Dean Saunder’s hat trick

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

Something that hasn't been hit on is this....we are one of 72 EFL clubs 3 of which are involved in this shambolic mess
But what about the other 69 clubs ?
Why have not one of those clubs come out and backed us up as it could be them next!
A bit of unity from a few chairman/ owners of other Football League Clubs might help as both Parasite chairman are dragging our wonderful game through the dirt
Football is never and should never be about who you can sue , make claims against and arbitration 
Money is tight for all clubs we have just been in a worldwide crisis yet parasites want to claim against us based on fantasy
We did not receive covid payments that other clubs received but this seems to not get a mention either
 
I know if another club was being picked on and clearly bullied into paying spurious claims for something that might've happened I'd like to think our club would support the victims as its just not right or ethical so why have no clubs backed us or made a comment ?
I would pay both of the parasites leaching onto our clubs future          Nothing!!!! Zero!!! Zilch!!! 
If its a battle ...us or the EFL which it appears to be we need support from other members not silence....this could well be our last ever season because we are being portrayed as villains and the biased BBC putting out statements like they have tonight are not helping....I genuinely fear we are doomed unless Morris himself does something out of the ordinary.....so don't hold your breath ?
 

Sibley off is an odd one? Just starting to get comfortable and growing in confidence 

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but maybe WR got the subs wrong tonight. 
Thought we were building a bit of momentum prior to him taking Sibley off. 
No way of knowing what would have happened though and maybe Sibleys chance was the only one we would have got.
Season beginning to take its toll, important we stick with the boys and make sure they know we are behind them every step of the way.

I agree, seemed an odd decision just after Sibley had muscled past a couple of defenders to get clean through and then shown some great close control on the touch line. Rooney’s been awesome all season. Can’t get em all right. Looking forward to hull now. Got my tix for that, peterborough and millwall. 3 massive games. 

I agree, seemed an odd decision just after Sibley had muscled past a couple of defenders to get clean through and then shown some great close control on the touch line. Rooney’s been awesome all season. Can’t get em all right. Looking forward to hull now. Got my tix for that, peterborough and millwall. 3 massive games. 

Poor sub by Rooney imo with Sibley for Cashin, going 5 at the back invited pressure just as we were frustrating them & having abit more of the ball

maybe thats why he is knackered

Sibley off is an odd one? Just starting to get comfortable and growing in confidence