The Scarlet Pimpernel

58 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

The rules don’t encourage or discourage disputes between clubs  They simply regulate whether those disputes are or are not subject to arbitration. As to whether the EFL itself encourages club to club disputes, there’s every reason to think it’s the last thing they would do 

How come the EFL encouraged Boro to claim against us to stay legal action against themselves then?

Like all of us I don't know what's going on but surely DCFC or Mel Morris have to take this to court and fast. We have at least two parties waiting to buy us.....the delays are scandalous. 

1 hour ago, David said:

These are questions that need to be directed to the EFL, as far as I’m aware only RamsTrust and MP’s have that direct line to hold meetings with them outside of Quantuma.

I have put across these to RamsTrust on Twitter, received a reply to say they will look into them.

The Supporters Charter Group hold meetings with Quantuma, who can’t really answer them and possibly want answers themselves.

Needless to say, still no reply from the EFL to the email I sent questioning the ability to be impartial and regulation 4.4

Can your excellent points be sent to Margaret Beckett? At least she I believe would wade in if given the ammo. 

23 minutes ago, David said:

This is what we're up against. 

 

Reporter for TalkSport and Sky Sports. I mean, it's just total and utter poo. 

Someone who does twitter please put him right. Such ignorance.

15 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Interesting response from an e-mail to the EFL:-

 

"While recognising this remains a challenging time for everyone connected to the Club, the EFL’s statement (issued on Thursday 3 February here) reiterates the EFL’s request for relevant and associated parties to enter formal collaborative negotiations to actively seek out the compromises and solutions. This also includes continuing transparent dialogue with politicians and engagement with Derby Supporters’ Groups.

As a point of clarification, and for the avoidance of doubt, the EFL has not declared the claims made by Middlesbrough and Wycombe as football debt, rather that under the terms of the EFL’s Insolvency Policy, the claims cannot be ignored. Put another way, the EFL cannot rule that they are not creditors as the claims may subsequently be upheld by independent process. The EFL cannot unilaterally decide if the claims should be dismissed, that is why under the terms of the EFL’s Articles of Association and Insolvency policy we are working with parties involved, and continuing to encourage them to seek to progress this matter independently, via commercial agreement, arbitration or the courts.

While not the only solution, when there are disputes between Clubs, there is an arbitration mechanism as set out in our Regulations which is independent and objective, consisting of lawyers and judges, appointed to settle disputes in a fair manner. Clearly nobody wants disputes between Clubs but they will occasionally arise, be over transfer fees or player medicals for example, and the mechanism in the rules means they can be resolved independently of the League.

As the statement clarifies, the EFL has reiterated this position to Quantuma, 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.  

Again we do understand that this is a concerning time for Derby supporters, and the EFL will endeavour to provide updates on any progress achieved as a result of this request and any subsequent discussions in due course."

 

2 main points from this:-

The EFL are NOT classing the Boro and WW as football debts

Quantuma are in a position to the apply to the High Court

Both of these seem to go against what some fans have been assuming over the past week or so.

Both good points but also and very importantly the arbitration mechanism they speak of (the bit in bold) is surely regarding charges brought by themselves the EFL as clearly their rules state that member clubs cannot independently pursue one another.

This really needs clarifying by the EFL as they appear to be disregarding their own rules to suit themselves in their desperation for Boro not to sue them.

3 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

How do you say his name? 

Malcolm 

Just now, IslandExile said:

Isn't the ball now firmly in EFL's court?

Isn't it up to them to approach Boro and Wycome over Mel's offer and determine how they now want it settled? Even if that is to flatly refuse to switch their claim to Mel, the person, from Derby County.

Please somebody get the ball rolling.

That's the problem, those that can don't want to. Checkmate!

6 minutes ago, Steve How Hard? said:

Does anybody know why this game hasn't been selected for Ramstv coverage? 

Its on sky I think?

So, in effect we (Derby in administration) are powerless to speed up the sale of the club. We are completely tied up in a thousand knots. Unfortunately then I think the only way forward is for the administrators to cut through the crap, say enough is enough and threaten liquidation by publishing a forward date to do so. If that doesn't force the issue nothing will and if DCFC do go under the EFL & the parasites will have to deal with the almighty row and stink that will surely be levelled at them.

All we can do as fans is what we have been doing, support the team on the pitch (not bothered which entity owns them) whether that be in the championship, league 1, league 2 or versus the Dog & Duck pub side.

No way should we pay the parasites a single penny. Ive had enough I'm afraid.

8 minutes ago, David said:

Could drop him a PM, Jim is now on the forum -  @RamsfanJim

Ive just dropped a line to Jim about getting a specific answer if possible to the 4.4/4.5 EFL rule about clubs not claiming off one another.

16 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

No. The reason I’m being so gobby is I’ve spent endless days and nights working on situations like this. So I’d be an idiot if I didn’t have a decent handle on what’s going on and I am very frustrated at watching it playing out and reading posts on here.  Experience counts for a lot but I certainly don’t confuse it with intelligence 

Kevin, what is your view on the EFL seemingly ignoring their own  regulation 4.4 and 4.5 (I think) which Mel flagged up. This surely outlaws the claim from Boro against us? 

Looking at it realistically you would think that buying the stadium for £20m is a bargain isn't it? You get an asset of arguably £80m.

23 minutes ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

Well with that being the case, what are these arbitration processes for? ?

I think for appeals against decisions brought about from EFL themselves, not club on club. 

Don't their own rules forbid clubs taking action against each other? MM pointed it out in his statement. 

Has Parry ever addressed that particular point? 

Mel's statement was designed to flush out intent. Does Gibson want compensation for his perceived loss as he claims or does he want to just destroy dcfc? 

I agree they may well say its dcfc they are after and Mel may well have to indemnify dcfc but at least now the pressure has just sky rocketed on the parasites and the EFL. 

9 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Not true.

It finally comes out and says Boro and Wycombe are football debts.

I'm agreeing with you Roy. They have always held that view, only now are they admitting it. Disgusting delays. 

The EFL statement says absolutely nothing new. All they have done is nailed their intransigence to a their mast. Hopefully they will be the architects of their own destruction. They are utterly disgusting. 

We have done incredibly well. Keep going. Have faith in the management team. 

6 minutes ago, minesahartington said:

Is it on red button? Can’t see it anywhere 

Rams TV - Tenner!

Blimey, haven't we got an actual Barrister as a member to cut through all this?

52 minutes ago, WharfedaleRam said:

Coldplay's 'Paradise'

Para Para Parasites

Para Para Parasites

woa oh oh oh etc etc!

Love it! Would be great to hear that ringing out round Gibsons football hovel.

Just now, Curtains said:

More convinced now that the Administrators are taking the right and only route through this myriad 

Yes, it has to be resolved and the sooner the better. We are all a little concerned but if justice is done the parasites claim will be thrown out.

2 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

I was commenting about the 'largesse' that is being attributed to Palarse.

But of course there would be an 'auction' when he was out of contract - if he's still scoring goals. Do you think only Palarse would have taken interest in a young Championship striker with his pedigree?

The auction wouldn't help Derby. 

8 hours ago, Andicis said:

Like I said - if you wait to the Summer you'll have plenty more clubs to compete with, he's free to go wherever. It's a risky move. As I said in my previous post. 

They wouldn't be paying Derby anything though. Just a competition to offer him better wages. How does that help Derby? 

1 minute ago, StrawHillRam said:

efl have agreed we can have him back on loan for the rest of this season. 

Is this a fact?