Eatonram

With all due respect it’s a bit rich a QPR fan posting about a club repaying it’s debts ?

I have said for ages that a lot of our punishment by the efl has been by stealth. The points and a fine is one thing, but it is the embargoes and the lack of being able to extend existing players contracts that will kill us. And the ridiculous decision to include all those who played in the Chorley cup game as professional standing players.
 

@Bald Eagle's Barmy Armyis the EFL statement in line with what you have heard. Does it make sense to you?

Exactly this.
The only way to get people on side is to say we’ve been punished and it’s been accepted. 
We need to highlight the extent of our punishment:
- fined 
- huge points deductions 
- multi window transfer embargo’s
- forced to sell off/release key players
- takeover deals being obstructed 
Then ask, when have we been punished enough, and can we be left to get on with saving our club without interference?
That’s the bottom line now!

I take my hat off to @Curtainsfor going on TalkSport and fighting our corner, but just a thought. Nobody in the football world is going to have even a smidge of sympathy for our points deductions, either for going into administration or P&S breaches. They aren’t going to care too much regarding the amortisation technicalities either. They will consider we (Morris) was trying to gain some advantage, and fwiw I think he was too.
We should begrudgingly accept that is where we are. It isn’t going to change. For those getting air time, or writing to MPs or newspapers, or tweeting, the message we should be giving is that we accept our penalties, but those penalties awarded by the EFL should be the full and final penalty.
1) Other football clubs shouldn’t be allowed to pile on - it hasn’t happened in the past with QPR, Leeds, Leicester, etc.
2) We didn’t go after QPR when there was a more evident case of similar wrong doing.
3) The current spat is a personal battle between Gibson and Morris.
4) What justification is there for Boro & Wycombe to be considered football creditors, when to date they are only unsubstantiated claims that the EFL know little about.
5) The Administrators should be able to proceed in accordance with the Law of the Land, not be beholden to ill-written, and out of date, EFL rules and regulations.
6) If this is happening to Derby now, it could be happening to your club next.
These are more important, more powerful points to be making. They are more likely to have a great affect on how we move forward.

So there is a forest guy on Efl board . Forest have made two low ball bids for our players.
 
and Efl has given us an ultimatum that happens to coincide with the transfer window.
it stinks to high heaven. Very very worrying also if we had accepted a bid of £500k for Festy.

Is it really that important to “own” the stadium we play in if we have a very long lease at an agreed annual rental? In fact could it be a better scenario? 
 
if the lease agreed with MM also has a sizeable rental increase in the contract when we reach the Prem, which we will during the lease period, it could be a good deal for both parties. 
 
quite relaxed about the stadium ownership if contracts are tight. 

IMO this is part of the EFL/Boro campaign over the last few days to shift the spotlight away from them and onto Morris. We all know that Morris ducked up big time and it will be a very long time (if ever) before he's forgiven for that, but it doesn't change the fact that EFL and Boro are actively twisting the knife and we should do everything we can to keep the spotlight on them for their incompetent/malicious behaviour.

Forest do own their stadium but not the ground it sits on - so it's just like a static caravan.

Is it really that important to “own” the stadium we play in if we have a very long lease at an agreed annual rental? In fact could it be a better scenario? 
 
if the lease agreed with MM also has a sizeable rental increase in the contract when we reach the Prem, which we will during the lease period, it could be a good deal for both parties. 
 
quite relaxed about the stadium ownership if contracts are tight. 

Is it really that important to “own” the stadium we play in if we have a very long lease at an agreed annual rental? In fact could it be a better scenario? 
 
if the lease agreed with MM also has a sizeable rental increase in the contract when we reach the Prem, which we will during the lease period, it could be a good deal for both parties. 
 
quite relaxed about the stadium ownership if contracts are tight. 

Something I've wondered about, just a hypothetical.
How would the parasite claims be considered by a club not in administration?
Would they be expected to consider them in their accounts before they became an actual cost?
Would that affect the clubs P&S submissions for that year or only if and when they became an actual cost?
I don't know if anyone has any ideas on this, but it does give rise to some interesting scenarios. 

Just got a good mention on the Marr show. DET story covered in Paper review. Derby must not be allowed to die.  

Just got a good mention on the Marr show. DET story covered in Paper review. Derby must not be allowed to die.  

This would be more fitting at the moment - absolutely love this video. Sums up what it’s like for that 90 minutes or so a week being a football fan

No. He IS responsible for our situation now.
If it wasn't Gibson and Couhigs claims, then Q would have announced a preffered bidder and we'd be on our way to coming out of admin and with the possibility of staying up.
Now because of those claims we have 'hints' being leaked from the EFL that they will 'pragmatically' allow us to restart in League 2 (oh how could be not be grateful?)...
Ultimately they are responsible.

Just got a good mention on the Marr show. DET story covered in Paper review. Derby must not be allowed to die.  

Isn’t that the entire problem. The EFL says they meet their definition of a football body, which no-one disputes. The administrators are saying that they don’t meet the insolvency law definition of a creditor, so the fact that they are a football body is irrelevant. 

One of the MPs referred to this in the parliamentary debate when they said that Boro and Wycombe were bringing a ‘grievance’ rather than a ‘claim’. 
And that’s before we even consider whether their argument even has any merit. 

I’d go further than that. They are not as yet “creditors” let alone “football creditors” and that is the main point. 

I’d go further than that. They are not as yet “creditors” let alone “football creditors” and that is the main point. 

Just got a good mention on the Marr show. DET story covered in Paper review. Derby must not be allowed to die.  

The EFL could easily say to its member clubs Boro and Wycombe , if you aren’t happy with the way we have regulated Derby County, in terms of timings and points deducted, then sue us directly. This would close down their claims immediately as they have no substance and avoid setting a dangerous inter club legal action precedent.

Just got a good mention on the Marr show. DET story covered in Paper review. Derby must not be allowed to die.  

Just got a good mention on the Marr show. DET story covered in Paper review. Derby must not be allowed to die.