Oldben
-
Posts
1,523 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Oldben
-
-
-
-
We talk about MM behaviour but here (long before MM) Gibson's nature was revealed.
-
Still haven't figured out what should be said on the banner to fly over Middlesbrough fc.
-
Assuming that the msd loan is against the stadium, technically msd own the stadium.
No legal action has been taken against MM, is that due to him owning the stadium, he doesn't msd own it, if the Loan was taken out against the stadium.
That leaves the way clear for Derby to recover a large proportion of the debt from mm, because legal action can be taken against him, for putting Derby in its current state.
Mm has the ability to significantly reduce Derbys debts if he is forced to do so by a court of law.
So what's the charge against mm ...
Director duties include promoting the company's success, exercising reasonable care and skill, exercising independent judgement, and declaring interests in transactions.
While breaches can be ratified by shareholder resolution, a company can sue one of its own directors if they breached their duties and caused the company loss.
If a director profits from a breach, he or she may have to account to the company.
-
As the Administrators prepare to take legal action over the Boro and Wycombe situation, it is my hope that they choose the best sports lawyer according to the Legal 500.
Nick De Marco Qc, who has spoken up for Derby in recent times.
He's taken on big sports cases against the efl ...
-
As regards the debt efl asking is derbys debt concerns me, as efl ought to know.
Would i be correct in thinking that if its business debt and non football debt, then boro and Wycombe can be added as potential creditors but if its football debt, then it means they can't be added as creditors.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-60027177
Hurray, now at last perhaps the stupid claims of boro and Wycombe can be ended.
The efl could be forced to listen to derbys administrators
-
I'm glad that mps are responding positively and have called for an immediate meeting with the efl over the Derby situation.
-
The news from the administrators if accepted by efl completes the end of Middlesbrough and Wycombe unsubstantiated claims against Derby.
-
Probably requires a publicity stunt to Ram whom the message of the passion of Derby fans on the issue.
A demonstration outside Parliament or a parachuting directly into pride Park carrying a message for the administrators or a fly past with a banner over middlesborough game saying "gibson leave our club alone".
Fly past with banner over efl hq saying "efl leave our club alone!".
These things might gain a mention in the national press.
Mind you, what ever is done has to happen before the 1 February, the efl deadline for our club.
-
On 15/01/2022 at 14:46, Oldben said:
I find it interesting that the 17 day window to stop liquidation, handed down by efl coincides with the transfer window.
It means the efl are demanding that the Derby sell their best players for a lower price, as top price will not guarantee, that the sale goes through before the window closes.
Even once Derby sell players, the transfer embargo isn't lifted so the efl gives Derby zero chance of signing replacements.
Efl know Derby must sell to raise funds to get through to the end of the season, so they give a 17 day window.
Plus they know any buyer will not complete the sale in 17 days.
The efl are sick of Derby doing well after the points penalty that they handed down, they don't want Derby to survive and so they reduce the teams strength still further by forcing the sale of best players.
The efl claims that they have the best interests of Derby at heart, a complete lie.
I believe that Parliament found that there was more that the efl could have done to stop Bury fc going bankrupt, and made recommendations about chamges the efl should make, not sure any of those recommendations happened.
One recommendation was that owners shouldn't be able to take loans against large fixed assets like grounds, that appears not to have happened.
Now it looks like we are further weakening the club by selling Jason Knight, for less than he's worth but if we don't do that we are not going to meet efl demand that we show them them the money (7 million needed to pay wages etc, until the Seasons end).
-
11 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:
I think that if it happens is much more likely to be Duncan Fergusson as he has done it before.
If they want Wayne I think he'll make them wait!
Why would the assistant manager of Everton, Duncan Fergusson, join Derby as manager, with Derby in its current situation.
-
My thoughts ...
I think Everton are seeking a short term interim manager until the manager they want to sign is ready, and Rooney is considered for the short term interim role.
The issue for Everton with that will be the large compensation fee they have to pay to Derby to Hire Rooney, that's under efl rules, that compensation is paid to a team if a manager moves team, while under contract.
Assuming Rooney leaves Derby, who can the administrators afford to offer the managers role to, so a current staff member takes over. Derby at that point would be guaranteed relegation.
Mute point to all of thus is that if Derby can't show efl the 7 million required to complete the season by 1 February, then Derby goes stops existing as club.
The efl will kick Derby out of the league.
-
27 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:
I'd love to think that contacting my MP would help, but I've contacted my MP a few times and I'd have been better served writing my message out, sticking it in a bottle and throwing it in to the Trent and Mersey canal in the vain hope that someone important finds it.
My MP is Michael Fabricant.
I'd agree with you, if your writing on your own. Yes if they get a thousand letters, they will listen
-
I find it interesting that the 17 day window to stop liquidation, handed down by efl coincides with the transfer window.
It means the efl are demanding that the Derby sell their best players for a lower price, as top price will not guarantee, that the sale goes through before the window closes.
Even once Derby sell players, the transfer embargo isn't lifted so the efl gives Derby zero chance of signing replacements.
Efl know Derby must sell to raise funds to get through to the end of the season, so they give a 17 day window.
Plus they know any buyer will not complete the sale in 17 days.
The efl are sick of Derby doing well after the points penalty that they handed down, they don't want Derby to survive and so they reduce the teams strength still further by forcing the sale of best players.
The efl claims that they have the best interests of Derby at heart, a complete lie.
-
Hm ... Am i missing something, looks like corruption over a stadium, wait, its not Derby, its Gibsons own Middlesborough fc.
-
In 2019 Bury fc went into liquidation, a commission of mps reviewed that situation, made recommendations and these included assigning some blame to the efl.
It occurs to me, why not contact all those mps who tried to support Bury fc, remind them of their reports findings and request that they help Derby by continuing with their original work for Bury fc, but for Derby.
It's possible that can apply pressure on the efl, who are subject to political pressure.
Nigel Paul Huddlestone is a British businessman and politician serving as Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Sport, Heritage and Tourism at the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.
email: nigel.Huddlestone.mp@parliament.uk
The mp for Bury who was involved with dealing with efl and Bury fc, was James daly mp, email: james.daly.mp@parliament.uk
I'm hopeful that after what Bury fc went through, he will have sympathy for Derby fans.
Damien Collins mp chaired enquiry into Bury fc and the efl, damian.collins.mp@parliament.uk
On tip of this why isn't there a Derby county petition on our treatment by the efl either on
https://petition.parliament.uk/
-
is this something we should be writing to the Derby mp about, to get them to raise an issue in parliament?
-
The administrators didn't know they had to show that we could pay wages until the end of the season. There is nothing they can do. When it finally goes off, I hope they don't get paid. Its partly the EFL's fault, they dont have proper regulation to stop a buyer like MM running a club into the ground. Not suprised that so many people blame them.
In this case, the administrators would have found someone to buy the company. They haven't found anyone yet.
The EFL has to look out for the wages of the players and staff after 4 months.
Morris, on the other hand, didn't care about anyone but himself. Thanks, Mel.
-
Committee calls for regulatory reforms to English football - Committees - UK Parliament 2019
Well its a few years later, and there has not been enough progress.
Here's what Mps called for in 2019 ...
MPs demand that EFL makes a formal apology to Bury FC staff and supporters with reparations made for associated loss of earnings
FA, EFL and Premier League should establish a supporters' ombudsman to hear concerns about how clubs are being run
Reformed Owners' and Directors' Test would disqualify a buyer with record of corporate insolvency
Clubs would be banned from borrowing against fixed assets such as stadiums (From a Derby point of view, MM wouldnt have been able to borrow against the stadium and training ground if this has been implemented)
Formal and enforceable licensing system for professional English football clubs, as recommended in 2011 report on Football Governance
Government legislation for independent system of football licensing and regulation if reforms are not implemented
Chair's comment
Damian Collins MP, said:
“Systematic and structural problems are responsible for the tragic expulsion of Bury FC from the League this year. These failures were avoidable, and it is essential that the authorities urgently overhaul their framework if they wish to avoid the same fate befalling other clubs.
“We heard time and again that supporters felt powerless as they watched their beloved club suffer shocking mismanagement and financial misconduct. The authorities must learn to respect, and act upon, these concerns. If the reforms we recommend are not introduced forthwith, the only alternative is for the Government to step in.”
EFL must share the blame:
MPs found the problems at Bury preceded the tenure of the current owner Steve Dale, and say the EFL must share the blame for having allowed the situation at the club to have deteriorated for so long. (Regarding Derby, the efl should share the blame for having allowed the situation at the club to have deteriorated for so long under MM).
Serious concerns are expressed about the size of an introductory fee charged for a loan to Bury FC. The letter is jointly addressed to Jonathan Taylor QC, who is heading the independent Taylor Review, urging him to investigate further.
-
1 minute ago, HectorsHouse said:
… here’s a thought… perhaps Gibson is using us as a test case.
If successful against us, a precedent would have been set and he may then be able to bring a case against Villa too…
Villa deserved promotion, thrashed boro, twice during that season.
I don't think the Derby team was that great thar season, so who were these players that were so great, we wouldn't have beaten Derby if we hadn't had those players in our squad.
Isn't that a thing boro are building there case on, that due to amortisation, we had a better team than they did, which boro feels is unfair.
-
28 minutes ago, Crewton said:
But the Administrator of the FMTTM Boro Fans Forum said that Gibson phoned him and told him how he arrived at the figure apparently (Direct quote below) :
"He also told me how he arrived at £45m. It makes total sense - I can tell anyone that asks me privately but is based on an average value of the worth of promotion to the Premier but also divided by the bookies odds if we made the play offs and not Derby."
Obviously, it doesn't make sense, not least because they'd have spent a fair proportion of it on new signings and higher wages, but it does appear that the figure is the one Boro have included in their claim, unless the FMTTM admin is a complete liar?
There are lots of reasons i have a problem with Boro's fabricated claim, but a key one is that they reckoned they were good enough as team to get promoted via the play offs in the 2018-19 season.
They missed out to Derby by one point.
Boro were not good enough that season to beat Aston Villa, West Brom or Leeds.
Aston villa beat Boro 3-0 on both games that season.
In my opinion Villa would have easily beaten Boro in the play offs, so they wouldn't been promoted.
And of course by Boro raising this argument, any team that just missed out on the play offs could go back and make a nonsense claim about them being the team that missed out on promotion and should therefore receive millions from the team that stole their place in the play offs.
In the 2014/15 season Wolves missed out to Ipswich on goal difference, but Wolves were level on points to Ipswich, under Boros mentality, shouldnt wolves receive 50 million for decisions that went against them during the season. Decisions which meant that they didnt get enough goals to be promoted via the playoffs.
- Crewton and Maxwell Baxter
-
1
-
1
-
I thought that under current restrictions, we are only allowed to sign a certain number of loan signings.
Fielding isn't a better player than Marshall was for us.
The Football Creditor rule is explicit, simple, and solves all of Derby's issues
in Derby County Forum
Posted
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/sport/football/60040400.amp