points deduction and get Derby relegated ideally this season or hopefully next! Meanwhile we remain under the embargo we’ve had for over a year! My thoughts are if you are hell bent on us having a points deduction just do it and leave us alone (nearly swore then!). The EFL have zero Integrity!!
You “don’t really care if Derby are guilty or not” but believe that their relegation to League One would be “the right outcome”. It is surprising that you would criticise the EFL while sharing their own point of view.
This is a witch-hunt by the EFL that is personal and not inline with any other issues. Derby have been found not guilty but an independent tribunal appointed by the EFL2 years ago. The EFL did not like the result so appealed and for 2 of the 3 accusation they were again found not guilty but on e technicality of player appraisal they were found guilty and fined £100,000. But the EFL are unhappy and have slandered Derby by saying they want a points deduction and relegation. Now all this noise from the toothless EFL has impacted on Derby over the past 2 years and they have been given unfair punishment due to the EFL appeals at critical times of the season. 2 transfer embargo’s due to the EFL appeals, lost potential buyers due to the ongoing saga of a not happening points deduction but its enough to put off buyers for the club.
The EFL are a Joke, Sheff Wed pleaded guilty to their charge as they sold their ground to themselves and then tried to put that money into last years accounts for FFP reasons.
Derby have never admitted any guilt but have accepted the fine and want to move on, its the bias vindictive EFL that are again wasting the leagues money and have been for 2 years chasing this witch-hunt and trying to get one back on Mel Morris who they feel got one over them with the ground sale.
Wish the ELF would grow up and stop this personally motivated witch-hunt toward Derby County and Mel Morris, its embarrassing.
The EFL’s treatment of Derby is in my opinion now personally aimed at the owner Mel Morris, as they couldn’t make the sale of the stadium stick, much to the annoyance of other owners. Suggestions have even been made via “well informed” national press that if Derby were to change ownership prior to the new season this may change the EFL’s view on Derby’s punishment. How bent is that if true! For pity’s sake how many “INDEPENDENT” panels / hearings / judgements are needed until they get the answer they want. “No go back in there and don’t come out until you get it right” seems to be the way this panning out.
In no way can the Sheffield sale of their stadium relate to ours and the amortization of players values was even done with the EFL’s knowledge and agreement from what I understand. If they cocked up in this respect they should by all means correct it but not by making a club a scapegoat.
Derby have already been punished with relation to these issues over a couple of years now as they have been subjected to embargos etc. and this is off putting to professionals Derby want to recruit.
As alot of people have already stated, it’s all Steve Gibson and the simple fact is that the EFL will keep disputing anything that is not what they want. They hire a external auditor then when it’s not the result they want they want it auditing again…..EFL & Steve Gibson are a joke.
As Swansea City have stated, [its now gone beyond Middlesborough owner Steve Gibson threatening legal action against the EFL unless Derby are persued]. Its now effecting the whole of the Championship and League One, as nobody knows their true fixture list. Ie;- are Huddersfield travelling to Derby or Wycombe in 6 weeks time?.
The real crux of the matter should now turn to what else Stephen Gibsons Middlebro lawyers had been saying to the EFL behind the scenes, corresponding with the EFL over the last 2 years which is turning 2 football leagues in the UK into a complete shambles.
Feel free to go public anytime now Stephen, bit of transparency now on what your role has been in all of this and what exactly got you so bent out of shape. Sore that Derby finished 6th and Middlesbro 7th in the 2018/19 season.. you better be sure of your facts to go on such a monumental witch hunt against your playing opponents off the field.
The thing that frustrates me the most is that, the EFL signed off on the amortisation policy, so Derby have been using that policy throughout that period. Had the EFL raised an issue with it at that point, it would have given Derby the opportunity to fix things during that three year period. They didn’t, and as a result are now seeking retrospective accounts that Derby are unable to affect in any way to correct potential overspending over that three year period.
The integrity of the EFL is absolutely questionable – it’s run by a group of con artists who are hell bent on making an example of Derby to the other EFL clubs. They don’t like to be wrong and are willing to drag one of their member clubs through the mud to find any way to prove they’re right!
Gordon’s summary is interesting, but he misses a few key points. Not saying I fully disagree but I don’t fully agree either.
Will declare my interest, am neither a fan of Derby or Swansea. Across his posts, he overlooks a few key points:
1) His so called Restraint of Trade argument is interesting but wrong. It is clear in the EFL Regulations that the EFL have significant powers in this area- be it while under Investigation, or be it as a Holding Pattern while a club has not submitted Accounts to CH beyond its deadline, or Accounts and Projections for the existing season to the EFL, or there is some kind of dispute with respect to these Accounts, or if the figures in March are over limits, an Embargo is an automatic holding pattern- e.g., it stops a club from gaming the system by signing players or spending while the EFL are not in possession of the full facts basically.
Derby fans who claim that it is punishment or should be factored in for any punishment are either mistaken or posting a misleading claim because it’s a part of the Process that is independent of the IDC, or the LAP- it has NO bearing on punishment and rightly so.
IDC=Independent Disciplinary Commission
LAP= League Arbitration Panel
Dispositive=Final Resolution
2) On Point 6 of his first post, Gordon fails to explain the difference between the IDC and LAP. The people who heard the original case last Summer were an IDC. The Appeal, well that was multi layered including Middlesbrough getting involved and the EFL trying to add new evidence, but I digress, the Appeal that was Dispositive was heard in late March, finalised in May by the LAP. This upheld part of the EFL case, ie that ERVs were impermissible from memory.
In theory, the LAP could have imposed a penalty or a final verdict right there but in practice there were doubts surrounding their jurisdiction hence they handed it back to the IDC. IDC is not dispositive and both sides can Appeal this verdict.
The verdict in q was as he points out, a £100k fine but ALSO the Restatement of the Accounts for the years in q- the period of 2015/16 to 2017/18. This will also have a knock on effect on what went after, both good and bad but it will have a knock on effect…plus even if Derby pass to 2018, Compliance to 2019 based on various sources looks fairly dodgy but we don’t know for sure and anyway 2019 is an irrelevant consideration in this particular case.
3 years to 2019 would require fresh charges if appropriate, about the possible FFP issues- in theory, could the EFL also work backwards to the 3 year period to 2016/17 and raise fresh charges there if the Restated numbers put them in breach? Consistency means I hope so!
He also mentions the High Court. I’d be interested to know which Regulations override which given that EFL Regulations quite clearly state cases must be settled through Arbitration…feel free, at your leisure etc.
https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules–regulations/section-9–arbitration/
Just for a little bit of context, LAP (League Arbitration Panel) is the upper body, IDC is arguably the lower one. Hence why the Appeals are finished there.