No, we were relegated when we finished in 22nd place in the league table on the last day of the season.
The "delay" was because the football league's deadline allowed them to submit their accounts after the cutoff for their points deduction to be applied last season. Of course they therefore did what they did, any other club in the same position would have done so.
@eric_plant said:
No, we were relegated when we finished in 22nd place in the league table on the last day of the season.
The "delay" was because the football league's deadline allowed them to submit their accounts after the cutoff for their points deduction to be applied last season. Of course they therefore did what they did, any other club in the same position would have done so.
Nothing you are saying is incorrect about timing. I guess I would just make my point as follows: if a Formula 1 team was found to make an illegal modification in an attempt to gain an unfair advantage, but they were not punished till the following season, should the car that finished behind them in the standings have a case?
@eric_plant said:
Maybe, I just don't share the "Derby cheated us out of a place in the championship" line. It just doesn't feel that way to me.
By “Maybe” you mean yes any other club would be doing exactly what we are. As for the reasoning there’s a direct cause and effect if Derby hadn’t deliberately withheld resubmitting accounts that showed they had been cheating they would have been deducted points in that season and been relegated in our place that is why the EFL published two sets of fixtures.
This caused Wycombe Wanderers a very provable loss of income in the following season and more importantly fans of our club were robbed of the opportunity of seeing live at least a season in the championship some of us will NEVER have that chance again .
The whole Wayne Rooney heroic attempt at staying up makes me sick they cheated and then they admitted it they cheated again to stay up and then they admitted that. where is the difficulty.
The fact Mel Morris admitted on radio to delaying the account submission as he knew it would result in a points deduction that would have relegated Derby and meant we stayed up is the bit that sticks in my throat. The accounts were, by implication, ready for submission but deliberately withheld, most probably because he knew he was planning on admin and he was hoping a Championship club would be more saleable than a Lg1 destined for Lg2
I’m sorry to sound so agitated usually I try and keep my posts on the lighter side but I remember taking part in all those minutes of applause and I don't like the thought of people like those in charge at Derby yakking it up while we remember.
@carrickblue said:
The fact Mel Morris admitted on radio to delaying the account submission as he knew it would result in a points deduction that would have relegated Derby and meant we stayed up is the bit that sticks in my throat. The accounts were, by implication, ready for submission but deliberately withheld, most probably because he knew he was planning on admin and he was hoping a Championship club would be more saleable than a Lg1 destined for Lg2
I’m a simple soul and have struggled to retain some of the chronological, legalistic and other details of this ongoing (seemingly interminable) saga but your post seems to me to strike at the heart of the matter.
I was very much in the ‘Derby didn’t cheat us into relegation’ camp originally.
What changed it for me was the chairman openly admitting (so I believe from what was said/written) that they deliberately chose to withhold publishing their accounts beyond the deadline to ensure that the resulting points deduction would be applied this season rather than last.
So if they had complied with the deadline (and by inference they could have) they would have been deducted points and would therefore been relegated instead of us.
By choosing not to they in effect “cheated” us out of relegation.
Now, whether that is cheated in an way that clearly broke the rules of the EFL or whether they cheated in a way that was more a case of bending the rules (aka ‘time wasting bastards’) I don’t know and one for the legal people to worry about.
But taking a view that we ‘wuz robbed’ is, I think, a perfectly reasonable position given what we (think we) know.
He did openly admit that on BBC Radio Derby, in an interview, the transcription of which Rob C recounted back to the interviewer, in a separate interview, who replied to Rob: “Yes, he did say that”. So I don’t think “we think” we know that. We know that.
@LeedsBlue said:
He did openly admit that on BBC Radio Derby, in an interview, the transcription of which Rob C recounted back to the interviewer, in a separate interview, who replied to Rob: “Yes, he did say that”. So I don’t think “we think” we know that. We know that.
Interesting that the interview is no longer on the BBC Derby website. Partisan? Legal issues? Been leant on?
But this delayed submission of the accounts, it was still within the deadline given to them wasn't it?
If I've got it wrong and it wasn't, and the deadline was in time for them to have been deducted the points last season then I've obviously misunderstood the whole thing and I'll shut up
It’s a dismal world that Eric lives in where deadlines can be breached and that the world has not ceased to exist means that fundamentally it is permissible to breach deadlines. That thinking can be applied to anything, same with the rules in the first place, it’s just an exercise in transgression and then we glibly assert that since it has happened it has therefore been allowed to happen and moreover in any given situation you would have done unto me as I have done unto you, so that’s ok then. What is being described is the law of the jungle, the strong will do as they will and the weak will suffer what they must. That’s why we have laws in the first place and regulatory bodies to enforce those laws and it’s one of the most worrying trends of the last few decades that our public institutions have been eroded to the point where regulation is so weak as to make this commonplace, Alan Swann of Peterborough is too small and petty a subject for Eric, what a surprise therefore to find such a shallow nihilist view from our philosopher king.
Facts are that only Rotherham earned less points than we did on the pitch that season.
We could have stayed up due to two other clubs off pitch historical financial mismanagement but that would have been fortuitous at best.
Going on and on about perceived past injustice seems a little bit Peterborough to me. We had a season in the Championship - beyond the wildest dreams to those of us old enough to remember the Isthmian League - and are now at the top end of League One with a chance of promotion again. Focus on and enjoy the present.
Our points total was enough to stay up in several previous seasons. So that's that argument dead. We went down because Derby delayed. If we were 10 points adrift it would be different, we weren't.
@eric_plant said:
And plucking an arbitrary "robbed us of three seasons in the championship" out of the air just seems bizarre to me
I’ve already commented on that, @eric_plant but I haven’t had the chance to endorse @MorrisItal_ ’s statement about some of us NEVER having the chance to watch Wycombe live in the Championship. In the lead up to this season I was encouraged by Rob Couhig’s assertion (in good faith) that we WOULD be playing in the Championship this season. At that time I was reasonably confident that I would be well enough to attend most, if not all, home matches. I renewed my season ticket, joined the Honours Lounge and secured a place in the car park.
Unfortunately, I decided after three or four games that the stress (largely irrational/psychological but in genuine fear of repeat attacks of disabling tachycardia) leading up to kickoff outweighed the pleasure of being there amongst friends and enjoying a pre match pint.
That’s my personal story and I thank the Gasroom for allowing the indulgence but I’m absolutely certain that @Morrisital_ is right and that I am just one of many who have been robbed.
@Ed_ said:
It’s a dismal world that Eric lives in where deadlines can be breached and that the world has not ceased to exist means that fundamentally it is permissible to breach deadlines. That thinking can be applied to anything, same with the rules in the first place, it’s just an exercise in transgression and then we glibly assert that since it has happened it has therefore been allowed to happen and moreover in any given situation you would have done unto me as I have done unto you, so that’s ok then. What is being described is the law of the jungle, the strong will do as they will and the weak will suffer what they must. That’s why we have laws in the first place and regulatory bodies to enforce those laws and it’s one of the most worrying trends of the last few decades that our public institutions have been eroded to the point where regulation is so weak as to make this commonplace, Alan Swann of Peterborough is too small and petty a subject for Eric, what a surprise therefore to find such a shallow nihilist view from our philosopher king.
@eric_plant said:
But this delayed submission of the accounts, it was still within the deadline given to them wasn't it?
If I've got it wrong and it wasn't, and the deadline was in time for them to have been deducted the points last season then I've obviously misunderstood the whole thing and I'll shut up
I've just checked, the deadline was 24th August, by which point we'd already played four games in League 1 (after a one week extension from the original deadline of 17th, on which date we were playing our 3rd.
What does everyone think would have happened if they'd submitted their accounts on 24th? I don't think we'd now be in the Championship but if anyone can prove otherwise go for it
Derby County Football Club Limited are shown on the Companies House website as being overdue on their June 2019 accounts. These were due in June 2020.
Deadlines are distractions though. The cheating that would have been evident in those accounts has been going on for years and our season long look in to the mad financial world of the top two divisions has shown how clubs do it in plain sight.
We're happy to bend the rules on the pitch to suit us if it gives us an advantage - fortuitously-timed injuries, Stockdale telling fans to keep hold of the ball - and even celebrate the odd defender committing a professional foul to 'take one for the team'. Yet when Derby do exactly the same off the pitch - bend the rules as far as they'll go to give them a professional advantage - we think that gives us the right to claim millions in compensation.
I suspect the silence from Rob Couhig on this matter over the past few weeks is because he's been persuaded that there's absolutely no chance he's getting more than a token payment to end his claim, which he will have agreed on the basis the administrators don't disclose the terms to save him embarrassment.
All the criticism that members of this board have - of the lax deadlines, of the ridiculous double-fixtures release, of the toothless punishments - are the responsibility of the EFL. It's their mess and it's them that deserve the criticism. All Derby have done is exploit the situation as best they can to benefit their club.
They're rule-exploiting bastards and they know what they are. But it's the EFL that set the rules. We exploit them on the pitch every week. Derby exploited them off the pitch. It's the EFL to blame and the EFL that desperately needs reform to stop this happening time and time again.
Of course I haven't. If the chairman had anything interesting to say I would assume it would have trickled out via other media by now. Each to their own but I'm afraid a 75-minute interview with the chairman is pretty low down my listening priorities.
@aloysius said:
Of course I haven't. If the chairman had anything interesting to say I would assume it would have trickled out via other media by now. Each to their own but I'm afraid a 75-minute interview with the chairman is pretty low down my listening priorities.
@aloysius said:
Of course I haven't. If the chairman had anything interesting to say I would assume it would have trickled out via other media by now. Each to their own but I'm afraid a 75-minute interview with the chairman is pretty low down my listening priorities.
‘the silence of Rob Couhig’
‘a 75 min interview with the chairman is pretty low down my listening priorities’
@Right_in_the_Middle said:
Couhig’s silence is because there is nothing to say. To suggest otherwise is nonsense.
Have you listened to his 75 min interview with Wycombe Sounds uploaded to iTunes yesterday?
Er you've listened to the 75 minutes (I presume) and are saying he's silent on this issue.
But actually, yes, I would like you to spoon-feed me. What did he say in this 75-minute opus that was noteworthy?
@mooneyman I support the club. I'll be here a long time after the current chairman sells up and ships out. The more you love daddy, the more it'll hurt you when he leaves.
@Right_in_the_Middle said:
Couhig’s silence is because there is nothing to say. To suggest otherwise is nonsense.
Have you listened to his 75 min interview with Wycombe Sounds uploaded to iTunes yesterday?
Er you've listened to the 75 minutes (I presume) and are saying he's silent on this issue.
But actually, yes, I would like you to spoon-feed me. What did he say in this 75-minute opus that was noteworthy?
@mooneyman I support the club. I'll be here a long time after the current chairman sells up and ships out. The more you love daddy, the more it'll hurt you when he leaves.
You don’t get it that easy. We are playing aeroplanes first. It’s much more fun.
Comments
No, we were relegated when we finished in 22nd place in the league table on the last day of the season.
The "delay" was because the football league's deadline allowed them to submit their accounts after the cutoff for their points deduction to be applied last season. Of course they therefore did what they did, any other club in the same position would have done so.
Nothing you are saying is incorrect about timing. I guess I would just make my point as follows: if a Formula 1 team was found to make an illegal modification in an attempt to gain an unfair advantage, but they were not punished till the following season, should the car that finished behind them in the standings have a case?
And if another club was in our position
Maybe, I just don't share the "Derby cheated us out of a place in the championship" line. It just doesn't feel that way to me.
And plucking an arbitrary "robbed us of three seasons in the championship" out of the air just seems bizarre to me
By “Maybe” you mean yes any other club would be doing exactly what we are. As for the reasoning there’s a direct cause and effect if Derby hadn’t deliberately withheld resubmitting accounts that showed they had been cheating they would have been deducted points in that season and been relegated in our place that is why the EFL published two sets of fixtures.
This caused Wycombe Wanderers a very provable loss of income in the following season and more importantly fans of our club were robbed of the opportunity of seeing live at least a season in the championship some of us will NEVER have that chance again .
The whole Wayne Rooney heroic attempt at staying up makes me sick they cheated and then they admitted it they cheated again to stay up and then they admitted that. where is the difficulty.
The fact Mel Morris admitted on radio to delaying the account submission as he knew it would result in a points deduction that would have relegated Derby and meant we stayed up is the bit that sticks in my throat. The accounts were, by implication, ready for submission but deliberately withheld, most probably because he knew he was planning on admin and he was hoping a Championship club would be more saleable than a Lg1 destined for Lg2
I’m sorry to sound so agitated usually I try and keep my posts on the lighter side but I remember taking part in all those minutes of applause and I don't like the thought of people like those in charge at Derby yakking it up while we remember.
@Shev said “probably robbed us….” to be fair, and perhaps should have said “potentially robbed us…”.
I’m a simple soul and have struggled to retain some of the chronological, legalistic and other details of this ongoing (seemingly interminable) saga but your post seems to me to strike at the heart of the matter.
I was very much in the ‘Derby didn’t cheat us into relegation’ camp originally.
What changed it for me was the chairman openly admitting (so I believe from what was said/written) that they deliberately chose to withhold publishing their accounts beyond the deadline to ensure that the resulting points deduction would be applied this season rather than last.
So if they had complied with the deadline (and by inference they could have) they would have been deducted points and would therefore been relegated instead of us.
By choosing not to they in effect “cheated” us out of relegation.
Now, whether that is cheated in an way that clearly broke the rules of the EFL or whether they cheated in a way that was more a case of bending the rules (aka ‘time wasting bastards’) I don’t know and one for the legal people to worry about.
But taking a view that we ‘wuz robbed’ is, I think, a perfectly reasonable position given what we (think we) know.
He did openly admit that on BBC Radio Derby, in an interview, the transcription of which Rob C recounted back to the interviewer, in a separate interview, who replied to Rob: “Yes, he did say that”. So I don’t think “we think” we know that. We know that.
Interesting that the interview is no longer on the BBC Derby website. Partisan? Legal issues? Been leant on?
I’m not sure it’s worth long posts explaining it to Eric, he understands perfectly but his factory setting is belligerent contrarianism.
But this delayed submission of the accounts, it was still within the deadline given to them wasn't it?
If I've got it wrong and it wasn't, and the deadline was in time for them to have been deducted the points last season then I've obviously misunderstood the whole thing and I'll shut up
It’s a dismal world that Eric lives in where deadlines can be breached and that the world has not ceased to exist means that fundamentally it is permissible to breach deadlines. That thinking can be applied to anything, same with the rules in the first place, it’s just an exercise in transgression and then we glibly assert that since it has happened it has therefore been allowed to happen and moreover in any given situation you would have done unto me as I have done unto you, so that’s ok then. What is being described is the law of the jungle, the strong will do as they will and the weak will suffer what they must. That’s why we have laws in the first place and regulatory bodies to enforce those laws and it’s one of the most worrying trends of the last few decades that our public institutions have been eroded to the point where regulation is so weak as to make this commonplace, Alan Swann of Peterborough is too small and petty a subject for Eric, what a surprise therefore to find such a shallow nihilist view from our philosopher king.
Facts are that only Rotherham earned less points than we did on the pitch that season.
We could have stayed up due to two other clubs off pitch historical financial mismanagement but that would have been fortuitous at best.
Going on and on about perceived past injustice seems a little bit Peterborough to me. We had a season in the Championship - beyond the wildest dreams to those of us old enough to remember the Isthmian League - and are now at the top end of League One with a chance of promotion again. Focus on and enjoy the present.
Our points total was enough to stay up in several previous seasons. So that's that argument dead. We went down because Derby delayed. If we were 10 points adrift it would be different, we weren't.
I’ve already commented on that, @eric_plant but I haven’t had the chance to endorse @MorrisItal_ ’s statement about some of us NEVER having the chance to watch Wycombe live in the Championship. In the lead up to this season I was encouraged by Rob Couhig’s assertion (in good faith) that we WOULD be playing in the Championship this season. At that time I was reasonably confident that I would be well enough to attend most, if not all, home matches. I renewed my season ticket, joined the Honours Lounge and secured a place in the car park.
Unfortunately, I decided after three or four games that the stress (largely irrational/psychological but in genuine fear of repeat attacks of disabling tachycardia) leading up to kickoff outweighed the pleasure of being there amongst friends and enjoying a pre match pint.
That’s my personal story and I thank the Gasroom for allowing the indulgence but I’m absolutely certain that @Morrisital_ is right and that I am just one of many who have been robbed.
Which deadline did they breach?
It was post-deadline.
I've just checked, the deadline was 24th August, by which point we'd already played four games in League 1 (after a one week extension from the original deadline of 17th, on which date we were playing our 3rd.
What does everyone think would have happened if they'd submitted their accounts on 24th? I don't think we'd now be in the Championship but if anyone can prove otherwise go for it
Derby County Football Club Limited are shown on the Companies House website as being overdue on their June 2019 accounts. These were due in June 2020.
Deadlines are distractions though. The cheating that would have been evident in those accounts has been going on for years and our season long look in to the mad financial world of the top two divisions has shown how clubs do it in plain sight.
@bookertease's suggestion is an interesting one.
We're happy to bend the rules on the pitch to suit us if it gives us an advantage - fortuitously-timed injuries, Stockdale telling fans to keep hold of the ball - and even celebrate the odd defender committing a professional foul to 'take one for the team'. Yet when Derby do exactly the same off the pitch - bend the rules as far as they'll go to give them a professional advantage - we think that gives us the right to claim millions in compensation.
I suspect the silence from Rob Couhig on this matter over the past few weeks is because he's been persuaded that there's absolutely no chance he's getting more than a token payment to end his claim, which he will have agreed on the basis the administrators don't disclose the terms to save him embarrassment.
All the criticism that members of this board have - of the lax deadlines, of the ridiculous double-fixtures release, of the toothless punishments - are the responsibility of the EFL. It's their mess and it's them that deserve the criticism. All Derby have done is exploit the situation as best they can to benefit their club.
They're rule-exploiting bastards and they know what they are. But it's the EFL that set the rules. We exploit them on the pitch every week. Derby exploited them off the pitch. It's the EFL to blame and the EFL that desperately needs reform to stop this happening time and time again.
Couhig’s silence is because there is nothing to say. To suggest otherwise is nonsense.
Have you listened to his 75 min interview with Wycombe Sounds uploaded to iTunes yesterday?
Of course I haven't. If the chairman had anything interesting to say I would assume it would have trickled out via other media by now. Each to their own but I'm afraid a 75-minute interview with the chairman is pretty low down my listening priorities.
Not sure why you profess to support our club?
‘the silence of Rob Couhig’
‘a 75 min interview with the chairman is pretty low down my listening priorities’
Would you like me to spoon feed you?
Er you've listened to the 75 minutes (I presume) and are saying he's silent on this issue.
But actually, yes, I would like you to spoon-feed me. What did he say in this 75-minute opus that was noteworthy?
@mooneyman I support the club. I'll be here a long time after the current chairman sells up and ships out. The more you love daddy, the more it'll hurt you when he leaves.
You don’t get it that easy. We are playing aeroplanes first. It’s much more fun.