Jump to content
IGNORED

Derby County


havanatopia

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I’m really torn between wanting Derby to be saved (for the sake of staff and their good fans) and them to go bust as it will show a big club can go under…and hopefully lead to positive reform.  Bury weren’t big enough unfortunately to trigger the right changes.

I want Mel Morris to pay…

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I’m really torn between wanting Derby to be saved (for the sake of staff and their good fans) and them to go bust as it will show a big club can go under…and hopefully lead to positive reform.  Bury weren’t big enough unfortunately to trigger the right changes.

If they do go bust the individual(s) involved in causing the financial issues can still just walk away without any fallout from it. Whilst Morris may have lost some of his money he’s invested in the club during his tenure, he has walked away from 30+ mil of debt that he left on the clubs books and made it someone else’s problem. 
 

I’m not sure what that would do to stop it happening again with another owner at another club. Where has ambition and throw money around. Then get bored or don’t realise the costs and just walk away and leave a boat load of debt. 
 

Wigan being slightly different being a new owner to Chuck them straight into Admin, however didn’t want to fund it and just dropped them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, cider11 said:

If they do go bust the individual(s) involved in causing the financial issues can still just walk away without any fallout from it. Whilst Morris may have lost some of his money he’s invested in the club during his tenure, he has walked away from 30+ mil of debt that he left on the clubs books and made it someone else’s problem. 
 

I’m not sure what that would do to stop it happening again with another owner at another club. Where has ambition and throw money around. Then get bored or don’t realise the costs and just walk away and leave a boat load of debt. 
 

Wigan being slightly different being a new owner to Chuck them straight into Admin, however didn’t want to fund it and just dropped them.

One of the major reasons owners turn away is they're egotists who don't need the hassle.  When chants turn against them and particularly their family, it's easy to understand why they decide to get out.

City fans to take note.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BTRFTG said:

One of the major reasons owners turn away is they're egotists who don't need the hassle.  When chants turn against them and particularly their family, it's easy to understand why they decide to get out.

The tiny minority of City fans to take note.

Fixed that for you....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

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.

The last line sums it up. 
 

However now the administrators are being thoroughly inept to add to the malaise as you imply. I’m not sure how they get out of this unless they find someone who is so wealthy the 65m mentioned yesterday by Courhig is irrelevant.  
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Afternoon again.

Finally we have some more clarification on where we seem to be at - even if we don't like the position. As much as I know Mel Morris is to blame and the admin have been less use than the proverbial chocolate teapot the push to get MPs involved and pressure on the EFL is at least pulling all the components into the open. As a fan I'd much rather know the true position than be left wondering.

The admin have committed to a statement today - however after reading the MPs updates post a meeting with them this afternoon I can see what's going to be said: "we're screwed if Boro/Wycombe don't drop their claims as player sales wouldn't cover what else we can recoup". Don't shoot the messenger - I know MM could resolve this and am perplexed by the MPs at least not flagging this. The Labour MPs especially I thought would bring this up more.

Couple of questions had been directed at me before from a couple of days ago

EFL - admitting they authorised Boro to sue us on order that they themselves didn't get sued. In the first hearing the choice of an expert on ground valuation of the ground who was anything but/didn't do their work to sufficient standard. Don't get me wrong - we're the guilty party but examples of things which leave us nervous about EFLs ability related to Derby.

Their last statement where they spent however many paragraphs saying they don't have a vendetta was remarkable!

Mr P - noticed a few references to deadline of this month for accounts to be restated. There were discussions between us/EFL after this ruling along the lines of we can't restate them as whilst the amortisation policy wasn't in line with what EFL wanted it was from a legal perspective a method which didn't break the law. How that ended up I don't know and I'm not qualified to know, but that was the discussion between Derby/EFL at the time.

Again I can't defend MM. I won't. I just want my club not to be liquidated. I want MM to pay and don't understand why more pressure across the board isn't exerted on him but at the minute our best chance appears EFL/Boro/Wycombe.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should Middlesbrough and Wycombe drop their clams Derby have  lied and cheated also not paying taxes 

why should they get a way with it

I do feel sorry for the Derby fans

but I also feel for Middlesbrough and Wycombe look what they lost

Many companies and people lost jobs because of the pandemic that’s what the mps should be looking out for not a badly run football club

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Coombsy said:

Why should Middlesbrough and Wycombe drop their clams Derby have  lied and cheated also not paying taxes 

why should they get a way with it

I do feel sorry for the Derby fans

but I also feel for Middlesbrough and Wycombe look what they lost

Many companies and people lost jobs because of the pandemic that’s what the mps should be looking out for not a badly run football club

 

 

 

 

Maybe they were fishing in Canadian waters? 
 

Sorry. ? ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Derby_Ram said:

EFL - admitting they authorised Boro to sue us on order that they themselves didn't get sued.

There is quite a lot to unpack here. This relates to the original complaints by Boro in September 2019 yes? Where they had issues with the valuation of PP. 

What exactly is meant by "...admitting they authorised...". Is authorised the correct word to use there? Could you point me to this "admission"? I couldn't see this issue addressed in either the recent EFL statement or the Boro one. 

Just trying to get a handle on what exactly went on there that means they authorised Boro's Claim.

3 hours ago, Derby_Ram said:

Their last statement where they spent however many paragraphs saying they don't have a vendetta was remarkable!

Agreed, I thought it pretty foolish to grant that accusation the dignity of a response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

There is quite a lot to unpack here. This relates to the original complaints by Boro in September 2019 yes? Where they had issues with the valuation of PP. 

What exactly is meant by "...admitting they authorised...". Is authorised the correct word to use there? Could you point me to this "admission"? I couldn't see this issue addressed in either the recent EFL statement or the Boro one. 

Just trying to get a handle on what exactly went on there that means they authorised Boro's Claim.

Matt Slater from the Athletic did a podcast interview with Rick Parry last year where he discussed the chain of events. Over the last couple of days the local MPs alluded to it in their comments post meeting the EFL. In today's meeting between the admin and MPs it appears the admin have clung onto it too although I take anything Quantuma say with a large pinch of salt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Derby_Ram said:

Matt Slater from the Athletic did a podcast interview with Rick Parry last year where he discussed the chain of events. Over the last couple of days the local MPs alluded to it in their comments post meeting the EFL. In today's meeting between the admin and MPs it appears the admin have clung onto it too although I take anything Quantuma say with a large pinch of salt.

Quantuma will have a lot to answer for if County go under. Every bloody week they were on the verge of a preferred bidder. We only have their word for it on pretty much every issue until now as Middlesbrough, Wycombe and The EFL have had to give statements of position due to the deluge of garbage stemming from Pride Park. 
 

Middlesbrough’s  action was started 18 months ago. How the hell are MPs arguing about who has a case or not 10 days before the club go under. 
 

Morris did everything to ignore getting before arbitration and Quantuma have used the same rationale. But now you have Wycombe who are owned by a renowned lawyer into the bargain as well. Sigh I feel for a lot of Rams supporters, however some of the abuse Rob Couhig is getting on the Derby County fans forum is not only wrong, nasty and I’ll informed  but if I were him I would let Derby go under. Hopefully for the more sane Rams fans he is a better man than me!!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

Quantuma will have a lot to answer for if County go under. Every bloody week they were on the verge of a preferred bidder. We only have their word for it on pretty much every issue until now as Middlesbrough, Wycombe and The EFL have had to give statements of position due to the deluge of garbage stemming from Pride Park. 

Whether we survive or not Quantuma have a lot to answer for.

41 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

Middlesbrough’s  action was started 18 months ago. How the hell are MPs arguing about who has a case or not 10 days before the club go under. 

This is where the EFL have to pull their finger out. They have to say whether they believe the claim - and Wycombe's - fall under football creditors or not. 

Do I believe Quantuma will announce a PB if the claim is ruled not - dubious. But they have to decide and decide quickly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Derby_Ram said:

Whether we survive or not Quantuma have a lot to answer for.

This is where the EFL have to pull their finger out. They have to say whether they believe the claim - and Wycombe's - fall under football creditors or not. 

Do I believe Quantuma will announce a PB if the claim is ruled not - dubious. But they have to decide and decide quickly.

I think, without a qualified or forensic understanding of accounts or law that pretty much sums it up.

These claims.

If they have merit, the EFL need to decide where - and quickly. If they are football creditors, they need to say.

If they don't, then the EFL need to come out and say that these claims  outside of EFL governance then they also need to be crystal.

The bit I struggle with is that of course they should be football creditors, they are claiming a loss based of Derby not playing by the rules in the league.

The fact the EFL won't back that up suggests that after all this time, says we aren't sure.

Are the rules (for the EFL) really that grey?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Derby_Ram said:

Matt Slater from the Athletic did a podcast interview with Rick Parry last year where he discussed the chain of events. Over the last couple of days the local MPs alluded to it in their comments post meeting the EFL. In today's meeting between the admin and MPs it appears the admin have clung onto it too although I take anything Quantuma say with a large pinch of salt.

Thanks. That doesn't quite tell me how the EFL can be said to have authorised Boro's Claim.

Do you have a link or transcript of the Parry interview?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Derby_Ram said:

Whether we survive or not Quantuma have a lot to answer for.

This is where the EFL have to pull their finger out. They have to say whether they believe the claim - and Wycombe's - fall under football creditors or not. 

Do I believe Quantuma will announce a PB if the claim is ruled not - dubious. But they have to decide and decide quickly.

For a short order answer. Again this is an old claim that has been ignored and not got into the relevant body for a decision because the administrations at Derby (MM and Quantuma) have done everything they can to avoid it. 
 

BUT one thing is clear, The EFL will not allow Derby County FC to obfuscate to their advantage again. 
 

The EFL have been dragged through the mud by Derby County, I would suggest there is no one on any board at the EFL cares less anymore about the outcome particularly at its other member clubs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Derby are kicked out of the league we'll lose the 3 points we gained from the recent home win. I suppose it would mean only 2 going down but since Derby are almost certain to go down anyway it would probably leave us in a slightly worse position than now'

Of the teams below us at present we'll lose 3 points to Hull and Cardiff and 2 points to Reading and Swansea based on their results against Derby. Birmingham, Peterborough and Barnsley will be in the same boat as us since they both beat Derby in earlier games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I’m really torn between wanting Derby to be saved (for the sake of staff and their good fans) and them to go bust as it will show a big club can go under…and hopefully lead to positive reform.  Bury weren’t big enough unfortunately to trigger the right changes.

Given the discussion in the House of Commons on Tuesday, I'll be very surprised if there isn't reform, no matter what the outcome for Derby is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the EFL clear. Their role is to attempt to have members in dispute resolve their differences to the benefit of all, without resort to Court.  Where that mediation process doesn't work to support resolving the matter via an independent arbiter. EFL does not itself act as judge. In that respect they made clear they had sought submissions from all 3 parties. Boro commencing activity over a year ago and Wycombe in response to Derby's intransigent attitude.

EFL will let the independent body rule whether Boro & Wycombe's claims are football related (haven't seen an argument why they wouldn't be,) and if that's the finding they'll administer under their existing procedures.

As is, it seems to me the EFL have bent over backwards to give Derby chance after chance. I didn't realise, for example, that once in administration membership is  annulled, though the decision temporarily suspended, such you have a chance to fulfill obligations. It's not suspension pending expulsion, it's the other way round. Despite that threat Derby have failed to produce the documents and undertakings by the dates required and the EFL, rather than go through with the sanction, gave them another chance. The documents that were produced weren't full disclosure, such the EFL has allowed these to be redrafted showing all potential liabilities (football or otherwise.) Now that sounds the opposite of vindictive to me.

Note also Derby are trying to use Covid legislation in respect of insolvency for issues that arose long before Covid existed. Lawyers have spotted the EFL may not have updated their articles in light of the legislation but as that was designed as a temporary measure is that really a surprise? It's akin arguing that although 'my client murdered all those women the case must be dropped because he wasn't fully read his rights'. Ditto Derby's flagrant 'heartstrings' appeal via Parliament. "We've been around a long time, ...were once famous, ...lots of people like us...." What the hell has that to do with fiddling the books and taxman? I note they didn't deploy the "...good for the local economy.." argument, as would have been embarrassing seeing the lines of unsecured creditors who've lost out having been robbed by the club.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

Thanks. That doesn't quite tell me how the EFL can be said to have authorised Boro's Claim.

Do you have a link or transcript of the Parry interview?

It may be the Athletic podcast from December. Search your podcast app of choice for The Athletic Business of Sport: EFL Chair Rick Parry On Regulating The Football Pyramid.

I'd have to listen again though so I may be wrong.

Edited by chinapig
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
1 hour ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

Given the discussion in the House of Commons on Tuesday, I'll be very surprised if there isn't reform, no matter what the outcome for Derby is.

For football supporters you would certainly hope so, for Derby though it may not come in soon enough

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, chinapig said:

It may be the Athletic podcast from December. Search your podcast app of choice for The Athletic Business of Sport: EFL Chair Rick Parry On Regulating The Football Pyramid.

I'd have to listen again though so I may be wrong.

Have listened again and there is some discussion of Boro's claim. Points to note:

Boro threatened to sue the EFL for failure to rigourously apply the rules. Parry admitted that they were too slow (as many of us have been saying all along). I don't recall Derby fans complaining about the delay at the time, only some of them cheering Morris on for having the EFL on strings.He should perhaps have gone on to say that Morris wanted to drag it out to avoid an earlier points deduction that would have relegated Derby instead of Wycombe but I guess he was being diplomatic.

There is no reference to authorising Boro's claim. This makes sense as the EFL is not a party to the dispute so cannot authorise it or not. What is not clear to me is whether the arbitration is in progress. Perhaps it has been held up given Boro's claim that the Administrators had not replied to their letters?

On the reform front an independent financial unit is being set up to improve the process. Better late than never.

So the EFL is to blame to the extent that that it failed to be tougher earlier but this still seems to fall short of victimising Derby.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Have listened again and there is some discussion of Boro's claim. Points to note:

Boro threatened to sue the EFL for failure to rigourously apply the rules. Parry admitted that they were too slow (as many of us have been saying all along). I don't recall Derby fans complaining about the delay at the time, only some of them cheering Morris on for having the EFL on strings.He should perhaps have gone on to say that Morris wanted to drag it out to avoid an earlier points deduction that would have relegated Derby instead of Wycombe but I guess he was being diplomatic.

There is no reference to authorising Boro's claim. This makes sense as the EFL is not a party to the dispute so cannot authorise it or not. What is not clear to me is whether the arbitration is in progress. Perhaps it has been held up given Boro's claim that the Administrators had not replied to their letters?

On the reform front an independent financial unit is being set up to improve the process. Better late than never.

So the EFL is to blame to the extent that that it failed to be tougher earlier but this still seems to fall short of victimising Derby.

Boro's threat against the EFL was subjective, to the extent their interpretation as to how they wanted the EFL to act didn't accord with how they thought the articles of association allowed. They may be right, but that would have been for a court to decide. Of course courts hate seeing cases where mediation hadn't first been attempted, hence where we are where we are and why the EFL statement read as it did. To a degree Boro were posturing, but that's for them, not the EFL. The equivalent of a player rushing at the ref miming a card for an opponent whilst not yet knowing what action the ref is to take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, chinapig said:

There is no reference to authorising Boro's claim. This makes sense as the EFL is not a party to the dispute so cannot authorise it or not.

As expected.

I think I do remember hearing part if not all of that interview on the Totally Football League Show. I'll listen again.

From their forum it seems that there are going to be many meetings between the EFL, Quantuma, MPs, Derby Council, fans groups, Boro, and Wycmobe. Will anyone have time to actually do anything as a result of these meetings I wonder?

Edited by ExiledAjax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, phantom said:

For football supporters you would certainly hope so, for Derby though it may not come in soon enough

Folks love to bandy about demands such as 'justice' or 'reform' though rarely without an inkling as to what outcome they'd like to see delivered.

I see no possibility or reason to start the pyramid again from scratch, one cannot ignore memory & association. So 'reform' should take what form?

I don't think that'll start with supporters having more realistic expectations, supporters ever being dreamers, nor do I think supporters will propose to pay more for the existing level of extravagance they demand. One only has to look north to the 'House of Tents' to realise how difficult it is to strike a balance. How they mocked us with the Fake Sheikh's alleged wealth, not realising he doesn't have to spend it even should he have it (which has always been in doubt.) Is he a fit person to control a club? Why not? Seems he's doing a grand job from where I'm sitting. He's kept them trading, he's kept them struggling. It takes two to tango and as Gasheads were thick enough to fall for his non-falsifiable patter is it they or he who should reform? 'I said I'll build a stadium. Didn't say of what type, where or when...' Bloke could still be good to his word.

Or one could go down the route of restriction, but as nobody starts from a level playing field is that fair? Forest Green may never generate Man City level revenues, irrespective of how well they perform. Not all clubs are funded equally, some have greater latitude than others - City being a prime example. Interesting that in pro sport the finest example of maintaining fair and open competition is to make it utterly restrictive. All clubs receive the same from TV and merchandise. That's why the NFL is so brilliant. And in respect of fans, their solution is to forbid fans ever being able to collectively own their club. Though The Packers horse bolted long since the stable door is now firmly shut, nailed and triple padlocked, never again to open. So unfair, but you never hear fans complaining.

Perchance it's us fans, not football per se, that need to reform?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am i correct in thinking that the EFL gave Derby another opportunity before this season started to produce accounts and ''put their hands up' by saying that Derbys and Wycombes fixtures were interchangeable before the season started. That surely implied an acknowledgement of Wycombes complaint and a warning to Derby that time was running out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...