winktheram
-
Posts
142 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by winktheram
-
-
4 minutes ago, Eatonram said:
"They've turned down £2m for Tom Lawrence in the last 6 months of his contract."
On the Boro forum. Who offered us £2M for Tom?
Nobody did.
- I know nuffin and Indy
-
2
-
9 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:
My original point was naively you expect responsible owners to keep up with their tax liabilities and expect them to be doing so unless they declare that they are massively in hock with HMRC.
And not just then decide to throw the problem to someone else by dumping the club in administration. Honour your debts.
We can't. That's why we are in admin. None of it is the fans fault. We know who's fault it is. You can keep repeating the same thing. Gibson is stopping us coming out of admin and if he gets anything for his mad 'claims' that MFC wernt bank in the run in it was all DCFCs fault for spending less that year than MFC did, then the tax man and other local businesses will get much less and possibly nothing.
-
58 minutes ago, I know nuffin said:
If it goes to the high court does it get a jury? If so either side can object to particular juror and I think even the judge if they can prove bias. With the EFL you get what they choose, no challenges no appeal after. Now which one would you pick.....
there's no jury, it'll be heard by a single judge with knowledge in the field. Probs be Mercantile Court, which is for business disputes. And either side cannot choose the judge or indeed complain about who is appointed. Which is why MM would prefer this route, and you cant blame him.
-
-
16 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:
Give him a break, they "haven't even seen the claims"!?!?
Does Rick think there is some huge smoking gun that no one yet knows about? Or has he been told there is one, but doesn't know what it is yet? Or is he totally incompetent/having a breakdown? Joke of a man.
Agree, as originally they were lodged against the EFL, so he/they must have seen them at that juncture. Bloke makes it up.
-
14 minutes ago, DCFC1388 said:
So two left in them. The 'Preferred' preferred bidder all along, Appleby, (as he's the only one that is prepared to give MM what he wants for the stadium and Q seem to be going along with it) but can't raise all the fuss yet. And Binnies who are low ball, want to rent stadium. Not going to end well this.
-
48 minutes ago, Indy said:
Because EFL, Boro and Wycombe are desperate to portray our side as in conflict with each other (hence their constant digs at the administrators, snide comments about feeling sorry for the fans etc). CK may have some issues, but he’s not part of the Derby side, he’s a third party with no dog in this fight and he should keep his counsel. It’s not helpful.
It may not be a pitbull but not so sure he doesn't have something still in the fight.
-
3 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:
You assume he's speaking the truth, not just bitterly poo-stirring?
In the same way why should u assume Q, MM and the EFL are.
-
16 minutes ago, I know nuffin said:
I admire the work done by the fans and the group's especially black and white and Punjabi rams. More strength to their elbows. BUT last night on twitter Black and While invited Kirchener to speak on Monday night on a Twitter marketplace. The WHY is totally beyond me. Yesterday like him or not MM came in with an offer which might well save our Rams who are tottering on a knife edge of oblivion. As fans we need to be patient, let team Derby and the country's MPs, who are on our side, put pressure on the EFL Gibson and MM to get an agreement that his offer will bring us out of this nightmare. We certainly don't want anybody rocking the boat. I take it that CK is an honourable man but shall we say slightly miffed with people at Derby. What good can come out of letting him have free range on what he discloses some of which might start the boat rocking. I am all for free speach but lack and white PLEASE PLEASE rethink the wisdom behind you decision for Monday night and postpone it until after
we are safe. He has had since December to air his feelings and hours after a possible step forward to save our team is scary to me. #savederbycounty
I might be in the minority but I quite like how Kirchner speaks out. Why wouldn't we want to hear if we've been told untruths? Why would anything he says affect any future purchase. If anything it should show up the issues and show up the liars/truth twisters. I'm all for it. Air it all.
-
-
6 minutes ago, David said:
Before I sign off the night and listen to the missus woes from work, just going to say this, don’t be angry at the EFL’s statement tonight, it’s a positive one for us and it clearly states their position which allows us to move forward with a high court judgment.
Whilst we might disagree on the side they fell into, it wasn’t totally unexpected and we’ve been desperate for them to come down off the fence for a while now, this is better than to continue stalling.
Quantuma have what they need now, the EFL’s position and proof of funds to see us through the next couple of months, time for court.
Absolutely David. Things are moving. Q show your hand. Court, Arbitration or Mediation. As Delia would say 'let's be be aving you!'
-
7 minutes ago, Jimbo Ram said:
How?
It's a moot point, as we can't go off an settle the other debts and then ignore other EFL member clubs 'claims' as none of the bidders will do this. But strictly to the law of the land, if a backer was prepared to do this we could. The EFL then just expel us for the misdemeanor of following the law of the land only and not considering EFL member clubs claims. The EFL can do this as they act for the 72 clubs and that's what the club rules say.
-
7 minutes ago, StaffsRam said:
And throwing out a club for complying with the law would be the last thing the EFL ever did.
Good point
-
1 minute ago, Jimbo Ram said:
Surely the actual law overrides EFL rules doesn’t it ??
Yes it does and we can do that. But they will throw us out the league if we do.
-
15 minutes ago, DCFC1388 said:
I think a key part to the statement is -
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
That to me reads like for Quantuma to take it to court/arbitration they needed full clarity on the EFLs position which they now have. Previously the EFL kept saying they wouldnt/couldnt get involved.
Yes. Actually you make a great point. As this is followed by 'we'd like to invite everyone to mediation' Could imply by that the EFL don't want us to go to court, but they have clarified things to allow us to. If Q come out and say, 'great, we'll see you in court then' this will move things on tremendously. And they would have every Derby fan right behind them.
-
Reading the statement again it's quite clear there are 3 ways out. It's in the statement. 1. High Court or 2. Arbitration. to make a judgement on the merits of the claims.
Interesting though the current invite from the EFL is to 3. 'Mediate' with all parties around the table. Which does well and truly nails their colours to the mast, as the expectation would be everyone gets a bit of the pie, and the inference Mel/MSD give up some in favour of Boro/WWs unproven claims.
We have to point a big finger at Q though. Why haven't they either done 1. High Court or 2. Arbitration, it'll cost but its much, much less than the claims, and if they are sure they will win the argument, it sorts it out once and for all and potentially the cost are paid by the other side. What the feck have they been doing, take the parasites to arbitration/Court ffs?
-
3 hours ago, duncanjwitham said:
?
apart from the fraud bit........................I'll get me coat
-
Decent from an Udders fan: ................although I have no sympathy for the plight Derby have found themselves in (totally self inflicted through mismanagement and fraud), but full credit to their fans. They sang their hearts out, supported their team throughout even when going behind and also behaved themselves - unlike the recent shithouses of Stoke, Hull, Millwall and West Brom. A credit to their club - who frankly don’t deserve them.
-
16 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:
No . Money is to pay football creditors. Of which none are either Boro or Wycombe.
....yet.....
sorry being mischievous assuming the outcome of the 'independent arbitrator'
-
12 hours ago, KBB said:
The next push on twitter and in the media needs to be to try and sell out every single home game for the rest of the season.
If we average every ticket price to just £10 as a very low estimate, then 30,000 fans at £10 a pop is already £300k to the club plus any food and drink and judging the lines for half time there was a hungry and thirsty crowd.
The fans could yet play a key role in the short term.
Let's sell those tickets. Let's pack the ground and eat those pies.
Much love.
You need to take 19k season ticket money off that, already paid for and spent by the club mate. Your point is a good one though. Fill the stadium every game we can muddle through till the end of the season in admin. Which hopefully won't be the case anyway (admin wise)
-
38 minutes ago, Rich84 said:
I think you are too young to make that statement....
In the 1980's they couldn't get anywhere near selling out OT for games because they hadn't won owt for many a year, I think it was 1989 when we won 2-1, Goddard and Saunders, that there were about 35k in OT, at least 7k were Derby, the capacity was close to 50k due to terracing
Liverpool always took/take huge away followings. If they didn't get in their end they'd be in ours. Tbf united never not sell out an away end either.
-
5 hours ago, TaahnRam said:
Very short. Go back 15 years from 2018 we have higher crowds every year. All time average attendance higher than theirs. Deluded.
- Rammy03, TheresOnlyWanChope and SKRam
-
1
-
2
-
1 hour ago, Tyler Durden said:
Sorry if this has already been mentioned why is the stadium not being included in the sale?
This was always my concern that we end playing in a stadium we don't own at the mercy of whoever the owner is.
If this is an attempt by Morris to claw some more cash back for himself after dumping the club in administration then its disgraceful
I reckon its part of a bigger picture further down the track. Binny has the £20m for the stadium but has to deal with the claims in some way- but for now to get deal moving he's having to stuff it down the back of the sofa for the potential loss against MFC and WW. If, as we expect the claims are dismissed then the stadium gets sorted down the track and he pis the £20m out. If lose, Morris takes the hit for the gap (assuming it's never gonna be near £40m+ or even £20m). Decent compromise and if MM is also so sure the claims are rubbish he has a very low risk but is also on the hook. Would seem a decent shout to unblock the cliams issues without having to actually deal with them directly at present but assuring the EFL they will face them.
-
11 minutes ago, vonwright said:
It's possible both these are true:
a) If Morris relinquished the stadium and took the hit over the loan personally, a buyer would live with a compromised settlement with Middlesbrough and Wycombe
b) If Middlesbrough and Wycombe dropped their claims, a buyer would live with having to pay Morris £20million for the stadium to pay off his loan
...and that's dangerous, because it becomes a game of chicken and the big losers if no one backs down are us, the fans.
It's also just possible Morris can't easily settle the loan. Who knows how much money he really has?
This is exactly it. Or somewhere in between. Putting aside the 'rights' of the claims for one moment to save the club. Gimp and the WW dude are saying MM should take a bit of the hit here. Lets say a compromise is £5m to Gimp and WW. As MM has a personal guarantee to MSD he would have to stump up that £5m. Or whatever the compromise is. Both have said they will deal. I'm guessing MM, as he is already in for £200m+ doesn't want to throw another £5m or whatever away and would also say they are spurious claims. BUT, perhaps some of the 'pressure' should also be diverted to MM - he could unlock this.
The Administration Thread
in Derby County Forum
Posted
How does this then sit with the rules 3.5 and 4.4. David has highlighted. Is it one or the other. Clubs can't claim against each other or yes they can through arbitration. I am struggling to understand the contradiction?