The Administration Thread

[PistoldPete]

9 hours ago, ilkleyram said:

Para 5 is important. It says that Boro first made their claims 12 months ago, suggests that WW were more recent (though it doesn’t say so). Only last week have the EFL decided that they should seek submissions to try to bring an end to the impasse. Incompetents.

And then later they confirm that the potential value of the claims is unknown and then suggest that the bidders are being unreasonable by not progressing without that knowledge. 
The statement reeks of incompetent inaction from an incompetent organisation. We can only hope that the public and political pressure will allow them, however late in the day, to do what they should have done in the beginning - create an arbitration process that allows for a decision to be reached that keeps one of their members in competitive business. Quickly.

It deos say WW claims were made since we went into admin, which is what i remember.

[GboroRam]

We've not got a vendetta against you...we've not got a vendetta against you...y'know...we've not got a vendetta against you...

[NottsRammy]

1 minute ago, Cool As Custard said:

Don't worry @Eatonram , I think  @NottsRammy is really just a red dog just lurking & posting on here to wind people up. Just look at the way he phrases & words his posts again.......

Lol ok mate.  No i just dont look at things with a blinkered view . But in thid case like whats been pointed out i didnt know about Bournemouth.  Aston villa while over spending which is wrong but they got away with it they went up . Did the cherries actually get fined and done for it . Why im saying this is a legally this is what makes the difference in a court if law . Not the fact we know they have all over spent but got away with it in promotion . 

[Sheff Ram]

24 minutes ago, Indy said:

No. Gibson is wrong. 
 

He tried this argument to insert Boro into the stadium valuation case and the LAP finding was that there definitely wasn’t a direct causal link between our finances and their failure. He’s putting forward the same case. Just because the money he’s moaning about us having is from our amortisation rather than stadium sale, he’s still claiming our extra finance = the reason Boro missed out, which has been disallowed. 
 

So - no culpability. And that’s before we consider the fantasy calculations he’s used to determine their loss. 

Has anyone seen anything by way of explanation as to how Gibbo came to his laughable compensation figure?

[Woodley Ram]

17 minutes ago, Indy said:

No. Gibson is wrong. 
 

He tried this argument to insert Boro into the stadium valuation case and the LAP finding was that there definitely wasn’t a direct causal link between our finances and their failure. He’s putting forward the same case. Just because the money he’s moaning about us having is from our amortisation rather than stadium sale, he’s still claiming our extra finance = the reason Boro missed out, which has been disallowed. 
 

So - no culpability. And that’s before we consider the fantasy calculations he’s used to determine their loss. 

Gibson has the right to make whatever claim he wants too. From the EFL statement it’s has been going down the arbitration route (not court as insolvency rules don’t allow it) for 12 months.  I think the claim is tosh but he has the right to make it and I don’t understand why it hasn’t been sorted or the EFL wasn’t involved earlier. 
 

anything to do with Villa or anyone else is irrelevant. It about Middlesbrough and Wycombe. As Wellington once said publish and be damned. Publish the claims, let’s see what they have.

re the EFL they need to agree a consistent story as they keep getting it wrong. Independent Regulator please sports minister 

[simmoram1995]

33 minutes ago, Andicis said:

We don't owe them a penny. And I can't see where he's coming from. He had years of parachute payments which we had no chance to compete with and threw the money away. That's on him.

This is what I’d give to Gibson 

960,000 home gate receipts 

120,000 away gate receipts 

 

then it’s up to the EFL to reimburse them for what finishing 6th would be if they could prove it! As many have said their final 12 games consisted of 6-7 defeats that’s not play off form neither does it bode well especially with how good Leeds were that season.

 

as for Wycombe I wouldn’t give them a single penny 

[PistoldPete]

9 hours ago, The Baron said:

The ITV interview went on for 15 minutes and they take a couple of ten second sound bites out of it. I did cover the claims from both those clubs but they weren’t broadcast presumably. 
 

As much as Rick Parry loathes me he’s not attempting to put Derby out of business, why would he do that, and also why would I want it either? 

"As much as he loathes me Rick Parry attempting to put Derby out of business, why would he do that?"

Well if he is someone who loathes people so much maybe he has  similarly vindictive streak towards football clubs? EFL is backed into a corner, an  last night's statement jus shows how desperate they are . He is plainly a very arrogant man who does not like backing down. But EFL are the only thing stopping Derby from announcing the preferred bidder. And there is no proper reason why EFL should stop Derby from doing that. Yet they are.       

[Sparkle]

45 minutes ago, NottsRammy said:

The way i see it is you can see where boro are coming from although i think its the efl that is at fault for failure to punish Derby quickly enough . Gibson cant go for 45million as he has no way of proving they would have gone up . What we prob do owe them and its a way out is the gate receipts from the play off legs thats it end of . The wycombe one for me is more complicated . Gibson is looking rather bad that he is pushing for this and actually could send Derby into liquidation if  some owner like Ashley doesnt have the balls to save us and take them on in court . Its clear to me now their is a real chance we could disappear.  

Middlesbrough and Derby probably finished higher in the league that season when Aston Villa and leeds United overspending is dealt with - if dealt with based on the same standards that the EFL have operated against us we would be near to automatic spots - the whole thing Is a farce.

[Ewetube]

1 minute ago, simmoram1995 said:

 

 

as for Wycombe I wouldn’t give them a single penny 

I would send them a penny in an envelope without a stamp on it.

[Tamworthram]

38 minutes ago, NottsRammy said:

The way i see it is you can see where boro are coming from although i think its the efl that is at fault for failure to punish Derby quickly enough . Gibson cant go for 45million as he has no way of proving they would have gone up . What we prob do owe them and its a way out is the gate receipts from the play off legs thats it end of . The wycombe one for me is more complicated . Gibson is looking rather bad that he is pushing for this and actually could send Derby into liquidation if  some owner like Ashley doesnt have the balls to save us and take them on in court . Its clear to me now their is a real chance we could disappear.  

I understand your point however, in the same way Middlesbrough can’t prove they would have got promoted if we hadn’t overspent, they also can’t prove they would have even reached the play offs either. 

I also think the Wycombe case is actually LESS complicated. We may have “cheated” by over spending but not during the season they were in the Championship. Therefore, had we had our points deduction last season, they would have been fortunate to have benefited from the time taken to conclude the case rather than something they were entitled to. As it is, their gripe is that the EFL took too long in applying the points deduction. That may have been a result of Derby’s tardy submission of figures. However, as I understand it, Derby submitted the figures within permitted timescales and therefore did not break any rules in that respect.

[RoyMac5]

32 minutes ago, Eatonram said:

Lots of love and Respect towards Rooney. Lots of hate towards Morris but for balance remember who had the guts to employ Rooney (and Lampard). The EFL loved the high profile names associated with the EFL as did all the leagues main sponsors and TV contracts. 

He had the stupidity to do so many other things. He got VERY lucky with Rooney, none of the others have paid off.

[hintonsboots]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60031718
 

Legal action ? 
Sorry if already posted.

[RoyMac5]

24 minutes ago, Seth's left foot said:

Why isn’t Gibson going after Villa too then? Same season, same claim.

He’s purposely going after Derby because of Morris, is it really worth liquidating a club for the gate receipts of two play off games?

The EFL need to learn from this and stop clubs overspending and getting away with it through promotion.

It's also because in admin we're a free hit.

Which other clubs will catch on and make a claim (or is that too late in our case?). But the EFL are aware of this possibility their statement suggests as much.

[Sparkle]

13 minutes ago, NottsRammy said:

Lol ok mate.  No i just dont look at things with a blinkered view . But in thid case like whats been pointed out i didnt know about Bournemouth.  Aston villa while over spending which is wrong but they got away with it they went up . Did the cherries actually get fined and done for it . Why im saying this is a legally this is what makes the difference in a court if law . Not the fact we know they have all over spent but got away with it in promotion . 

The Aston Villa one and the Leeds United one are simply waiting for their return to the EFL which is a farce in its self.

[darren22]

14 minutes ago, NottsRammy said:

Lol ok mate.  No i just dont look at things with a blinkered view . But in thid case like whats been pointed out i didnt know about Bournemouth.  Aston villa while over spending which is wrong but they got away with it they went up . Did the cherries actually get fined and done for it . Why im saying this is a legally this is what makes the difference in a court if law . Not the fact we know they have all over spent but got away with it in promotion . 

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11743/10267899/bournemouth-fined-7-6m-after-breaching-financial-fair-play-rules

[PistoldPete]

8 hours ago, Barney1991 said:

This could have all been avoided 6 years ago if the efl did there jobs properly. When we started our accountancy way or even a year in the efl had looked and said hmm we’re not sure about this as all other teams do this we need to get it looked at and see if it’s in the rules we will advise. Instead sign off accounts for 4 years to find out we breach account 6 years later. How can we know we have cost middlesborough a place in the play offs if we didn’t even know we had breached ffp by then because we weren’t even charged. If this hadn’t of been allowed to happen we wouldn’t have overspent and theoretically there would be no cases against us and we wouldn’t be 2 weeks away from oblivion 

This is an exact rerun of that. EFL not sure what their own rules say. At first they say we are within the rules, then decide we are not.

Now its the other way around. Quantuma's plan is not acceptable to EFL. Why not? "It's against EFL rules, we think,  but we are not sure?"
Well you wrote the bloody rules. And you can bloody rewrite them too. Surely the rules were never written to allow the kind of dodgy claims from Boro and Wycombe to be made, in any circumstances  leave alone in our circumstances where this could kill this proud club.

[Crewton]

17 minutes ago, Sheff Ram said:

Has anyone seen anything by way of explanation as to how Gibbo came to his laughable compensation figure?

Average uplift in income for a club sending one season in the PL x Odds of getting through the playoffs

i.e £180M/4 = £45M

Of course, what they haven't done is factor in the average uplift in expenditure for a team spending one season in the PL. 

I wouldn't be surprised if they were heavily criticised by an Arbitration Panel or a Judge for the sheer chutzpah in submitting such a clearly outlandish and contrived claim, even if they ultimately won their case.

 

[Sparkle]

11 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

I understand your point however, in the same way Middlesbrough can’t prove they would have got promoted if we hadn’t overspent, they also can’t prove they would have even reached the play offs either. 

I also think the Wycombe case is actually LESS complicated. We may have “cheated” by over spending but not during the season they were in the Championship. Therefore, had we had our points deduction last season, they would have been fortunate to have benefited from the time taken to conclude the case rather than something they were entitled to. As it is, their gripe is that the EFL took too long in applying the points deduction. That may have been a result of Derby’s tardy submission of figures. However, as I understand it, Derby submitted the figures within permitted timescales and therefore did not break any rules in that respect.

If a sanction had been sorted out by the EFL earlier we would have secured Enough  points to be well clear of it or alternatively I can be fairly sure we wouldn’t have been playing a lot of those individuals who got a draw vs Sheffield Wednesday on the last day - Sheffield Wednesday would have won easily - net result Wycombe would still be relegated. 

[DarkFruitsRam7]

22 minutes ago, Sheff Ram said:

Has anyone seen anything by way of explanation as to how Gibbo came to his laughable compensation figure?

Paddy Power.

[kevinhectoring]

1 hour ago, FlyBritishMidland said:

I’m not sure the claims do exist.  Starting with statute, the Insolvency Act introduces a moritorium where any creditors or others are prohibited from pursuing any legal action whilst the company is in administration.   It’s pretty clear that the administrators haven’t agreed and, as far as we know, they haven’t been through the courts.

The only way they exist with the EFL is if arbitration proceedings brought by either MFC or WWFC have started.  As the EFL claim to know nothing of the cases it’s safe to assume they don’t exist in this form.

They may have lodged something with the administrators but, from what I’ve read, at this point of time they have no legal standing.  How can the administrators make provision for something that doesn’t exist?

Well they are contingent claims and the extortionists have 6 years to launch them. Until now the EFL has not been willing to agree that they are so remote they can be ignored. But the signs are that this may be changing and that they will give their own view on the merits. We are getting to them

so far as Ashley is concerned, he’s clearly not willing to take the risk. Not surprising - he made a big error with his diligence when he bought the Toon and he’ll never forget that, he doesn’t enjoy looking foolish. And the EFL’s position on ‘compressing’ footie claims will have made him all the more wary. I don’t think the EFL will change their position on that in time to help us -  I think this will be resolved by other means