The Scarlet Pimpernel

7 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said:

Why aren’t Middlesbrough suing Aston Villa? The team who actually won the playoffs while failing FFP?

 

I think its because they went up and left the EFL thus out of reach of any charges?

8 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

happy to explain and you should feel free to call me a naive fool

 MM was in the position where he was haemorrhaging cash into the bottomless pit of our beloved club, as he funded us through covid and as the efl allowed Gibson and his cronies to spin out resolution of FFP. (MM must share some blame for this of course.) So he was at the end of his tether as his nemesis, Gibbo, literally forced him to sign a cheque every month for £2m (or whatever) with no end in sight.  He had a sale in prospect in June/July and it fell away, most likely because of the FFP issues (and it was a hugely difficult time to sell a club). He was being driven mad because Gibbo had him over a barrel, so he came to think: this has to stop. He told this to MSD and then Q were consulted    Q advised MM and MSD that administration was the best route to reach a timely deal with EFL (because relations between MM and EFL were so poor) and would ultimately be the best for the club because it would enable a sale.   So MM's decision to put us in admin was not made because he simply decided to walk away into the sunset and leave us to the jackals; it was made mostly to 1 stem the cash burn and 2 get the club sold. I know this decision has major consequences for unsecured creditors and the taxman - they have to take a haircut - but it was an understandable one - even for a fan -  given how much he had invested. 

I was catatonic when we went into admin, I couldn't believe he had done it. But having listened to him and Q talking about it, I now sort of get it. And it may yet prove to have been a good decision, especially if Uncle Mike takes the reins and if Wayne keeps showering us with gifts on the pitch. We will see.

So that's the background. MM will now be biding his time. He will understand that his legacy is in tatters but that, if the next phase goes well, some of that will be clawed back, especially if he is seen to assist. Consistent with this, Q tell us he and they are 'aligned' 

So if the admins say to him: MSD are max-ed out, you are the only person who can keep this ship afloat, I think there is a decent chance that he will put his hands into his deep pockets one last time   

I've wanted to voice this for some time but not smart enough to articulate it. Thank you. 

1 hour ago, SBW said:

I'm not sure they can act so subjectively.  We all have one view on it, that has been aided by Q's version of events.

We're now seeing Rick Parry's comments, of course his are from his angle too.

But if there is a process it has to be followed objectively, Parry's comments suggest that.  So it leaves an alternative angle of thinking.

I'm not saying that they are acting with total impartiality, it feels like anything that can be used against the club, is.  I think the comments of them acting unlawfully, based off Q's comments are possibly misguided though.

I am an objective and pragmatic person, so I try to view things through neutral eyes, as it best places my judgement, that's all.

 

So what is your view as to whether there is any advantage to be gained  by Derby County creating a potential debtor by threatening a claim against QPR under the same pretence as Boro against us?

Surely that would provide some security for the potential new owner? Either both succeed or both fail and our claim would be more positive as we were actually in the final. 

The only way to cut through this is to higher the stakes by going after QPR. 

3 minutes ago, Hanny said:

My opinion on the new details: 

EFL are trying to save face while continuing to show strength. 
 

To note: I am still working under the impression, the EFL do not have jurisdiction to impose a demand to settle any random claims that aren’t official creditors. So, they continue to push a demand they can’t legally enforce. However: 

The recent list of ‘how to resolve these claims’ gives one new option that I think is the save-face option to get a sale done: ‘take on liability and resolve after exiting admin.’

Of course these claims shouldn’t even be a barrier, and the EFL should not be demanding anything in this regard. However, this option will give any bidder a relatively safe path to buying the club. 
 

Why safe? Because as rightly pointed out numerous times, Boro/Wycombe/etc have zero evidence to prove the claims of monies owed by Derby. And I would be surprised if a court would even hear the case  

So, while a headache for any new owner, it’s more of a task item needing checked off vs a real threat. 
 

Hopefully I’m reading that correctly, and this new ‘out’ will help sort a PB in short order. 

 

Yes but can you trust the EFL's internal panel the LAP? 

23 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

The way I see it is Wycombe and Middlesbrough are not currently creditors of any description. Simply submitting a claim doesn’t make you a creditor until either you win your day in court or a settlement is agreed. Neither of these have happened so, in theory, exit from administration should be able to proceed without resolving them and I can’t see how the EFL have any right to insist they are settled first. The only people that could/should be delaying the announcement of a PB is the PB themselves if they don’t want to progress to that stage with a potential future compensation payment hanging around.

Instead of allowing them to hold us to ransom (which it seems is exactly what they’re doing) the EFL should have insisted Wycombe and Middlesbrough put up or shut up long ago. Sadly, if they did take us to court, even though there chances of victory may be slim in the extreme, they know it would take a long time - time we don’t have. They seem to be taking advantage of the situation to receive a settlement for a claim they may have minimal chance of winning if it was allowed to proceed through the courts. That strikes me as immoral.

Totally agree which is why I was suggesting some security for the PB with a claim for damages from QPR. 

So we are at an impass. The PB can't engage due to the potential of a claim by the parasites. The claims are unquantifiable hence the risk being too great. Potential football creditors we are told. 

Using exactly the same yardstick then why don't we bring a claim against QPR thus creating a potential football debtor? This way if one claim succeeds they both succeed. If one claim fails they both fail. This gives the PB some security. 

QPR Bobby on here say we can't claim past 6 years. Not sure the in house LAP route follows the law as such. 

Desperate times call for desperate measures. 

Didn't a couple of posters confirm that there are staff meetings arranged for tomorrow? The first one being at 9.00am? I guess they are now cancelled...... https://media.tenor.com/images/d00c7a36b764fde7848e72b8d680ebe9/tenor.gif

This whole issue and the parasites role in it has gone on in the shadows long enough.. Time to broadcast loud and from the roof tops exactly what's going on. 

Where is Chris Coles when you want him. Come on radio Derby... Get on it. 

Can't bbc radio Derby and local TV start banging the drum to raise the issue? Surely they can do better than they are and then perhaps some national media will get involved.

This whole situation is beyond belief. 

4 minutes ago, ThePrisoner said:

Imagine he’s sent a sealed bid

We certainly need some fresh money. 

11 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Yeah, got to assume Arteta was pointing out how limited his squad is. The fullback that got subbed cost £8m didn't he? Looked rubbish. ?

Daft as it sounds Roy that's dead right. That full backs performance was shocking wasn't it!

7 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

To be fair, Arsenal didn't play like "a strong Arsenal side" 

That performance was the worst I think I have seen Arsenal play for many a year. Far too many youngsters and fringe players simply not up to it.

3 minutes ago, StrawHillRam said:

It was more than 6 years ago, so beyond statute of limitations for a claim.

Don't forget this is not going through a law court but through the EFL. 

If we owe £45m to Boro and as such they become a creditor then by the same logic, using the same method of calculation we surely must claim against QPR for what will be a greater sum (as we got to the final). As such QPR become a huge debtor in the process. Is my logic wrong? 

Something has to break the impass as its killing us

In all seriousness what if anything are Boro and Wycombe waiting for. If they have a claim persue it. If its just hogwash why don't the admin at Derby call it out and/or ignore it. This has gone on for long enough. 

10 hours ago, Crewton said:

Wikipedia says it's Jimmy Greaves - 357 to Steve's 314. Those seasons in Div. 2 obviously the difference and I doubt Greavsie had many assists! 

Interesting that the great Jimmy Greaves wanted to play for Derby when he left spurs for West ham. 

1 hour ago, nottingram said:

I know we don’t see what goes on in training, and that is an important point to make, but he is not getting any game time to make an impression. His last appearance was for 3 minutes away at Millwall, two months ago. He hasn’t had meaningful minutes since the Blackburn game at home. He played poorly, yes, but so did everyone. Since then we have seen Aghatise come on as a sub over him (I believe to try and make a point) and Sam Baldock starting over him in the attacking midfield trio. I refuse to believe this is on any sort of on pitch merit because a) Baldock is crap, b) you are probably going to have to sub him after 25 minutes anyway and c) he is out of contract in two weeks. I can understand him not getting in while we’re playing well and scoring a few goals, before this month we have been very very average with very little to lose.

It is a waste of time letting him play in the U23’s where he can half arse it and still be the best player on the pitch by a mile. Nobody is learning anything from it. It isn’t going to help him improve, it isn’t going to improve his work ethic and it isn’t going to make Rooney pick him for the first team.

In my opinion he is our best player technically. Rooney has spoken lots about man management, surely part of that is finding a way to unlock that? I don’t think it’s going to be by alienating him.

I am pretty confident in saying if we sold him, we would hugely regret it, unless it is to literally keep the club in existence.

I respect your view nottingram but the bit in bold is where we differ..........I don't think he's anywhere near our best technical player. 

2 hours ago, Jubbs said:

Hard to stand out when he's playing out of position and making sub appearances. Look what happens when he plays in his correct position for the U23's...

I don't think it is Jubbs. Quality always shows.

We don't want anything from the EFL. Don't want it don't need it. 

This blaming of the coaches is wrong. Ability will out. If he wants to play then make yourself undropable in training. When you get some game time, stand out. He's not had a ball and chain attached to him. Step up lad. 

The potential for a business going forward post administration is important. A large enthusiastic customer base ensures that.