Jump to content

Derby finally accept 21 point deduction.


taggy180

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Red Ram said:

https://www.footballinsider247.com/sunderland-could-be-hit-by-Derby-country-ruling-maguire/

This is the problem in a nutshell. This is why the EFL feel the need to enforce the rules. Not because they're out to get us....

 

Some of these pundits and journalists are a bit slow. I (along with others probably) suggested this way back on page 4 of this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Red Ram said:

https://www.footballinsider247.com/sunderland-could-be-hit-by-Derby-country-ruling-maguire/

This is the problem in a nutshell. This is why the EFL feel the need to enforce the rules. Not because they're out to get us....

 

A great article that has actually nothing to do with Sunderland and manages to invent a new type of planned administration deal called a "pre-back" (sic). 

Maguire might indeed be simply pointing out what must be a concern to the EFL, but that concern should not influence a legitimate appeal to an independent tribunal under one of the EFL's own rules. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

If clubs file for administration as a result of Derby successfully appealing the deduction, then it's highly likely those clubs will fail their own appeals... evidence will point towards Covid not being the cause of them going into administration.

Why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Really? Absolute guarantee??? There is a scenario where we'd get the 12 admin points removed, and I doubt we'd have a 12 point P&S deduction.

Guarantee is the wrong word. Probably should have said in all liklihood we will have at least minus 12 points.

I said in another thread recently that our appeal ought to be successful, not sure what would need to happen for force Majeur to be a success, but this is the EFL so I fully expect it to be thrown out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Crewton said:

A great article that has actually nothing to do with Sunderland and manages to invent a new type of planned administration deal called a "pre-back" (sic). 

Maguire might indeed be simply pointing out what must be a concern to the EFL, but that concern should not influence a legitimate appeal to an independent tribunal under one of the EFL's own rules. 

Dead right.  Didn't we effectively have a 'pre-back' deal with the three amigos when we were bought out of 10 minutes of administration for a quid, or whatever it was?  But otherwise what the hell has it to do with Sunderland who are apparently well funded.

What was interesting was the photo that illustrated the article of a match at PP with no fans.  There's the problem - Covid = no fans = no income (or hugely reduced). QED, force majeure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Jimbo Ram said:

Why?

Because the claim is they'd only file for administration to clear debts and throw Covid in there as the excuse.
It's unlikely a club doing this will have projections to show they will be running at a profit in the near future if it wasn't for lost covid revenue. If they weren't projected to make a profit, then where was the money supposed to come from to avoid administration?. The list of clubs that have a chance of doing it would be pretty much limited to those who were cutting their wage bills before Covid. It has to be a clear trend from before Covid, so 19/20 wage bill lower than 18/19.

If I had to make a list of potential Championship clubs that could get away with it, then it would be just Boro and Huddersfield. Coincidentally, those reductions in wage bills would be as a result of reductions in parachute money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Jimbo Ram said:

Why?

Because our appeal is, from what I’ve seen, based on the loss of gate revenue being an unusually large percentage of our income. For clubs with large parachute payments, or historically low gates, the loss of gate revenue due to a pandemic lockdown would not have been such a proportionately large impact.
 

If another club can show that they had a financial plan with reasonable income projections that has been torpedoed by a loss of income over which they have zero control, then maybe a similar appeal would work. Sunderland, I presume would be a big draw in league one, so might have a large proportion like us - but I’d guess it would be a much lower figure and more likely to be recoverable through normal business loan facilities for covering cash flow problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well just in case Kieran Maguire is lurking again, I should say I agree that the whole point behind the 12 point penalty is to prevent someone applying for administration if they could possibly avoid it… a penalty for a moral hazard clause.

But previously maguire has argued that the reason Derby are in administration Is due to overspending. But there is already a moral hazard penalty for overspending … and Derby are facing that penalty too.

 

you shouldnt be penalised for the same thing twice. In fact if it’s a penalty for immoral behaviour it should be the person who is carrying out the immoral behaviour who is punished , ie allegedly Morris, not the club …which obviously has gained no advantage anyway .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know the EFL love a bit of retrospective action themselves, but it would be blindingly obvious to all that the only reason any club would go into administration directly following us having a a points deduction annulled was because they'd seen what happened here and retrospectively feel they've missed a trick, not because they have a genuine need to do so.

The corner has already been turned, fans are back in stadiums, revenue streams have returned -  if they're not in administration as a result of Covid by now why would they be another 2, 3 months down the line? They wouldn't, the cause would have to be something else.

We're talking about clubs who have all taken up an offer of financial support (L1/L2) or an interest free £8m loan (Champ) and continued trading, who up to now haven't collapsed. 

The EFL could & would probably would turn around and say that the club in question shouldn't have applied/accepted the financial help if they knew that it wasn't going to be enough to stave off administration.

I'm less convinced the EFL are worried it would set a precedent of teams getting away without a  points deduction than I am that they simply can't be bothered to go through with the cost and effort of further appeals processes by other clubs, even futile ones.

Edited by Coconut's Beard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Crewton said:

A great article that has actually nothing to do with Sunderland and manages to invent a new type of planned administration deal called a "pre-back" (sic). 

Maguire might indeed be simply pointing out what must be a concern to the EFL, but that concern should not influence a legitimate appeal to an independent tribunal under one of the EFL's own rules. 

I’d have thought  the EFL’s concern will lead them to settle with us to stop other clubs electing for admin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Because if they apply for admin only because Derby got away with it then that will be the reason, not because of force majeure.

Like us it will depend on the case they present. I don’t think we can be the only team in the league impacted negatively by the pandemic…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Red Ram said:

https://www.footballinsider247.com/sunderland-could-be-hit-by-Derby-country-ruling-maguire/

This is the problem in a nutshell. This is why the EFL feel the need to enforce the rules. Not because they're out to get us....

 

By Kieran Maguire 

 

Enough said. The chump doesn't realise that Derby's administration is not to cheat the debt, but to prevent further debts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get the reasons for the 12 point penalty - it makes sense.  Under normal circumstances.  For us though, the core reason for appeal is COVID and the loss of 10s millions in potential income without which we'd likely not be in administration.  Not saying we'd be flush, but Mel certainly wouldn't have been in a position where he was required to provide all that additional funding.   Strikes me Maguire likes to point things out to the EFL just in case they haven't thought of it, or to give them another angle.  

With gates now open, crowds back and the revenue associated with that, I don't see why our case would set a precedent and open any flood gates.  If a club isn't yet in administration why should they suddenly file for it as a result of our appeal? If we were still in a lockdown, with zero additional funds for clubs, then different story. But we're not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, BucksRam said:

I get the reasons for the 12 point penalty - it makes sense.  Under normal circumstances.  For us though, the core reason for appeal is COVID and the loss of 10s millions in potential income without which we'd likely not be in administration.  Not saying we'd be flush, but Mel certainly wouldn't have been in a position where he was required to provide all that additional funding.   Strikes me Maguire likes to point things out to the EFL just in case they haven't thought of it, or to give them another angle.  

With gates now open, crowds back and the revenue associated with that, I don't see why our case would set a precedent and open any flood gates.  If a club isn't yet in administration why should they suddenly file for it as a result of our appeal? If we were still in a lockdown, with zero additional funds for clubs, then different story. But we're not. 

There could be a flood of clubs going into adminsitration when the loans run out in 2024. Maybe before then covid will be gone.. it still hasnt finished with us yet that's for sure. But with revenue still down on pre covid levels all clubs will struggle. 

 

 

Edited by PistoldPete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mostyn6 said:

By Kieran Maguire 

 

Enough said. The chump doesn't realise that Derby's administration is not to cheat the debt, but to prevent further debts.

a good point. what is someone expected to do just let the debts  get bigger and bigger? The quoted reaosn for going into admin is to protect the creditors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Because the claim is they'd only file for administration to clear debts and throw Covid in there as the excuse.
It's unlikely a club doing this will have projections to show they will be running at a profit in the near future if it wasn't for lost covid revenue. If they weren't projected to make a profit, then where was the money supposed to come from to avoid administration?. The list of clubs that have a chance of doing it would be pretty much limited to those who were cutting their wage bills before Covid. It has to be a clear trend from before Covid, so 19/20 wage bill lower than 18/19.

If I had to make a list of potential Championship clubs that could get away with it, then it would be just Boro and Huddersfield. Coincidentally, those reductions in wage bills would be as a result of reductions in parachute money.

I don’t believe for 1 moment Covid19 was the cause for our administration. I do feel it hastened it along though. We were haemorrhaging money pre Covid19 but I fully except this probably doubled during Covid19. If a buyer couldn’t be found at Mels asking price which I see no evidence to suggest was likely. Then admin would have probably followed this time next year. Having said that, if MM is willing to state that he would have been happy to continue to fund this loss without Covid19 coming along then the appeal isn’t without merit 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...