Derby County

[Monkeh]

10 minutes ago, HitchinRed said:

I’m guessing there’s are plenty of other smaller creditors that are owed money in addition to the big boys named in the proposed arbitration. 

It does seem inherently unfair that the likes of Middlesbrough get preferential treatment over the 1 man band from down the road that may have sorted out the club’s electrics problems, for example.

I’m not saying that the EFL’s approach is illegal or looking to override Insolvency Law. They are simply saying to the Administrator to pay the football creditors first or get banned from the league. If this were the case, it would seriously devalue the club and reduce the amount that any new purchasers would pay for the club - reducing the pay out for all creditors.

The problem is that there is a limit to the amount that the new purchasers will want to put into the club, and if all this goes to the Football Creditors, they’ll be little left for anyone else. In this case, there is little reason for these creditors to agree to such an arrangement - they might be better off pushing the club into insolvency.

In my opinion, it’s not in anyone’s best interest to drive the club into insolvency, and therefore everyone will come to an agreement sooner or later. At the moment it’s just a poker game with everyone trying to bluff each other in order to secure a bigger payout for themselves.

The problem is, there is so little money in the lower leagues that the efl put the football creditors rule in to protect other clubs,

Imagine if Derby owed us 25 million in transfer fees, they went into administration and that debt was wiped off in turn putting us into administration which in turn puts Swindon into administration because we owe them money,

The Football creditor rule is vital to protecting the integrity of the competition,

Otherwise clubs rake up millions in transfer debt go into admin reset with better players and no punishment

 

That and all the crying Derby fans don't think they are in debt, they forget about the hmrc

[HitchinRed]

3 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

Imagine if Derby owed us 25 million in transfer fees, they went into administration and that debt was wiped off in turn putting us into administration which in turn puts Swindon into administration because we owe them money

I think the reality of Administration is that there is not enough money going round. If I was running a cleaning business that was forced into liquidation because a football club couldn’t pay its bills, would I be happy will millions being paid to a Football Creditor instead? Absolutely not.

In terms of the integrity of the league - I’m not sure it shows much integrity to force smaller companies out of business in order to protect your colleagues. I would suggest it shows much more integrity to let these companies go out of business. Maybe then these owners will think more about the impact of their decisions. But then again, maybe not!

[Monkeh]

27 minutes ago, HitchinRed said:

I think the reality of Administration is that there is not enough money going round. If I was running a cleaning business that was forced into liquidation because a football club couldn’t pay its bills, would I be happy will millions being paid to a Football Creditor instead? Absolutely not.

In terms of the integrity of the league - I’m not sure it shows much integrity to force smaller companies out of business in order to protect your colleagues. I would suggest it shows much more integrity to let these companies go out of business. Maybe then these owners will think more about the impact of their decisions. But then again, maybe not!

That's not the leagues fault though, that is solely Derby county's fault,

The league enforce the rules they don't  manage the clubs, 

It wasn't the leagues choice for Derby not to pay the hmrc or to cheat,

[chinapig]

From the BBC:

Wycombe's American chairman Rob Couhig said: "Since last November, we have asked the administrators for a meeting to conduct good faith negotiations to resolve the issue between the two clubs.

"Despite repeated requests, we have never heard a word from them. Perhaps, now that the request has come from the EFL, they will finally agree to meet and try to come to a responsible commercial solution.

"As soon as I am told when and where the mediation will take place, I will fly back to the UK and personally attend."

So the Administrators seem to have adopted Morris' tactic of delaying in the hope the problem would just go away. Quite how this helps the club is beyond me.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60253222

Edited February 4, 2022 by chinapig

[Monkeh]

1 minute ago, chinapig said:

From the BBC:

Wycombe's American chairman Rob Couhig said: "Since last November, we have asked the administrators for a meeting to conduct good faith negotiations to resolve the issue between the two clubs.

"Despite repeated requests, we have never heard a word from them. Perhaps, now that the request has come from the EFL, they will finally agree to meet and try to come to a responsible commercial solution.

"As soon as I am told when and where the mediation will take place, I will fly back to the UK and personally attend."

So the Administrators seem to have adopted Morris' tactic of delaying in the hope the problem would just go away. Quite how this helps the club is beyond me.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60253222

Ie stringing it out to earn as much as possible,

Mel Morris has killed Derby the administrators are his assassin 

[Davefevs]

4 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

The league enforce the rules that Derby and all the other clubs agreed to, they don't  manage the clubs, 

Fixed.

Mel Morris could’ve paid the debts and taken the points deductions (and relegation).  He could have negotiated with Gibson and Couhig.  It would not surprise me if Gibson seeing Derby relegated might see that as part compensation and accept a lower amount.  Morris could then trying to sell the club and ground as a Lg1 club.  As a Lg1 club, on a sounder footing he may well have got some of his money back.

Instead, he put Derby into administration and pretty much washed his hands of it.

[HitchinRed]

39 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

That's not the leagues fault though, that is solely Derby county's fault

Agreed, but my point is that it is not the fault of any other Non Football Creditor either, and yet they are being asked to take more of the pain, whilst other Football Creditors are insulated to a far greater extent.

[Monkeh]

2 minutes ago, HitchinRed said:

Agreed, but my point is that it is not the fault of any other Non Football Creditor either, and yet they are being asked to take more of the pain, whilst other Football Creditors are insulated to a far greater extent.

And I explained why,

It's not the leagues fault the league shouldn't pay these people ether,

It's solely Derby county's fault and one man in particular Mel Morris 

[Davefevs]

8 minutes ago, HitchinRed said:

Agreed, but my point is that it is not the fault of any other Non Football Creditor either, and yet they are being asked to take more of the pain, whilst other Football Creditors are insulated to a far greater extent.

5 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

And I explained why,

It's not the leagues fault the league shouldn't pay these people ether,

It's solely Derby county's fault and one man in particular Mel Morris 

Comes to something when you don’t even pay the St Johns ambulance bill….and the fans whip round and pay it for you.

I guess any business providing services / goods to a football club ought to ensure their payment terms are sound, and they understand the impact of long term non-payment.  I know that’s easy to say.

[sh1t_ref_again]

if Derby leave the EFL, an alternative is just 282 miles up the road, sure the SPL could do with another 2nd rate team

[BTRFTG]

40 minutes ago, HitchinRed said:

Agreed, but my point is that it is not the fault of any other Non Football Creditor either, and yet they are being asked to take more of the pain, whilst other Football Creditors are insulated to a far greater extent.

Unless I've misunderstood 'Football Creditors' only applies so far as Derby continue to trade as a football club.  As soon as it's confirmed their expulsion from the EFL is absolute I would have thought standard insolvency priorities are the order of the day. Clearly charges are charges but with respect to registrations and transfers I'm not sure whether these may be argued as proprietary assets (i.e. when a player's registration is transferred subject to staged payments is it the case the transferer retains beneficial ownership of the asset (player) until the final payment is settled, hence may have first dibs on payouts?) All other 'football' related debt one assumes is unsecured. 

I've also assumed the majority of that owed HMRC is preferential debt, such I wouldn't have thought there would be much trickling down to unsecured level.

The clever accountants on here may also be able to clarify what happens to the holding company with the ground? I suppose MSD could seek to force it's sale to recover their loan, else Morris might pay them off personally but in the case of the latter and with minimal income but continued outgoings, wouldn't that company eventually have to be folded or asset held sold off?

Edited February 4, 2022 by BTRFTG

[Hxj]

22 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

'Football Creditors' only applies so far as Derby continue to trade as a football club.

The EFL's regulations only apply for as long as Derby County is a member.  Whether or not 'Football Creditors' actually exist in insolvency law has not yet been properly tested in Court. 

22 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Player registrations

These transfer to the EFL on any expulsion/liquidation.  Any amounts received for the onwards transfer are used to pay off any Football Creditors in the first instance.

22 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

what happens to the holding company with the ground?

The charge held by MSD is secured by the freehold and the leasehold of the ground, plus other assets.

MSD can only recover the sum owed including interest and charges.  If they receive that sum in the Administration of the football club their charge will have been met in full and Morris's company will own the stadium with no debt.  Another one of Morris's cunning plans I believe.  If the club gets liquidated they will be able to enforce the security on other assets (such as the freehold of the stadium) to the extent that the debt remains unpaid.

Edited February 4, 2022 by Hxj

[BTRFTG]

1 hour ago, Hxj said:

These transfer to the EFL on any expulsion/liquidation.  Any amounts received for the onwards transfer are used to pay off any Football Creditors in the first instance.

I'm grateful you highlighted this the other week but my query related rather to the nature of the transfer contract.  Clubs account for full player value in their accounts when registrations transfer such players become the asset of the club to which they've transferred, but where payments are staged one would have expected the transfering club to include caveats within the contract to ensure they receive full payment (i.e. in case of injury the player must be insured at all times in the minimum value of any sums outstanding.) Now I don't know if outstanding sums may be drafted as 'floating charges' or whether the EFL allow a club to reclaim (at cost received to date,) the player. If they do it strikes me it could be argued such 'football' debts move to the high priority.

[Port Said Red]

I received this on email from the FSA this morning.

https://mailchi.mp/thefsa/fan-mail-govt-calls-for-derby-county-pragmatism-cumbrians-pick-up-my-club-my-shirt-initiative?e=e73f2ad03a

[Monkeh]

4 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

I received this on email from the FSA this morning.

https://mailchi.mp/thefsa/fan-mail-govt-calls-for-derby-county-pragmatism-cumbrians-pick-up-my-club-my-shirt-initiative?e=e73f2ad03a

That's a come down from what the fans of been bleeding on about,

So it will now be a efl and government conspiracy against Derby soon,

And the independent body wouldn't of stopped this at Derby it was a take over the fans wanted and approved and the cheating approved and goaded about by the fans

Had this been dealt with instead of having the Billy big club mentality none if this would be happening, the fans don't deserve to lose there club but apart from a few they are as guilty as the rest

[HitchinRed]

3 hours ago, Monkeh said:

And I explained why,

It's not the leagues fault the league shouldn't pay these people ether,

It's solely Derby county's fault and one man in particular Mel Morris 

I’m not sure you have explained why Non Football Creditors should take more of the pain of a football club going into administration compared to Football Creditors.

You have simply said that it’s not the league’s fault that Derby went into administration. Well it wasn’t St John’s Ambulance’s fault either.

I haven’t suggested that the League should pay the debts for ‘these people’, I am just saying there ought to be a level playing field. 

[Monkeh]

Just now, HitchinRed said:

I’m not sure you have explained why Non Football Creditors should take more of the pain of a football club going into administration compared to Football Creditors.

You have simply said that it’s not the league’s fault that Derby went into administration. Well it wasn’t St John’s Ambulance’s fault either.

I haven’t suggested that the League should pay the debts for ‘these people’, I am just saying there ought to be a level playing field. 

you do know how administration works don't you?

Unsecured creditors are at the bottom of the list, these people you talk about are at the bottom of the list, thats not just in football, thats in insolvency law,

Whether that be the football league, Debenhams or Frank the fish monger, the unsecured creditors will always be at the bottom of the list and will always get little if anything back,

I'll also put it another way, should I pay your debts and credit cards if you are declared bankrupt? 

That is not for the football league to sort out,

[ExiledAjax]

5 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

And the independent body wouldn't of stopped this at Derby it was a take over the fans wanted and approved and the cheating approved and goaded about by the fans

The aspects of the Fan Led Review that the statement refers to are items such as Owners having to keep a business plan (strategy, financial projections, corp gov, sustainability etc. all included within that) on file with the regulator, including evidencing proof of funds to finance that plan for 3 years. This would be updated every year. This would be part of an enhanced Owner's test. Sanctions for breach would be wide-ranging and flexible, and ultimately could include the revocation of the license required to operate within the league (although this would be a last resort given the impact on fans and community). 

There would be parallel capital and liquidity requirements as well. These are already used in the financial sector and would require Clubs to work with the regulator to ensure they have adequate finances and processes in place to keep operating. Firstly, clubs would be obliged to ensure they have enough cash coming into the business, control of costs, and suitable processes and systems to ensure the sustainability of the business. Clubs would need buffers in place for shocks and unforeseen circumstances. IREF would look at clubs’ plans, conduct its own analysis and if the club plan is not credible, does not have enough liquidity, costs are too high or risk not accounted for properly, IREF would be able to demand an improvement in finances (e.g. inject some cash into the business or lower the wage bill) and ultimately have the necessary powers to force the club to do so.

At this stage these are high level goals and sketched out plans, they will require refinement and detail to tailor them to football's needs. However, I personally agree that policies like this would go a long way to ensuring that clubs to not go into insolvency as often as they do now.

It is excellent news that “The Government is now working swiftly to determine the most effective way to deliver an independent regulator, and any powers that might be needed.”

[Davefevs]

5 minutes ago, HitchinRed said:

I’m not sure you have explained why Non Football Creditors should take more of the pain of a football club going into administration compared to Football Creditors.

You have simply said that it’s not the league’s fault that Derby went into administration. Well it wasn’t St John’s Ambulance’s fault either.

I haven’t suggested that the League should pay the debts for ‘these people’, I am just saying there ought to be a level playing field. 

The answer in the most basic of terms is because that’s the rules of belonging to / being a member of the EFL.

They can follow the letter of the law, just that they’ll have to give up their EFL membership.

I gave a crap analogy on twitter:

Is it law that you have to wear trousers and a collar when you play at the golf club you become a member at?  No, but it is the club rules.  If you don’t wear the right clothes, you can’t play. 

[ExiledAjax]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Is it law that you have to wear trousers and a collar when you play at the golf club you become a member at?  No, but it is the club rules.  If you don’t wear the right clothes, you can’t play. 

Not too bad an analogy really. In many walks of life people and companies accept extra rules and regulation over and above "the Law" and they go along with it because they get extra benefits - in your case membership of a no doubt very fine golf club.

In Derby's case they want the extra benefit of competing within the EFL. Fine. But abide by the rules and regs that you were part of making and agreeing.

As others say, they can even continue as a football club if they don't pay the football creditors - but that will be in whichever Dog and Duck league will take them.

[HitchinRed]

26 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

you do know how administration works don't you?

Unsecured creditors are at the bottom of the list, these people you talk about are at the bottom of the list, thats not just in football, thats in insolvency law,

Whether that be the football league, Debenhams or Frank the fish monger, the unsecured creditors will always be at the bottom of the list and will always get little if anything back,

I'll also put it another way, should I pay your debts and credit cards if you are declared bankrupt? 

That is not for the football league to sort out,

I’ll try one more time…

I know how administration works.

I know that unsecured creditors are bottom of the list.

Under Insolvency Laws, Football Creditors are no different from Non Football creditors.

IMO, I do not think it’s fair that the internal rules of a closed shop league should be able to prioritise the interests of their members over other creditors, who in the eyes of the law are of equal standing.

 

[exAtyeoMax]

3 hours ago, billywedlock said:

That we are still discussing the same issues suggests that any resolution is not going to happen any time soon . Morris probably has to hand over the ground to unlock a deal. Otherwise, liquidation looks more likely by the day. Who would want the wage bill they have, even reduced as it is, in L1 anyway. Like Wimbledon, they will have to start at the 9th/10th level. At least the fans will have a few promotions over the next decade. As it stands, no one wants to pay out the 60M (excluding the ground) . Ashely is waiting for a bargain. 

What would be the benefit of MM holding on to the ground? Sell it to any new owner? 
redevelop it?

 

[BTRFTG]

6 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

The aspects of the Fan Led Review that the statement refers to are items such as Owners having to keep a business plan (strategy, financial projections, corp gov, sustainability etc. all included within that) on file with the regulator, including evidencing proof of funds to finance that plan for 3 years. This would be updated every year. This would be part of an enhanced Owner's test. Sanctions for breach would be wide-ranging and flexible, and ultimately could include the revocation of the license required to operate within the league (although this would be a last resort given the impact on fans and community). 

There would be parallel capital and liquidity requirements as well. These are already used in the financial sector and would require Clubs to work with the regulator to ensure they have adequate finances and processes in place to keep operating. Firstly, clubs would be obliged to ensure they have enough cash coming into the business, control of costs, and suitable processes and systems to ensure the sustainability of the business. Clubs would need buffers in place for shocks and unforeseen circumstances. IREF would look at clubs’ plans, conduct its own analysis and if the club plan is not credible, does not have enough liquidity, costs are too high or risk not accounted for properly, IREF would be able to demand an improvement in finances (e.g. inject some cash into the business or lower the wage bill) and ultimately have the necessary powers to force the club to do so.

At this stage these are high level goals and sketched out plans, they will require refinement and detail to tailor them to football's needs. However, I personally agree that policies like this would go a long way to ensuring that clubs to not go into insolvency as often as they do now.

It is excellent news that “The Government is now working swiftly to determine the most effective way to deliver an independent regulator, and any powers that might be needed.”

It still doesn't address the fundamental problem, that being unrealistic fan expectation.

Just consider all those clubs, like our own, who without the beneficence of their owner would go bust overnight. Just suppose Mr Lansdown declared that he would no longer make loan provision to the club, a club that's been losing £750k a week for years. What might the fans or this review then do? Would we all start chipping in £50 a week to ensure we remained within whatever arbitrary limits were demanded? Would we offer to pay triple ticket prices?  Like **** would we.

If Mr Lansdown stated he would continue to support cashflow but no further capital purchases, we'd only be signing frees at the bottom of the food chain, that he'd be prepared to see us plummet through the leagues but on the upside we'd be able to demonstrate long term stability, would the fans sign-up to that? Would they erect a statue in his honour to celebrate our consolidation in The Conference whilst ensuring the balance sheet remained healthy? In your dreams would they.

If fans want a review start with getting real. Bring football back into the realms in which supporters exist and ensure there it remains. Limit excess even where that limits ambition.

The problem of reviews such as this is they're reflective of the malaise that pervades modern society. Everybody thinks they have rights. Everybody demands that they desire. Everybody is adamant somebody other than they foot the bill.

Association Football, its origins do not lie in business 

[HitchinRed]

27 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

The answer in the most basic of terms is because that’s the rules of belonging to / being a member of the EFL.

They can follow the letter of the law, just that they’ll have to give up their EFL membership.

I gave a crap analogy on twitter:

Is it law that you have to wear trousers and a collar when you play at the golf club you become a member at?  No, but it is the club rules.  If you don’t wear the right clothes, you can’t play. 

Yes, I agree. This is what I said in my original post.

 

6 hours ago, HitchinRed said:

I think the reality of Administration is that there is not enough money going round. If I was running a cleaning business that was forced into liquidation because a football club couldn’t pay its bills, would I be happy will millions being paid to a Football Creditor instead? Absolutely not.

In terms of the integrity of the league - I’m not sure it shows much integrity to force smaller companies out of business in order to protect your colleagues. I would suggest it shows much more integrity to let these companies go out of business. Maybe then these owners will think more about the impact of their decisions. But then again, maybe not!

 

[Monkeh]

1 minute ago, HitchinRed said:

I’ll try one more time…

I know how administration works.

I know that unsecured creditors are bottom of the list.

Under Insolvency Laws, Football Creditors are no different from Non Football creditors.

IMO, I do not think it’s fair that the internal rules of a closed shop league should be able to prioritise the interests of their members over other creditors, who in the eyes of the law are of equal standing.

 

we aren't working under insolvency law we are working under the football league rules that all 72 clubs sign up too, I explained why those rules are in place and the knock on effect it can have by not having said rules,

You may not think it is fair but its the rules every club signs up too and agreed too, don't agree then don't join the league simple as that,

[ExiledAjax]

23 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

It still doesn't address the fundamental problem, that being unrealistic fan expectation.

Just consider all those clubs, like our own, who without the beneficence of their owner would go bust overnight. Just suppose Mr Lansdown declared that he would no longer make loan provision to the club, a club that's been losing £750k a week for years. What might the fans or this review then do? Would we all start chipping in £50 a week to ensure we remained within whatever arbitrary limits were demanded? Would we offer to pay triple ticket prices?  Like **** would we.

If Mr Lansdown stated he would continue to support cashflow but no further capital purchases, we'd only be signing frees at the bottom of the food chain, that he'd be prepared to see us plummet through the leagues but on the upside we'd be able to demonstrate long term stability, would the fans sign-up to that? Would they erect a statue in his honour to celebrate our consolidation in The Conference whilst ensuring the balance sheet remained healthy? In your dreams would they.

If fans want a review start with getting real. Bring football back into the realms in which supporters exist and ensure there it remains. Limit excess even where that limits ambition.

The problem of reviews such as this is they're reflective of the malaise that pervades modern society. Everybody thinks they have rights. Everybody demands that they desire. Everybody is adamant somebody other than they foot the bill.

Association Football, its origins do not lie in business 

I hear your arguments, and I've never said that the Review or it's recommendations are perfect. You're correct that some are idealistic, even fanciful, and that practical implication will be tough. Also, as with any change, there is the very strong possibility of unforeseen impacts that may simply bring up bigger issues in the long run.

However, I strongly believe that having an independent regulator in place will, at the very least, mean that there is a single, impartial and independent body that can provide a clear and obvious forum for the solution of those possible issues. That is preferable to what we have now which is competing bodies - the FA, the EFL, the Prem, the Clubs, fan groups, government, TV companies etc - deciding matters on an ad hoc basis. It's unwieldy, messy, political, and selfish. We can do better than this.

Let's not derail this thread any further but I am a strong believer in the underlying principles of this Review.

Edited February 4, 2022 by ExiledAjax

[semblar]

30 minutes ago, HitchinRed said:

I’ll try one more time…

I know how administration works.

I know that unsecured creditors are bottom of the list.

Under Insolvency Laws, Football Creditors are no different from Non Football creditors.

IMO, I do not think it’s fair that the internal rules of a closed shop league should be able to prioritise the interests of their members over other creditors, who in the eyes of the law are of equal standing.

 

I think the closest equivalent is something like this.

 

You declare bankruptcy. First goes the stuff on the mortgage (secured creditors) then the rest get a % under insolvency laws.  The EFL is the golf club or the gym that you owe a few hundred to, who then say "if you don't clear our whole bill you can't come and use our facilities..."

[Bristol Rob]

Just had a quick look at the Derby forum to see if I could gauge the mood of their fans, there seem to be a few distinct categories.

1. It's the EFL fault for not applying their rules consistently.

2. It's Boro's fault

3. The administrator hasn't made enough money from this yet.

4. Delirium. Possibly due to exhaustion where people have almost stopped taking the threat seriously as there is little they can do about it.

5. Anger. With everyone and everything.

Very little directed towards Wycombe (compared to Boro).

No one likes Mel. He kinda fits against all of the above.

I hope Derby find a route forward and their fans still have a club to support this season, next season and beyond.

From the outside, it appears Rooney is doing a fair job in difficult circumstances, surprised his 100k a week he was earning hasn't been questioned more, as surely that would have contributed.

 

[ExiledAjax]

8 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

From the outside, it appears Rooney is doing a fair job in difficult circumstances, surprised his 100k a week he was earning hasn't been questioned more, as surely that would have contributed.

Unbelievably, there's a report that someone has commissioned a statue of Rooney to be placed outside PP.

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/derby-county-wayne-rooney-statue-6601095

"It has now been revealed that a statue of Rooney has been commissioned to immortalise the ‘spirit’ that the Derby boss has shown.

“The last four months, the spirit he has shown, it’s gone throughout the team the club, the supporters, the City and all of the community,” Garry McBride, whose idea it was told BBC Radio Derby.

Rooney also revealed last week that he turned down the chance to interview for the ten [sic] vacant managerial position at former club Everton.

...

It’s [Rooney 'turning down' Everton] another thing that shows the ‘measure of the man’, according to McBride.

It is hoped that the bronze bust, which will be finished by the end of the season, will be placed at the side of Pride Park."

I cannot actually believe that this is a serious suggestion. How Rooney is coming out of this so exalted and glorified I will never understand.

Edited February 4, 2022 by ExiledAjax

[REDOXO]

15 hours ago, Ska Junkie said:

Where did Wimbledon restart and Bury for that matter? The Combined counties premier league (tier 9), in Wimbledons case. North West counties division 1 in Burys (tier 10). The comparison for Derby is the Midlands football league division 1 or the united counties league, division 1, both tier 10.

Each league has a Premier division which is clearly tier 9.

Long, long way back.

I agree but those clubs were not hauling 1000s of away fans to all local games.
 

This is the first big (I use the term advisedly) club to go under.

As you use The Combined County’s as an example, how Would the equivalent of Hartley Wintney in Derbyshire cope with the angry DCFC following. It’s not feasible. 
 

The SFA put Rangers in The lowest pro division they could as at least there were some facilities. Can you imagine Rangers away at(enter random jock village here)

Unfortunately there has to be pragmatism what ever happens. The West Nottinghamshire League is where they should go but don’t expect it.
 

So I think finally DCFC will get recognized as a ‘big club’ (In appropriately small letters)

[Mr Popodopolous]

Surely a mere requirement that for Licensing approval, the club through their own endeavours must not exceed a breakeven cash position, year in year out solves or goes a long way towards solving the insolvency risk issue.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Two more lines.

In the event of liquidation, at least according to Nixon a couple of weeks back the EFL have suggested that they could start at League Two level- which would raise a lot of questions about preferential treatment.

I'd be intrigued to know how many of the other 71 clubs would approve of this.

Secondly saw this elsewhere, what do we make of this?

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/13892993/filing-history

[semblar]

2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Two more lines.

In the event of liquidation, at least according to Nixon a couple of weeks back the EFL have suggested that they could start at League Two level- which would raise a lot of questions about preferential treatment.

I'd be intrigued to know how many of the other 71 clubs would approve of this.

Secondly saw this elsewhere, what do we make of this?

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/13892993/filing-history

All in the name of Peter Wallis - sorry but I can't remember if he is a person we "know about" in relation to DCFC...

[Midred]

21 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Unbelievably, there's a report that someone has commissioned a statue of Rooney to be placed outside PP.

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/derby-county-wayne-rooney-statue-6601095

"It has now been revealed that a statue of Rooney has been commissioned to immortalise the ‘spirit’ that the Derby boss has shown.

“The last four months, the spirit he has shown, it’s gone throughout the team the club, the supporters, the City and all of the community,” Garry McBride, whose idea it was told BBC Radio Derby.

Rooney also revealed last week that he turned down the chance to interview for the ten [sic] vacant managerial position at former club Everton.

...

It’s [Rooney 'turning down' Everton] another thing that shows the ‘measure of the man’, according to McBride.

It is hoped that the bronze bust, which will be finished by the end of the season, will be placed at the side of Pride Park."

I cannot actually believe that this is a serious suggestion. How Rooney is coming out of this so exalted and glorified I will never understand.

Will this also be fan funded or are the administrators working on an allowance for this?

[BTRFTG]

15 minutes ago, semblar said:

All in the name of Peter Wallis - sorry but I can't remember if he is a person we "know about" in relation to DCFC...

Appears to be a banker who's also the treasurer of a minor league in Wilts.

Possibly a Derby fan looking to protect the name should supporters look to firm a new start up? Else a chancer looking to make a few bob by selling the company to somebody looking to resurrect the club. I guess the former.

[ExiledAjax]

Just now, Midred said:

Will this also be fan funded or are the administrators working on an allowance for this?

Margaret Beckett MP is counter-claiming against the EFL for £1 BILLION pounds and that should be enough for the pedestal at least.

4 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Appears to be a banker who's also the treasurer of a minor league in Wilts.

Possibly a Derby fan looking to protect the name should supporters look to firm a new start up? Else a chancer looking to make a few bob by selling the company to somebody looking to resurrect the club. I guess the former.

Agree looks like a lone wolf, articles are just model articles and reg address is a residential house in Wilts. I doubt he's even involved a solicitor. Pointless exercise as it's the IP in the badge and various trade marks, player registrations, EFL membership share etc that makes "Derby County Football Club" Derby County. The registered name of a company on CH means chuff all. Hope he's fine with wasting his £13 registration fee.

[REDOXO]

1 hour ago, HitchinRed said:

I’m not sure you have explained why Non Football Creditors should take more of the pain of a football club going into administration compared to Football Creditors.

You have simply said that it’s not the league’s fault that Derby went into administration. Well it wasn’t St John’s Ambulance’s fault either.

I haven’t suggested that the League should pay the debts for ‘these people’, I am just saying there ought to be a level playing field. 

 

Your premise is wrong but A lot will depend on the order. 
 

If the EFL chuck this bloody club out first I’m not sure the football/non football creditors will come into play anyway. The thing will just be dealt with as a normal winding up!
 

If Derby survive somehow that’s when local businesses have a problem. 
 

In order to get out of administration Derby will have to first negotiate a settlement with all party’s knowing in order to stay in the league they have to pay their football debt first as this is a rule of being a member. This is why the football debt must be paid first. It’s the rules of football, Derby signed up to it as all clubs did. 
 

Anyone can argue it’s not fair, particularly as the local suppliers were almost certainly not aware of this, so think of it as Football club suppliers now becoming informed!
 

Derby/Quantuma thought they could hammer everyone with a we are a big club and personal attacks on The EFL Gibson and Couhig. That has now failed.

So it’s down to three possible futures

1 Derby survive. (Some one chunks out a wedge load of dosh) This will take an agreement with all party’s some of which will likely take Pennie’s on the pound they keep their EFL registration and I never have to think about this thread again

 

(If number one means a cram down, which is the courts imposing a Pennie’s on the pound settlement in this case it will probably lead to expulsion anyway, number two comes into play)

2 Derby survive emerge from administration but do not pay their football debt first. Derby are expelled from the EFL and need to find another league to play in  

3 Derby gets wound up and Football debt becomes a non issue as the club is automatically expelled and normal bankruptcy moves forward leaving Mel Morris and his financiers owning the dirt Pride Park is built on until Gibson and Couhig Take legal action

Hope that helps. I ran my own business successfully for years so get it how this plays out with local business people, but none of the options are good for anyone! 

 
 

 

[BTRFTG]

7 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Margaret Beckett MP is counter-claiming against the EFL for £1 BILLION pounds and that should be enough for the pedestal at least.

Agree looks like a lone wolf, articles are just model articles and reg address is a residential house in Wilts. I doubt he's even involved a solicitor. Pointless exercise as it's the IP in the badge and various trade marks, player registrations, EFL membership share etc that makes "Derby County Football Club" Derby County. The registered name of a company on CH means chuff all. Hope he's fine with wasting his £13 registration fee.

I gave him the benefit thinking he might be acting for the supporters club to get in early to prevent some smart doing likewise. As you say the name itself wont be worth much even to those who might wish to use it.

[ExiledAjax]

21 hours ago, phantom said:

THE EFL JUST RELEASED THIS STATEMENT

The EFL Board met today and received an update in respect of Derby County FC.

 

Over the last few weeks, the EFL has engaged proactively with the Club’s Administrators and other key stakeholders including the local authority, MPs and the Rams Trust as we seek to assist the Club in its efforts to exit from administration in accordance with the requirements of the League’s Insolvency Policy.  

The EFL’s Insolvency Policy is designed to offer guidance to Clubs on how the board might seek to deal with any Club in administration. That policy, which has been accepted by all 72 Clubs, describes how the Members agreed ‘that the starting point is that no Club should gain (or seek to gain) any advantage within the context of professional football over other Clubs by not paying all its creditors in full at all times.’ 

In this case, Derby County is seeking to use insolvency legislation to avoid having to defend the claims of Middlesbrough FC (which commenced initially in January 2021) and Wycombe Wanderers FC. Derby County considers those claims should not be treated as football related debts and that it would be wrong for the EFL to require the Club to have to continue to defend the claims as a condition of continuing membership in circumstances where they have been compromised by way of a restructuring plan. The EFL does not agree with that analysis.

At the request of the Administrators, and in line with commitments given at last week’s meeting with local politicians, the EFL has provided a further clear statement to Quantuma of its position on the application of the Insolvency Policy, so as to enable them to apply to the High Court or engage in Arbitration to have that issue determined. It is now for the Administrators to determine how they wish to move this matter forward and we remain willing to expedite any process, as necessary.   

The fact remains that the Club is suffering from critical legacy debt issues that reach into tens of millions, all of which need to be resolved if a solution is to be found. That also includes monies owed to HMRC and the loans from MSD secured against Club assets and the Stadium. 

The EFL has previously requested mediation between the two Clubs and the Administrators and is today inviting all relevant and associated parties involved to enter formal collaborative negotiations to actively seek out the compromises and solutions required to ensure that Derby County has a long-term future. 

For the avoidance of any doubt the EFL is requesting the attendance of Administrators and the following stakeholders to participate: the current highest bidder(s), Middlesbrough FC, Wycombe Wanderers FC, Mel Morris, MSD Partners and HMRC. 

The EFL will endeavour to provide updates on any progress achieved as a result of this request and any subsequent discussions in due course, whilst also continuing to maintain our commitment to transparency in our dealings with the politicians and local authority officials that make up ‘Team Derby’ alongside direct engagement with Derby County Supporters’ groups and the FSA.

Boro have responded to this. Have to say all this correspondence by public statement is pretty hilarious.

Middlesbrough FC has welcomed the statement from the EFL, who have requested a meeting with the administrators of Derby County and the following stakeholders: the current highest bidder(s), Middlesbrough FC, Wycombe Wanderers FC, Mel Morris, MSD Partners and HMRC.

MFC is available to attend any meeting, wherever or whenever this may be, just as we always have been.

MFC has always maintained that its claim against Derby County is a football related debt and that it should be treated as such. MFC welcomes the EFL’s confirmation that it shares this view. If the administrators believe that the EFL are not entitled to take this stance, MFC has offered to refer the matter to a judge to decide.

The administrators were appointed in September but have consistently refused to engage with MFC’s attempts to engage with them to reach a resolution. There are several letters from us which the administrators have ignored. MFC is extremely disappointed that this administration has not been concluded successfully and that the administrators have, instead, through the media, continuously sought to make scurrilous and unfounded suggestions that it is the claims of our club and Wycombe, and the EFL, that are preventing a successful outcome. It is not true and these statements are deeply unfair, not only to our club, but also to the Derby County supporters who deserve better.

There has been no suggestion that the administrators have reached an agreement with Derby County’s other main creditors. We believe that the administrators have a duty to the public to answer the questions we asked in our open letter of 20 January 2022. MFC understands that the debt owed to MSD is (i) personally guaranteed by Mr Morris and (ii) is secured against the stadium. This means that Mr Morris has agreed to pay the MSD debt if there is a shortfall. Is this correct? And, if so, what contribution is being sought from Mr Morris?

A significant focus of MFC’s claim against Derby County relates to the sale of Derby County’s stadium and the belief that it was done in a way which manipulated the Profit and Sustainability Rules. The same transaction is now a material reason why the administration cannot be resolved. MFC, and many other stakeholders in football, do not understand why the administrator refuses to acknowledge this problem and, instead, chooses to unfairly blame us, Wycombe and the EFL.

[chinapig]

3 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

I gave him the benefit thinking he might be acting for the supporters club to get in early to prevent some smart doing likewise. As you say the name itself wont be worth much even to those who might wish to use it.

I wonder if I should register a domain name that might make me a few quid down the line?

[exAtyeoMax]

42 minutes ago, Midred said:

Will this also be fan funded or are the administrators working on an allowance for this?

perhaps its a Trojan horse type thing?

[BTRFTG]

3 minutes ago, chinapig said:

I wonder if I should register a domain name that might make me a few quid down the line?

What like www.bristolroversfcmemorialarchive.co.uk ?

[REDOXO]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Two more lines.

In the event of liquidation, at least according to Nixon a couple of weeks back the EFL have suggested that they could start at League Two level- which would raise a lot of questions about preferential treatment.

I'd be intrigued to know how many of the other 71 clubs would approve of this.

Secondly saw this elsewhere, what do we make of this?

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/13892993/filing-history

Very entrepreneurial! 

16 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

What like www.bristolroversfcmemorialarchive.co.uk ?

Not so much!

[Monkeh]

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

Boro have responded to this. Have to say all this correspondence by public statement is pretty hilarious.

Middlesbrough FC has welcomed the statement from the EFL, who have requested a meeting with the administrators of Derby County and the following stakeholders: the current highest bidder(s), Middlesbrough FC, Wycombe Wanderers FC, Mel Morris, MSD Partners and HMRC.

MFC is available to attend any meeting, wherever or whenever this may be, just as we always have been.

MFC has always maintained that its claim against Derby County is a football related debt and that it should be treated as such. MFC welcomes the EFL’s confirmation that it shares this view. If the administrators believe that the EFL are not entitled to take this stance, MFC has offered to refer the matter to a judge to decide.

The administrators were appointed in September but have consistently refused to engage with MFC’s attempts to engage with them to reach a resolution. There are several letters from us which the administrators have ignored. MFC is extremely disappointed that this administration has not been concluded successfully and that the administrators have, instead, through the media, continuously sought to make scurrilous and unfounded suggestions that it is the claims of our club and Wycombe, and the EFL, that are preventing a successful outcome. It is not true and these statements are deeply unfair, not only to our club, but also to the Derby County supporters who deserve better.

There has been no suggestion that the administrators have reached an agreement with Derby County’s other main creditors. We believe that the administrators have a duty to the public to answer the questions we asked in our open letter of 20 January 2022. MFC understands that the debt owed to MSD is (i) personally guaranteed by Mr Morris and (ii) is secured against the stadium. This means that Mr Morris has agreed to pay the MSD debt if there is a shortfall. Is this correct? And, if so, what contribution is being sought from Mr Morris?

A significant focus of MFC’s claim against Derby County relates to the sale of Derby County’s stadium and the belief that it was done in a way which manipulated the Profit and Sustainability Rules. The same transaction is now a material reason why the administration cannot be resolved. MFC, and many other stakeholders in football, do not understand why the administrator refuses to acknowledge this problem and, instead, chooses to unfairly blame us, Wycombe and the EFL.

What a fantastic statement

The Derby fans need to wake up they are throwing their anger on the wrong direction

[ExiledAjax]

1 minute ago, Monkeh said:

What a fantastic statement

The Derby fans need to wake up they are throwing their anger on the wrong direction

Ballsy isn't it? Admins have to respond to that surely. And they have to do it in public as well I'd have thought. You can't let these kind of allegations against your professional character linger in the air without answer. 

I guess Q could argue that as Boro aren't creditors under insolvency law (only under the EFL's interpretation of its rules, and even then only as 'Football Creditors') or shareholders they can be ignored...but in reality that's missing the point. Interesting claim that MFC have 'offered to refer it to a judge'. I take that to mean that MFC have decided that offers to arbitrate have been rejected/ignored to the point that court is the only option. In court, IIRC, a judge will look poorly upon the party that frustrates arbitration, especially if the judge thinks that the matter is something that could or should have been settled out of court. If there's one thing judges hate, it's having to hear unnecessary cases that block them from nipping to the White Swan for a Friday lunch.

It all comes back to this point about Derby having to abide by the extra layer of rules that the EFL lays against member clubs. Every problem comes back to that issue. Until either the Admins accept that they are bound by those rules, or the EFL decide to exempt Derby from the application of them, there will be no solution and liquidation is the final destination.

[Derby_Ram]

26 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Ballsy isn't it? Admins have to respond to that surely. And they have to do it in public as well I'd have thought. You can't let these kind of allegations against your professional character linger in the air without answer. 

Nah, no need. Vanishing Mel has broke cover and done it on their behalf.

No idea where to start or finish with it all. 

[ExiledAjax]

6 minutes ago, Derby_Ram said:

Nah, no need. Vanishing Mel has broke cover and done it on their behalf.

No idea where to start or finish with it all. 

Seems as though I have to sign up to Twitter to read that in detail. But I gather he has offered out Boro (and Wycombe) to sue him personally in the courts in place of their current actions against DCFC.

That seems...bold.

Edited February 4, 2022 by ExiledAjax

[Monkeh]

6 minutes ago, Derby_Ram said:

Nah, no need. Vanishing Mel has broke cover and done it on their behalf.

No idea where to start or finish with it all. 

Mel Morris isn't the plaintiff, the only way Morris can settle this is if he takes over Derby County,

Middlesbrough's issue is with dcfc not mm,

[Derby_Ram]

13 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Seems as though I have to sign up to Twitter to read that in detail. But I gather he has offered out Boro (and Wycombe) to sue him personally in the courts in place of their current actions against DCFC.

That seems...bold.

Bold....is one word. Finally coming out of the woodwork and seemingly offering a solution to this impasse.

Now if only he'd settle his tax bill and pay the other creditors I could be happy.

[chinapig]

12 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

Mel Morris isn't the plaintiff, the only way Morris can settle this is if he takes over Derby County,

Middlesbrough's issue is with dcfc not mm,

Exactly, he's posturing - again. Perhaps he will regain his heroic genius status with Derby fans as a result (they are an extraordinarily gullible lot) but this does not offer a resolution of the claims. The EFL has invited him to a meeting with all parties so why not just attend and make constructive proposals? Likewise the Administrators.

[ExiledAjax]

23 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

Mel Morris isn't the plaintiff, the only way Morris can settle this is if he takes over Derby County,

Middlesbrough's issue is with dcfc not mm,

Yeh my immediate thought was that unless Boro/Wycombe's legal advisors believe that MM is someone that they can duly sue for the matters they are suing Derby County for then they will ignore this offering from MM.

My second thought is that the basis for the current claims is, if I understand it correctly, that DCFC cheated, gained competitive advantage from that cheating, and in doing so caused loss to Boro (and Wycombe). If that is the case then if they go after MM personally wouldn't either MM have to accept that he was the main cause of that cheating, or Boro (and Wycombe) would need to prove that. 

Highlights:

• He claims Wycombe haven't actually made a formal claim yet;
• He makes a less-than-veiled threat to sue QPR should the Boro claim be upheld;
• He decides to choose this point to raise the question of the 'legality' of Parachute Payments - valid criticisms are made of that system, but really Melvyn, choose your moment;
• A garbled paragraph about promoted teams being protected by the Prem;
• The airing of some personal grievances regarding his past interactions with the EFL and its disciplinary proceedings;
• Typos and errors galore, and he's not even fully justified the text FFS. How on earth can we take this seriously?

Honestly, there's some interesting stuff in there, but I am absolutely filing this in a special place in the cabinet labelled "EFL Chairmen making long-winded and possibly wine-fueled written statements without proofreading their work or getting their lawyer to review it."

I suspect Gibson is currently using a copy of this statement in the smallest room in his house.

PS. These replies to Keiran Maguire's tweet made I laugh. 

Edited February 4, 2022 by ExiledAjax

[Davefevs]

3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Two more lines.

In the event of liquidation, at least according to Nixon a couple of weeks back the EFL have suggested that they could start at League Two level- which would raise a lot of questions about preferential treatment.

I'd be intrigued to know how many of the other 71 clubs would approve of this.

Secondly saw this elsewhere, what do we make of this?

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/13892993/filing-history

I can imagine at least 24 clubs would be against it….those in Lg2!

21 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

Mel Morris isn't the plaintiff, the only way Morris can settle this is if he takes over Derby County,

Middlesbrough's issue is with dcfc not mm,

Lot of Derby fans showing true colours again tonight @DerbyFan, re-starting their Mel Morris messiah stuff again, saying that he’s called their bluff.  Like you say, I bet it’s not as simple as they suggest!

Not sure Boro’s comms we’re very good either.

Getting messier and messier by the day.

[ExiledAjax]

2 minutes ago, chinapig said:

why not just attend and make constructive proposals

Because we're doing this all through public statements now China. Public statements > meeting in private and being grown ups.

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Yeh my immediate thought was that unless Boro/Wycombe's legal advisors believe that MM is someone that they can duly sue for the matters they are suing Derby County for then they will ignore this offering from MM.

My second thought is that the basis for the current claims is, if I understand it correctly, that DCFC cheated, gained competitive advantage from that cheating, and in doing so caused loss to Boro (and Wycombe). If that is the case then if they go after MM personally wouldn't either MM have to accept that he was the main cause of that cheating, or Boro (and Wycombe) would need to prove that. 

Highlights:

• He claims Wycombe haven't actually made a formal claim yet;
• He makes a less-than-veiled threat to sue QPR should the Boro claim be upheld;
• He decides to choose this point to raise the question of the 'legality' of Parachute Payments - valid criticisms are made of that system, but really Melvyn, choose your moment;
• A garbled paragraph about promoted teams being protected by the Prem;
• The airing of some personal grievances regarding his past interactions with the EFL and its disciplinary proceedings;
• Typos and errors galore, and he's not even fully justified the text FFS. How on earth can we take this seriously?

Honestly, there's some interesting stuff in there, but I am absolutely filing this in a special place in the cabinet labelled "EFL Chairmen making long-winded and possibly wine-fueled written statements without proofreading their work or getting their lawyer to review it."

I suspect Gibson is currently using a copy of this statement in the smallest room in his house.

PS. These replies to Keiran Maguire's tweet made I laugh. 

Would he be better to guarantee / underwrite this on Derby’s behalf?  To me sounds like he thinks he being clever, knowing that Boro and WW won’t change who they are after compo from, I.e. it’s just posturing to make himself look good (again).  If he did underwrite it, then surely the bidders can bid with full knowledge of the cost?

[ExiledAjax]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Would he be better to guarantee / underwrite this on Derby’s behalf?  To me sounds like he thinks he being clever, knowing that Boro and WW won’t change who they are after compo from, I.e. it’s just posturing to make himself look good (again).  If he did underwrite it, then surely the bidders can bid with full knowledge of the cost?

You mean as was discussed on here maybe 40 pages ago? Yeh I'd think that would be the grown up solution to the problem. But privately offering a guarantee/indemnity/underwrite (however it was finally structured and termed) to the bidders removes the chance to publically rage against the EFL doesn't it.

He's metaphorically stood up in the middle of a bar, pointed at Rick Parry and yelled "Parry! You, me, outside. Now". He doesn't get to do that, nor does he get some DCFC fans back on side (unbelievably), by supporting the actual legal process that is already underway.

Yeh, when is it best to make over-the-top promises and offers? When you know that no one will ask you to follow through on them!

Edited February 4, 2022 by ExiledAjax

[chinapig]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Would he be better to guarantee / underwrite this on Derby’s behalf?  To me sounds like he thinks he being clever, knowing that Boro and WW won’t change who they are after compo from, I.e. it’s just posturing to make himself look good (again).  If he did underwrite it, then surely the bidders can bid with full knowledge of the cost?

That's exactly what I meant by posturing in my post too. Make it look like he's riding to the rescue, get Derby fans worshipping him again, while knowing he is not in reality personally exposed.

Just pay off the debts you accumulated Mel and **** off. They'll put a statue of you next to Wayne's then.

[Northern Red]

4 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

Unbelievably, there's a report that someone has commissioned a statue of Rooney to be placed outside PP.

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/derby-county-wayne-rooney-statue-6601095

"It has now been revealed that a statue of Rooney has been commissioned to immortalise the ‘spirit’ that the Derby boss has shown.

“The last four months, the spirit he has shown, it’s gone throughout the team the club, the supporters, the City and all of the community,” Garry McBride, whose idea it was told BBC Radio Derby.

Rooney also revealed last week that he turned down the chance to interview for the ten [sic] vacant managerial position at former club Everton.

...

It’s [Rooney 'turning down' Everton] another thing that shows the ‘measure of the man’, according to McBride.

It is hoped that the bronze bust, which will be finished by the end of the season, will be placed at the side of Pride Park."

I cannot actually believe that this is a serious suggestion. How Rooney is coming out of this so exalted and glorified I will never understand.

Did Rooney shag your gran or something?

[ExiledAjax]

Just now, Northern Red said:

Did Rooney shag your gran or something?

Well he'd have to dig them up first, so I doubt it.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Is the statement anywhere in full? It sounds very, interesting might be one word! The Mel Morris one.

Apparently in amongst all this, the Punjabi Rams have sent an open letter to Wycombe Wanderers and Ebosele linked with Udinese- pre-contract arrangement maybe.

Edited February 4, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[ExiledAjax]

12 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Is the statement anywhere in full? It sounds very, interesting might be one word! The Mel Morris one.

Apparently in amongst all this, the Punjabi Rams have sent an open letter to Wycombe Wanderers and Ebosele linked with Udinese- pre-contract arrangement maybe.

[Monkeh]

26 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

[chinapig]

17 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Dear me, largely rambling gibberish with no substantive arguments addressing the issues just more conspiracy thinking. I am inclined to repeat my original description of posturing.

The sections on parachute payments are of course irrelevant to the case but he seems not to know that the EFL cannot unilaterally change them without Premier League agreement. That level of ignorance from a former club owner rather undermines his credibility.

As does his written English - Grade C must try harder.

[Hxj]

So given that confrontational statements are the order of the day - you've now even got the Derby Supporters' clubs demanding an apology from Morris - might be warranted but the timing is tragic - who is working in the background to try and sort this out - looks like no one - so it won't ever get sorted. 

[ExiledAjax]

4 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Dear me, largely rambling gibberish with no substantive arguments addressing the issues just more conspiracy thinking. I am inclined to repeat my original description of posturing.

The sections on parachute payments are of course irrelevant to the case but he seems not to know that the EFL cannot unilaterally change them without Premier League agreement. That level of ignorance from a former club owner rather undermines his credibility.

As does his written English - Grade C must try harder.

 

3 minutes ago, Hxj said:

So given that confrontational statements are the order of the day - you've now even got the Derby Supporters' clubs demanding an apology from Morris - might be warranted but the timing is tragic - who is working in the background to try and sort this out - looks like no one - so it won't ever get sorted. 

Friday lunches really should be limited to two bottles of wine per person.

[Show Me The Money!]

He does have a point about QPR. Same could probably be said about Villa too. If your beach FFP but get promoted you get away with it.

[Monkeh]

2 minutes ago, Show Me The Money! said:

He does have a point about QPR. Same could probably be said about Villa too. If your beach FFP but get promoted you get away with it.

Qpr didn't get away with it, they were heavly fined and suffered from transfer embargo,

In fact it's only thr last 18 months that they finally recovered,

Villa will face the music if they get relegated

[Davefevs]

Kirchner having a right pop on twitter tonight.

 

This isn’t the only tweet.

[chinapig]

1 minute ago, Show Me The Money! said:

He does have a point about QPR. Same could probably be said about Villa too. If your beach FFP but get promoted you get away with it.

Though the QPR case was under an earlier version of the regulations so the comparison doesn't hold. The current version is much stronger and was agreed by all the clubs, including Derby.

Of course both Sheff Wed and Reading have been sanctioned under the current regulations, though neither went into administration. In all 3 cases that was entirely their own fault.

[Show Me The Money!]

1 minute ago, chinapig said:

Though the QPR case was under an earlier version of the regulations so the comparison doesn't hold. The current version is much stronger and was agreed by all the clubs, including Derby.

Of course both Sheff Wed and Reading have been sanctioned under the current regulations, though neither went into administration. In all 3 cases that was entirely their own fault.

I’m not trying to stand up for MM at all. I just want to see the EFL having powers to stop teams getting promoted if they are breaking FFP in doing so.

 If those kinds of rules are in place already then great

…. actually thinking about it in doing that it also just highlights the unfair advantage that teams with PP have

[ExiledAjax]

21 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Kirchner having a right pop on twitter tonight.

 

This isn’t the only tweet.

Honestly, I want Derby to survive insolvency, I really do. I've been flippant about a few things today but if any of their fans are reading this then I really do offer you my sympathy. I know the ones that are really suffering aren't the millionaires but the ordinary fans of Derby. The Club has been punished for the FFP issues, and they've been punished for going into Admin, I have to say that I do hope they are relegated, but I also hope their fans have a club next season (although only so long as the EFL rules are abided by). I hope a solution is found that satisfies everyone as much as can be done.

That said, this public soap opera of 'he said, she said, you say, I say' is electric. I am trying very hard not to find the whole exchange of public statements and open letters grimly amusing. I've worked as an adviser to people with this kind of money and dear god I can only imagine the head-bashing going on in their legal teams and PR teams. I remember the number of times we used to redraft a simple press release issued by an unknown company about a change in director, and compare that to these four or five page letters seemingly fired off into the ether without even running a spellcheck...it is incredible really.

As for Kirchner coming back and sticking his oar in just as we get to lunchtime/late afternoon over this side of the Atlantic...again I repeat that people really need to consider putting down the wine list on Friday lunchtime. It is all very unbecoming.

Edited February 4, 2022 by ExiledAjax