Oldben
-
Posts
1,523 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Oldben
-
-
-
-
-
So that's where Derbys money is going
-
I'd like Derby to sign ...
- Cole Stockton, morcambe
- Matthew Taylor, Oxford
- scott Twine, mk dons
- Ryan hardie, Plymouth
- paddy Lane, Fleetwood
-
Free agents don't help understand the embargo, sure the club can sign them as long as the current squad size isn't bigger than efl allowable size which just happens to be almost the minimum amount for a squad.
The next issue is derby can't compete on salaries for those free agents, spend amount on salaries is restricted under the embargo
The next is is that with Derby in its current position, which quality free agents would look derbys way, unless of course the salaries paid were high.
-
-
Wycombes superfluous case has yet to be dealt with, meaning the transfer embargo hasn't been dealt with.
Of boro and wycombes cases, the wycombe one is the case I'd have most like to take to the efl arbitration.
Moving forward derbys insurance policy against being sued is the only way for clubs to protect themselves.
In the nfl clubs regularly sue each other, that's a culture that Couhig comes from.
If derby had an insurance protection policy in place before, the messing about with boro and Wycombe would have ended differently as the legal costs would and any claim would have been covered.
-
The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.
Sun Tzu, The Art of War
Derby have dealt with Boro without fighting a legal battle or having to pay for one.
Even if that feels a bit like a hollow victory, I will take it.
Hopefully derby can beat boro on the pitch.
-
it would be interesting to know what Morris agreed to pay Gibson.
What happens now with the Wycombe claim
-
10 hours ago, PistoldPete said:
MAybe. Hopefully though the more pressure on wycombe hopeless case the more the stupid claim is likely to get kicked into touch.
Agreed ?
When I look at Wycombe, I see a club that was promoted in a dubious manner from league one (efl fault for the way their promotion was calculated, the season ending early due to covid).
Then I also see a club wanting to blame us for their season of poor performances, they weren't strong enough to compete in the Championship.
Now to try and get money due to losses sustained when they were relegated, they have unfairly targeted derby due to their belief that they wouldn't have been relegated if derby resubmitted accounts earlier than deadlines for resubmitted accounts given to derby by the efl.
-
52 minutes ago, DerbysLane said:
Why would he be in financial difficulty? The profit exceeds the losses?
Sorry I forgot to include this article about wycombes losses.
-
Couhig in my opinion is in some financial difficulties with Wycombe and is scapegoating Derby to cover those costs.
https://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/sport/18493679.rob-couhig-wycombes-financial-struggles-pandemic/
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/19410485.amp/
It's similar to Boro who we know suffered significant financial difficulty recently.
-
-
5 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:
Was it, by who, Fred the groundsman?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/sport/17132436/Derby-takeover-kirchner-rooney/amp/
As in the amount mentioned here in the national press
And here in the Det ...
-
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/mike-ashley-pulls-out-Derby-26152575
Ashley's bid was rumoured at 25 million, the Binnie brothers 28 million.
These bids clearly below the 50 million the club's looking for.
It was rumoured that ck offered 50 million, for some reason the administrators wasted time over that and ck pulled out.
The binnie brothers bid didn't include the stadium.
-
There's a work around here for MM and Derby, there's nothing to stop him undertaking the following ...
1. Agree to pay Derbys legal fees for a court case against m/w
2. Agree to pay any legal costs that arise
3. Sign a contract for this with Derby, stating that the legal fees to be given by mm are only for that purpose and not to prolong the survival of the club which is dependent on a new buyer being found. That the money is only applicable for an long as Derby shall remain a club, in case it goes into liquidation, why continue the case.
This would negate mm not being able to stand in for Derby in the way he currently has preposed.
Let the potential buyers know he's doing this, with a contract stating the removal from them of legal liability for m/w cost.
Let the efl know that Derby wish to proceed in this way, requesting that under these circumstances, Derby be allowed to progress with the sale.
- Rammeister, Kathcairns and Ken Tram
-
2
-
1
-
The EFL and clubs will have to admit it's not a footballing debt because he's not liable for them and the club is.
If they concede that, they're looking at 0pence instead of millions from a deal
-
Derby can't afford legal action, ergo efl request arbitration which will result in a very expensive action against derny.
For the efl, the only issue is how much will Derby have to pay.
-
-
Win this case, they've sided with m/w.
-
42 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:
The arbitrators are independent. They aren’t fighting the corner of the party who nominated them
In an ideal world I'd agree with you.
That's semantics.
All im saying is that rhe efl doesn't lose many arbitrations.
From the efl statement, I've reason to believe that they've taken the side of m/w and an estimated thar 7 million will resolve things.
In my opinion, thats like saying that the judge has sat before the trial.
There's no jury in an efl arbitration, and any experts must be called from the efls own selective list.
If I were Derby I'd prefer a court case, but I'm guessing the reason that they haven't is because don't have the funds for that and in any case the only expedited route is via arbitration.
While it's possible to appeal the result of a court case, there are very few grounds under which the result of an arbitration car be appealed.
- Norman and RadioactiveWaste
-
2
-
It's not that the efl could or couldn't drag m/w into arbitration, its that by doing so Derby would be faced by a panel of 3 judges.
A judge for m/w interests, a judge for efl interests and a judge for derbys interests.
The majority vote carries the day, so Derby unfairly end up paying a suggested 7 million to m/w.
Derby know that the potential buyers, are unlikely to want go pay that bill on top of the current debts, and Derby can only get that money from the potential buyers.
The efl suggest the arbitration includes a representative from hmrc, as if by doing so hmrc would reduce their debt to cover an unfair bill to hmrc.
At the moment we are going round in circles because the efl will not allow us to move forward with a potential buyer, until we have settled m/w claims.
I have no idea why the efl consider it acceptable to say that they consider the false claims of m/w as football creditors.
The last time I checked, the efl are just a football association so why should they be in a position to rule out insolvency law.
-
Relegation rivals watch
in Derby County Forum
Posted
Paul ince, managerial statistics, hoping he's as good as he was at the last team he managed and not as good as other teams he's managed.
Some of the teams hes managed, hes done well at, any return above 40% isnt bad ...