Steve Gibson trying to liquidate Derby

[drgoodspeak]

It’s here. Utterly bizarre.

[DarkFruitsRam7]

25 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Presumably the argument Leeds were disadvantaged is the Boro would have lost to Leeds in the play offs, sort of killing off his stance that Boro had a *insert fantasy odds* chance of promotion.

What's mad is that if Boro have a claim, then so do Leeds. They could perfectly well argue that our 'cheating' cost them the Play Off Semi-Final and an extra year's worth of Premier League money.

Just shows how ridiculous the whole thing is.

Edited January 20, 2022 by DarkFruitsRam7

[duncanjwitham]

Just now, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

What's mad is that if Boro have a claim, then so to do Leeds. They could perfectly well argue that our 'cheating' cost them a year's worth of Premier League money.

Just shows how ridiculous the whole thing is.

I know it's probably not in the admins remit to do this, but I would be very tempted to publicly release a list of all of the cases that we believe would be valid if the 'Boro and Wycombe claims were allowed to stand.  There are literally dozens and dozens of them.  Make it very clear to everyone quite how insane it is.

[Ewetube]

1 minute ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

What's mad is that if Boro have a claim, then so to do Leeds. They could perfectly well argue that our 'cheating' cost them am extra year's worth of Premier League money.

Just shows how ridiculous the whole thing is.

The EFL certainly can't be accused of joined-up thinking over allowing this, can they?

[DarkFruitsRam7]

1 minute ago, duncanjwitham said:

I know it's probably not in the admins remit to do this, but I would be very tempted to publicly release a list of all of the cases that we believe would be valid if the 'Boro and Wycombe claims were allowed to stand.  There are literally dozens and dozens of them.  Make it very clear to everyone quite how insane it is.

That would be brilliant.

Anyone who knows what they're talking about (@Ghost of Clough?) fancy doing it for them?

Edited January 20, 2022 by DarkFruitsRam7

[Ewetube]

3 minutes ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

Anyone who knows what they're talking about......

 

I'm out.

[RoyMac5]

This kind of man.

 

[YouRams]

11 minutes ago, drgoodspeak said:

It’s here. Utterly bizarre.

Surely a good sign if they're selling tickets!

[DarkFruitsRam7]

13 minutes ago, drgoodspeak said:

It’s here. Utterly bizarre.

What’s bizarre about it?

[RammingStone66]

26 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Nuance isn't a good click generation reporting style.

I think that fact definitely plays against us here. It's a complicated issue for us who have been following it the whole time.

Easier to say Derby are cheaters than explain a situation.

[Ghost of Clough]

11 minutes ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

That would be brilliant.

Anyone who knows what they're talking about (@Ghost of Clough?) fancy doing it for them?

Search my post history and you'll find something from the past few days. It also depends how far back you want to go - Forest, Leeds and others failed FFP prior to it being superseded by P&S.

[TigerTedd]

45 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Presumably the argument Leeds were disadvantaged is the Boro would have lost to Leeds in the play offs, sort of killing off his stance that Boro had a *insert fantasy odds* chance of promotion.

In fact, by that logic, Leeds have a better case (especially as they could claim for horrific embarrassment). But they didn’t moan, they just pulled the wit socks up and smashed the league the following season. What did Boro do, they finished 17th.

evidence that they put all their eggs in that basket, with their own dodgy but legal finances (parachute payments) and as soon as they ran out, they couldn’t sustain their level of spending and performance. 

[StaffsRam]

14 minutes ago, TigerTedd said:

In fact, by that logic, Leeds have a better case (especially as they could claim for horrific embarrassment). But they didn’t moan, they just pulled the wit socks up and smashed the league the following season. What did Boro do, they finished 17th.

evidence that they put all their eggs in that basket, with their own dodgy but legal finances (parachute payments) and as soon as they ran out, they couldn’t sustain their level of spending and performance. 

This is why Pube-head has turned MFC into a laughing stock. Ever since FFP was brought in these scenarios have existed, including against us. Almost all clubs just get on with it, but no not SG, got to have his temper tantrum.

[Ken Tram]

The EFL should compensate Middlesbrough.

Middlesbrough were right - the regulation was not fit for purpose - EFL were in the wrong.

Derby did not blatantly break the rules. The arbitrators found in our favour - which was overturned by appeal.

We have had a sanction, within the rules.

I think I'm saying that Middlesbrough were not wrong to try to put an end to poor regulation. Everyone agrees with them. The regulator should take the hit, rather than singling outa whipping boy.

[duncanjwitham]

2 minutes ago, Ken Tram said:

I think I'm saying that Middlesbrough were not wrong to try to put an end to poor regulation. Everyone agrees with them.

The obvious question with that is, were 'Boro trying to make the EFL enforce their rules, or trying to make them enforce a particular interpretation of them that favoured 'Boro over us?  It certainly seems clear that in what 'Boro deemed to be the major issue (the stadium sale), the interpretation that the EFL initially applied was correct (that the sale was allowed).

[Ken Tram]

Is the EFL not owned by all clubs?

Could the majority of clubs not get together to save us?

Cannot all the clubs vote and agree to collectively take the hit from Middlesbrough, agree that we (as clubs) have failed to regulate ourselves, and agree to the fan-led review proposal, and agree to a smooth transition to an independent regulator?

Therefore, can the English League clubs as a whole not choose to save Derby! (And bring in regulation to prevent a Derby-style overspend happening again.) (i.e. not creating a precedent to save clubs)

[Ken Tram]

1 minute ago, duncanjwitham said:

The obvious question with that is, were 'Boro trying to make the EFL enforce their rules, or trying to make them enforce a particular interpretation of them that favoured 'Boro over us?  It certainly seems clear that in what 'Boro deemed to be the major issue (the stadium sale), the interpretation that the EFL initially applied was correct (that the sale was allowed).

But, to some degree, was that not still Middlesbrough challenging poor regulation?

The sale of the stadium (whether or not it was within the rules) sounds pretty dodgy to me.

I don't think the rules should allow the sale of a stadium as a way to get around football expenditure rules. After all, the stadium sale has put us in a worse position.

It's like when a business has subsidiaries in Panama - it may not be illegal, but it is clearly dodgy in the eyes of most people.

[Ghost of Clough]

1 hour ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

That would be brilliant.

Anyone who knows what they're talking about (@Ghost of Clough?) fancy doing it for them?

Derby vs QPR – 13/14, Derby lost in Playoff Final
Wigan vs QPR - 13/14, lost to QPR in Semi-Final
Reading vs QPR - 13/13, finished 7th
Derby vs Leicester – 13/14, won the League, Derby placing 3rd
Boro vs Bournemouth – 14/15, won the League, Boro were highest placed side not promoted (4th)
Ipswich and Cardiff vs Derby and Sheff Weds – 15/16, 7th and 8th placed sides missed out to 5th and 6th
Leeds vs Sheff Weds – 16/17, Leeds finished 7th as Sheff Weds were 4th
Blackburn vs Birmingham – 16/17, Birmingham 2 points ahead of 22nd placed Blackburn
Preston vs Derby – 17/18, Derby 6th, Preston 7th
Barnsley and Burton vs Birmingham and Reading – 17/18 Birmingham finished 5 points ahead of the relegated teams whereas Reading only 3.
Bristol vs Derby – 18/19, Derby beat Bristol at the end of the season. Bristol winning would have meant Derby 8th, Bristol 6th
Leeds vs Derby - 18/19, Derby beat Leeds in the Playoff Semi-Final
Rotherham vs Reading – 18/19, Reading finished 7 points ahead of relegated Rotherham
Charlton vs Reading – 19/20, Reading finished 8 points ahead of relegated Charlton
Sheff Weds vs Derby – 20/21, Derby would have lost on the final day due to nothing to play for, resulting in a Sheff Weds win and them staying up

Using Gibson's calculator* teams need to be awarded:
Boro = £90m
Leeds = £90m
Derby = £84m
Bristol = £45m
Cardiff = £45m
Ipswich = £45m
Preston = £45m
Wigan = £45m
Reading = £27m
Barnsley = £6m
Blackburn = £6m
Burton = £6m
Charlton = £6m
Rotherham = £6m
Birmingham = (£12m)
Sheff Weds = (£84m)
Bournemouth = (£90m)
Leicester = (£180m)
QPR = (£180m)

*£180m for losing to a Playoff Finalist or missing out on automatics, £90m for losing in the semi-finals,£45m for missing out on the playoffs, £6m for relegation

 

Others include:

13/14
Leeds – No impact
Blackburn – No impact
Forest – No impact

14/15
Millwall – No impact (relegated)
Fulham – No impact (11 points ahead of 22nd placed Millwall who also exceeded limits)
Forest – No impact
Derby – No impact

15/16
Birmingham – No impact

16/17
Derby – No impact

17/18
Sheff Weds – No impact

19/20
Derby – No impact

20/21
Reading – No impact

Edited January 20, 2022 by Ghost of Clough

[Ken Tram]

Did Middlesbrough voluntarily switch their legal claim from the EFL to Derby - or did they lose their claim against the EFL?

If it was voluntary, one solution to this impasse might be too persuade Middlesbrough to switch their claim back to the EFL!

[duncanjwitham]

Just now, Ken Tram said:

The sale of the stadium (whether or not it was within the rules) sounds pretty dodgy to me.

I don't think the rules should allow the sale of a stadium as a way to get around football expenditure rules. After all, the stadium sale has put us in a worse position.

The rules were expressly changed a few seasons before we did it, to allow profit/loss from disposal of fixed tangible assets to count towards FFP.  There's no question of interpretation here as it was a change that was consciously and deliberately made.  And the value was determined correctly by a 3rd party valuer, so there's no issue there either.

The rules were changed back a few seasons later, so it's not allowed any more.  But that's not relevant to our case, as it was clearly and deliberately allowed at the time.