TooFarInToTurnRed

2 minutes ago, OUFCfan said:

Thanks for this, 1 thing I don't get though, if the claims are as frivolous as most on here seem to say (I genuinely have no idea what they are btw), then why has it put bidders off? Surely they and their lawyers would look at it, know it's no risk and carry on?

Because the EFL run the arbitration process and nobody has confidence in applying even their own regulations correctly. Add in a bit of subjectivity and anything could happen. I told a mate last week that they extended our embargo so we had to start each game with only 9 players and they thought it might be true!

5 minutes ago, Eatonram said:

In a Nutshell, the EFL's position is ....if we make a decision on this to unblock the logjam, Boro will sue us instead of Derby.

The extortion is quite simply that crude.

Clever solution though: "In an attempt to move this particular matter forward swiftly, the EFL has written to all parties with a proposed solution to negotiate a deal via independent legal mediation"

Get someone else to rule on it so they are in the clear!!!!!!

Just now, Barney1991 said:

Everyone needs to wake up to the fact you can blame middlesborough Wycombe efl as much as you want. Mel Morris is 70 percent to blame for this mess. Kitchener deal fell apart because Morris refused to sell for less than he wanted. He’s getting ripped to shreds in statements and won’t show face to save the club from the mess he caused. Everyone is to fixed on efl and orher clubs and he’s setting off in the sunset Scott clear.

I agree but unfortunately as a group of fans our best hope is to apply as much pressure on the people who need to find a settlement for the future of our club. Boro feeling the need to issue what is in reality a defensive statement however it may seem speaks volumes, they are feeling the pressure and are looking for a way out I suspect.

1 minute ago, Norman said:

My conclusion for why its worth. 

Steve Gibson still hates MM. 

Steve Gibson has been given so much perceived power by the EFL not telling him to pipe down through fear of being sued that he thinks he has the right to get answers to those questions. 

The administrators have no choice but to be ballsy and take this down to the wire. 

The statement form Middlesbrough is about as unprofessional as I've ever seen, especially since they have tried to write it professionally. It makes me despair we have to deal with someone who has the ego to put that out in the public and think it looks good.

Its been 3 days since MPs, media and all of our fans found out just how incompetent the EFL are, confirming many of our suspicions. We have 11 more days. That's plenty of time for many more twists and turns. 

We just need to realise, that for us to come out of this, the administrators will take us all the way to the deadline. 

Could not agree more the later they leave it with more and more pressure being applied then the deal the club/new owner gets is better.

My belief is that there will be nominal settlements with Boro and Wycombe agreed at the 11th hour.

Just now, Animal is a Ram said:

What I'm struggling to reconcile is - surely, until arbitration/courts discuss the merits and rule that we owe MFC/WWFC, how can they be classed as creditors?

Anyone help me on this?

The problem as I see it is that they COULD become creditors somewhere down the line after the administration process and the club would be in a whole load of debt again.

1 minute ago, Maharan said:

One interesting point from the administration update which seems to have been overtaken by the shitstorm of updates;

‘The uncertainty around the possibility of further sanctions from the EFL in the event the chosen bid does not deliver the financial compensation to pass the EFL rules around payment to both football creditors and other creditors.’ 
 

I wonder if that’s a general statement because none of the bids meet the minimum thresholds to comply with EFL rules?

Think that means if we have to treat Boro and Wycombe as football creditors we will need to dilute all the creditors down including football ones

1 minute ago, MK-Ram said:

Not missed the point, but conscious HMRC would be an unsecured creditor.

In the event of Liquidation I thought HMRC would jump above football creditors. I think football creditors rule only matters if you want to stay in the league. Anyone confirm?

One point I haven’t seen made yet is how the performance this season undermines Boro’s argument that bigger budget = better performance in the league. 

Add 21pts back and we’re currently sitting above Sheffield Utd who have parachute payments supporting a premier league wage bill not a threadbare squad packed with freebies and academy products.

1 hour ago, Unlucky Alf said:

In what way taken out of context somewhat?,

 

4. On 6 September 2019 MFC commenced arbitration proceedings against EFL contending
that EFL had failed to take timely disciplinary action against DCFC. On 29 November 2019
MFC and EFL agreed that this arbitration would be stayed and EFL would commence
disciplinary proceedings against DCFC. MFC indicated that if EFL started such
disciplinary proceedings, MFC would seek compensation from DCFC pursuant to EFL
Reg 92.2.5. In other words, they would apply for compensation on the back of a finding of
breach by DCFC.

Your assertion was clearly that there was some sort of clandestine pact between the EFL and Boro when it was all done through proper procedure. Nowhere near as dodgy as it was made out to be.

Boro took issue with the EFL for not applying the the rules, the EFL applied the rules and Boro dropped the claim simple. This part seems fairly reasonable to me. 

2 minutes ago, chipperram said:

I haven’t heard it, brilliant then, an audible admission of complicity in this whole sham. The police should be informed of this, hopefully some bigwig has heard it and may act on it.

This is taken out of context somewhat,  Boro took action against the EFL for not enforcing the rules which was halted when we were charged.

https://www.efl.com/contentassets/c9fc5dceaa7f4b62b81dca0b9e2f7c9d/2020.10.26---decision-on-mfc-redaction.pdf

6 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

Makes no financial sense. But one can hope - it was reported that Mike Ashley was going to see what Gibson would want, I think?

Apparently Mike Ashley was seen in the Middlesboro branch of Sports Direct picking up a baseball bat. 

5 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

As I understand it - this hasn't just been prepared for, it was actively proposed, but shut down due to the EFL not ruling on whether the claims by MFC and WWFC are football debts or not.

If they rule 'in favour' of those two, we're finished. Nobody will taken on that risk.

If they rule 'in favour' of DCFC, we're saved, but at the anger of MFC and WWFC who would, given their seemingly nuclear stance, probably attack the EFL and then the new owners again for good measure.

In reality whichever way the decision went Boro and Wycombe will get nothing wouldn’t they?

Think this is the “pragmatism” that was being called for yesterday. 

Claim is completely based on timing of the punishment which was wholly in the hands of the Independent Disciplinary Panel & the EFL.

Fails to understand that if we hadn’t agreed a sanction it would still be ongoing now probably!

So a fair summary of the last 24hrs:

EFL now backpedaling desperately looking for a way out that saved face.

Boro backpedaling now public opinion has clearly gone against them and saying they wanted to settle.

Wycombe gently fading back in to insignificance. 

Quantuma quietly sitting tight lipped knowing they were right.

Me having a new found respect for my MP!

20 minutes ago, StarterForTen said:

Great piece of digging David; we've all become amateur sleuths, old school journos or bar room barristers in the last few weeks haven't we!

While this points to the claims as they stand not being admissible as football creditors within the administration process, it wouldn't necessary make them go away further down the line would it? The new club owners could still face the claims, and after due process, should they be found to have merit and value, be liable to meet those costs in full.

I agree and think that is exactly what the EFL said, they would be football creditors if found in their favour. 

Just now, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

YES. There is nothing in the legislation to support this stance there taking, in fact there own rules prohibit it.  There making it up as they go along.  In the meantime, Stoke can sign our player despite ramming 30 million quid of covid losses into accounts that finish in May 2020. They can duck off.

Could what the EFL are doing therefore be considered Contempt of Court as the administration order is a legal process granted by a court. 

2 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

what does this mean in legal terms "these disputed claims cannot be compromised"?

It means what they are doing does not fit the law

We should be instructing lawyers to go to the high court and get a high court injunction against the EFL interfering in the legal process of Administration. We are being forced to settle an untested case with Boro/Wycombe under duress.

52 minutes ago, SamUltraRam said:

The potential for other clubs getting into trouble is why we have to keep fighting to pick up every point right up to the end of the season - just in case !!

The article suggests that it is more likely to be next season and beyond that other clubs have difficulty.

We might be the only club in the championship next year without a points deduction. 

18 minutes ago, Andicis said:

They don't have the authority to do that, but if they won't allow us to pass on any legal responsibilities to the next owner it's going to be that or we go bust. 

So, unlikely as it is could Mel Morris legally agree to keep any liability from these claims?
Could we then see a counter claim against Boro for costing him millions due to the lost sale caused by their low Pride Park valuation. Could be boom or bust for Boro, see if Gibson has the balls for it. 

Are the EFL are legally allowed to interfere in the Administration process to this extent? I very much doubt it

We should not let the views of Newcastle fans determine our opinion. They have been deluded for many years that they are a big club and should be competing in the Champions league expecting investment to suit.

Even with their new owners they will find it difficult to break in to the elite group and in a year or two the fans will be complaining they are not being ambitious enough.

5 minutes ago, Ramos said:

Can’t wait for the stadiums new name…..

 

The SportsDirect Arena at the the House of Fraser pride park football stadium for football. 

I’m looking forward to the giant mug coming free with my season ticket for next year!

13 hours ago, Ramarena said:

If this is true, then liquidation looks less likely/unlikely.

They’d be accepting offers to pay as much to all creditors, as soon as possible if liquidation was a distinct possibility, before the players registrations default to the EFL upon liquidation and only football creditors have access.

As others have mention preserving the value of the squad suggests there’s a deal in the offing!

?

It would surely depend on whether the received offer is good value not just a club who thinks we’re desperate trying to get our players on the cheap.

Have to remember that we would still be due a fee for under 23 players who move at the end of their contracts. The PFCC (Tribunal) awards are often a lot more generous than you may think.