ExiledAjax Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 6 minutes ago, Sweeneys Penalties said: wonder what tune Derby will be singing on 31.1.22 Should be filing their (very) late accounts that day as well. Could be a busy little day for all involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said: Although another twist- seems Derby can't be that badly off if they're turning down bids...£450k I believe this one for Sibley was. It's one thing to hope to get more for him - though the later in the window the more the bids might decrease if they have not secured a new owner, or at least funding to complete their fixtures. It's quite another to say a player is not for sale. Doubtless their fans will be impressed but the Administrators are playing Russian roulette with their club. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 (edited) 9 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said: Should be filing their (very) late accounts that day as well. Could be a busy little day for all involved. Don't think their fans have ever mentioned it tbh. I could be wrong but it probably doesn't get much discussion, Thereafter they need to: Submit at the start of March the 2020/21 accounts and the 2021/22 P&S calculations to the EFL. And No later than the end of March, publish the 2020/21 accounts- if not submit to CH then publish I dunno on the website or such. If not, sanctions for each infraction please! Edited January 18, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledAjax Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said: Don't think their fans have ever mentioned it tbh. I could be wrong but it probably doesn't get much discussion, It will be interesting to see what they show. What are the potential penalties if they demonstrate P&S failings during those periods? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 (edited) 2 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said: It will be interesting to see what they show. What are the potential penalties if they demonstrate P&S failings during those periods? The entire period up to 2021 is covered by the settlement. I think there are still holes that can be picked though- say e.g. it shows no rent from club to stadium company, that's another problem. If it's just club and not consolidated then maybe worse...if they have understated numbers in any given year, while you can't get them for P&S- utmost good faith? Give no quarter I say! Hopefully further sanctions will follow for each new failing if they miss any one of these requirements. Edited January 18, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledAjax Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said: I believe that the entire period up to 2021 is covered by the settlement. I think there are still holes that can be picked though- say e.g. it shows no rent from club to stadium company, that's another problem. If it's just club and not consolidated then maybe worse...if they have understated numbers in any given year, while you can't get them for P&S- utmost good faith? Give no quarter I say! If that's the case then I guess right now there's not really any penalty to come from the accounts publication that could be worse than what Derby are already facing. I think there is your answer as to why it's not really being mentioned in relation to the administration, attempts to sell the Club, or other matters. There are much bigger issues at hand right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 2 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said: If that's the case then I guess right now there's not really any penalty to come from the accounts publication that could be worse than what Derby are already facing. I think there is your answer as to why it's not really being mentioned in relation to the administration, attempts to sell the Club, or other matters. There are much bigger issues at hand right now. Actually, misconduct charges can arise from missing deadlines probably but that's a secondary priority for another day. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 37 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said: They also if they haven't already, need to submit 5 years worth of accounts by 4pm on that day to the EFL not that it is mentioned anymore. Is this valid whilst in Administration? 50 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said: Although another twist- seems Derby can't be that badly off if they're turning down bids...£450k I believe this one for Sibley was. If they haven’t got funding this is gonna look really bad. 36 minutes ago, chinapig said: It's one thing to hope to get more for him - though the later in the window the more the bids might decrease if they have not secured a new owner, or at least funding to complete their fixtures. It's quite another to say a player is not for sale. Doubtless their fans will be impressed but the Administrators are playing Russian roulette with their club. Wonder if the worm might turn in the coming days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 1 minute ago, Davefevs said: Is this valid whilst in Administration? Should be- the settlement was reached with the administrators and the full June Order seemed to draw a distinction between in administration or not. ie Acknowledging that while they were in administration they wouldn't be required to submit to CH but at the same time, they would still have to publish- the distinction being between CH and on the website or similar. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke_bristol Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 11 minutes ago, Davefevs said: Is this valid whilst in Administration? If they haven’t got funding this is gonna look really bad. Wonder if the worm might turn in the coming days. Millwall might find that in a weeks time they’re getting a phone call and a conversation starting “so how how about Sibley for £450k”, at which point if I were Millwall I’d be suggesting £250k and that’s the final offer…. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 Here's one angle I don't qute get too. On the one hand, having done a bit of reading the LAP/IDC ordered Derby to put in restated and revised accounts and by extension P&S ones on 18th August 2021 or by that date. Surely however being overdue with the accounts is a delay and a breach in of itself- remember in the original case, one of Derby's defences was along the lines of: Well I can't find it now but basically I recall reading a procedural defence that if no annual accounts submitted then you can't be found in breach of FFP. Denial, deprivation possibly? They also knowingly gained that extra headroom through the incorrect application of amortisation- again grounds of some kind for a claim? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 34 minutes ago, luke_bristol said: Millwall might find that in a weeks time they’re getting a phone call and a conversation starting “so how how about Sibley for £450k”, at which point if I were Millwall I’d be suggesting £250k and that’s the final offer…. How do they stand if the player refuses to move? Wants to stay and fight the good fight and all that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 I'm starting to wonder, if they can continue to turn down bids for players in administration then clearly their money worries overstated and Middlesbrough and Wycombe should press on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 14 minutes ago, Lanterne Rouge said: How do they stand if the player refuses to move? Wants to stay and fight the good fight and all that? They can’t force a player. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 Just now, Davefevs said: They can’t force a player. I did wonder. Strange times make for strange outcomes and all that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristol Rob Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 51 minutes ago, Davefevs said: They can’t force a player. 8 men had a dream... But you are right, they can't be forced. And because of 82, pretty sure the rules changed over who owns players registration. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossi the Robin Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 Colin Murray on Radio 5 live doing a whole programme on the in’s and out’s at Derby, Mel Morris, Parachute payments etc now. Very interesting 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waconda Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 2 hours ago, Lanterne Rouge said: How do they stand if the player refuses to move? Wants to stay and fight the good fight and all that? Totally within his rights not to move, he has a legal work contract. But if Derby goes bust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledAjax Posted January 18, 2022 Report Share Posted January 18, 2022 21 minutes ago, VT05763 said: Totally within his rights not to move, he has a legal work contract. But if Derby goes bust. He'll get another one at another club. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 19, 2022 Report Share Posted January 19, 2022 (edited) Quote Concerned onlooker7 HRS AGO We are slowly drifting into oblivion without a sponsor. This is Derby, the Derby that can realise 20-30k fans every home game, not Bury at 3-5k fans every home match. Middlesbrough and Wycome, yes Wycombe could force our demise....anybody!!! Please help us. From one of the comments below the line on the DET- fools like this don't help their cause. Edited January 19, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 19, 2022 Report Share Posted January 19, 2022 (edited) Just watching the Urgent Question bit and the guy who is answering the questions- is he the Sports Minister- made a very unusual claim. Said the Treasury were an Unsecured Creditor- pretty sure they are now Preferential and Secondary Preferential, at least for certain categories of debt!? 21:00-22:00. A lie or an error? Edited January 19, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 19, 2022 Report Share Posted January 19, 2022 https://www.change.org/p/make-derby-county-pay-the-39m-outstanding-to-hmrc Here is a petition I can get behind! Sign and share...! Although for purposes of accuracy it is £28-29m not £39m!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDOXO Posted January 19, 2022 Report Share Posted January 19, 2022 32 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said: https://www.change.org/p/make-derby-county-pay-the-39m-outstanding-to-hmrc Here is a petition I can get behind! Sign and share...! Although for purposes of accuracy it is £28-29m not £39m!! Just signed that MF! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
semblar Posted January 19, 2022 Report Share Posted January 19, 2022 4 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said: Just watching the Urgent Question bit and the guy who is answering the questions- is he the Sports Minister- made a very unusual claim. Said the Treasury were an Unsecured Creditor- pretty sure they are now Preferential and Secondary Preferential, at least for certain categories of debt!? 21:00-22:00. A lie or an error? "Unsecured" is correct but not complete. - you then subdivide the unsecured creditors into the other categories. You are only a secured creditor if you hold a charge over assets or the company as a whole. They are top of the queue, followed by the administrators (first preferential - but still unsecured technically), HMRC (second preferential) then legally all the rest, but EFL rules split into football and non-football 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waconda Posted January 19, 2022 Report Share Posted January 19, 2022 8 hours ago, ExiledAjax said: He'll get another one at another club. Exactly, so he has no reason to move now unless HE wants to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exAtyeoMax Posted January 19, 2022 Report Share Posted January 19, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellow&Blue&Red Posted January 19, 2022 Report Share Posted January 19, 2022 Just cannot believe how badly this has been handled by the administrators. They've got a weak negotiating position and they've decided to take it public! They've complained about how unfairly they're being treated by the EFL, by WW and MFC and all three have come out with well argued presentations of their positions. As a result - a direct result - of the administrators poorly thought through tactics, WW's and MFC's positions have strengthened. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midred Posted January 19, 2022 Report Share Posted January 19, 2022 Thank goodness for Robbie Savage, on his days off from Macclesfield he could volunteer at Pride Park! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTRFTG Posted January 19, 2022 Report Share Posted January 19, 2022 9 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said: Just watching the Urgent Question bit and the guy who is answering the questions- is he the Sports Minister- made a very unusual claim. Said the Treasury were an Unsecured Creditor- pretty sure they are now Preferential and Secondary Preferential, at least for certain categories of debt!? 21:00-22:00. A lie or an error? HMRC are a preferential creditor. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTRFTG Posted January 19, 2022 Report Share Posted January 19, 2022 18 hours ago, ExiledAjax said: Based on the various announcements made over the past few days, it seems as though the stadium issue has been solved behind the scenes. I don't know how taht has been dealt with, but no one is mentioning it as a problem anymore. Seemingly the only real blocker right now is the debate around whether or not the WW and Boro claims should be treated as 'Football Creditor' debt per the terms of the EFL articles of association. I agree with Derby fans that on a face value reading of the articles the claims don't currently fit the definition of 'Football Creditor'. However, I also think there is some merit in the EFL's explanation yesterday that the fact that the claims may yet crystallise into a due payment that would come under the definition of 'Football Creditor' means that there should at least be pressure on any PB to provide assurance that the potential awards can be met in the future. There are good arguments on both side IMO, and I'm glad I am just an observer. The EFL couldn't have been clearer. Wycombe & Boro lodged their complaints in the correct form, within the appropriate timeframe and it's now in the capable hands of the independent arbiter to adjudicate. In that respect and under EFL's articles of association it was a failure on the part of the administrators not to include the risk of potential penalties within their liability assessment or declare as much to potential bidders. As much as Derby like to think themselves the victim, their position remains entirely of their own making. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.