The Administration Thread

[Animal is a Ram]

2 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

 

If the EFL's 'rap sheet' tracker is correct, and we haven't submitted the accounts to them, then what were the 9 additional points deducted for?

As I understand from the left image, we don't have to submit to HMRC, because administration, but still have to submit to EFL.

Does this mean we still haven't submitted year ends 2019 and 2020? 

[Animal is a Ram]

7 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

It might just be me but I listened to that and felt less reassured about the situation than I did before. 

I'm in about the same place - no more or less confident. Admittedly my confidence is pretty low at the moment.

[chipperram]

Before I sit down and construct a crappie worded email to Panarama to investigate how the EFL have managed to operate as a self licking lollipop for so long I thought I should garner some sensible topics from the Forum. Nothing rude just plain facts which could prove they are not fit for purpose.

 

Edited January 28, 2022 by chipperram
Missed out the EFL

[RandomAccessMemory]

44 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

FYI, here's a little table of the teams who suffered P&S points deductions.

Inconsistencies throughout.

• Birmingham the most harshly treated
• Delay in the season Sheff Weds got their penalty
• EFL's lateness in charging Derby for failed periods

Just wondering a couple of things, would a failure in 14/15-16/17 definitely have been expected in 18/19 as opposed to 17/18, the season following the failure? Also, I didn’t think there was a 3 year period for 17/18-19/20? Because of Covid wasn’t it changed to 17/18-20/21 a 4 year period, with the average of years 19/20 and 20/21?

[i-Ram]

20 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

If everyone who used clever accounting to try and stay within FFP was actually guilty of breaching FFP then most clubs in the Championship will have broken FFP at one time. They’ve all done it. In fact Birmingham sold their ground too and that wasn’t challenged if you want to disallow that then they should have got done for more according to your warped logic.

But these are completely different points to the ones you were making earlier. You are Rick Parry and I claim my £5.

[Topram]

So nothings changed again what are these meetings even doing apart from wasting time? Just the same story over and over 

[Bald Eagle's Barmy Army]

2 minutes ago, Topram said:

So nothings changed again what are these meetings even doing apart from wasting time? Just the same story over and over 

Exactly - But you can't change something that was probably already decided months ago. 

I believe one of our punishments (without public knowledge) was to not let us do any business during this transfer window. 

[Ghost of Clough]

9 minutes ago, RandomAccessMemory said:

Just wondering a couple of things, would a failure in 14/15-16/17 definitely have been expected in 18/19 as opposed to 17/18, the season following the failure? Also, I didn’t think there was a 3 year period for 17/18-19/20? Because of Covid wasn’t it changed to 17/18-20/21 a 4 year period, with the average of years 19/20 and 20/21?

Ugh! 2 more mistakes!! You're correct on both

[PistoldPete]

5 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

But these are completely different points to the ones you were making earlier. You are Rick Parry and I claim my £5.

 No just saying that there is a difference from a club like QPR deliberately breaking FFP rules and hoping they will get away with it by getting promoted… which is the worst kind of breach.

Whereas Doing what other clubs do to get around FFP legally but due to incompetence or whatever failing to do it is a lesser crime.

 

that’s how the wendies penalty was fixed at only six points and if you think that is one eyed drivel we’ll take that up with Lord Dyson QC.

 

[Animal is a Ram]

30 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

Solloway spoke on RD about an hour ago - about 11.10 here https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_radio_derby

Not much to say, really, that we didn't already know. She was bound by confidence, by the sounds, but it felt a very much politican answer.

• Complex situation, they talked about how to resolve the stadium/Boro/Wycombe/HMRC.
• There is another meeting next week. Confident that pressure is being applied to the right people.
• Also attending the meeting with Mel and Team Derby.

A better link to this 

 

[Ghost of Clough]

22 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

If the EFL's 'rap sheet' tracker is correct, and we haven't submitted the accounts to them, then what were the 9 additional points deducted for?

As I understand from the left image, we don't have to submit to HMRC, because administration, but still have to submit to EFL.

Does this mean we still haven't submitted year ends 2019 and 2020? 

9 points was for failing the 3 P&S periods. 3 points were suspended conditional of meeting the requirements listed in the agreed decision doc (submitting accounts to EFL)

[RandomAccessMemory]

2 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Ugh! 2 more mistakes!! You're correct on both

Sorry ?

I thought it was best to check as it means we wouldn’t have been punished in either of the years Boro and Wycombe are claiming they were disadvantaged for.

[RoyMac5]

Beaten to the post again by @Animal is a Ram! #COYR

Edited January 28, 2022 by RoyMac5

[PistoldPete]

31 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

Solloway spoke on RD about an hour ago - about 11.10 here https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_radio_derby

Not much to say, really, that we didn't already know. She was bound by confidence, by the sounds, but it felt a very much politican answer.

• Complex situation, they talked about how to resolve the stadium/Boro/Wycombe/HMRC.
• There is another meeting next week. Confident that pressure is being applied to the right people.
• Also attending the meeting with Mel and Team Derby.

That didn’t sound good. What were the positive developments the EFL were referring to? Doesn’t sound positive at all.

it would help if the MPs were allowed to speak about stuff. It all makes it even more worrying when we don’t know what is going on.

[Tamworthram]

17 minutes ago, chipperram said:

Before I sit down and construct a crappie worded email to Panarama to investigate how the EFL have managed to operate as a self licking lollipop for so long I thought I should garner some sensible topics from the Forum. Nothing rude just plain facts which could prove they are not fit for purpose.

 

If your looking for facts you might be on the wrong forum ?

[Animal is a Ram]

Just now, Ghost of Clough said:

9 points was for failing the 3 P&S periods. 3 points were suspended conditional of meeting the requirements listed in the agreed decision doc (submitting accounts to EFL)

Forgive stupid question, but...

Does this mean P&S is not part of the accounts - i.e. submtting for P&S is a separate process to submitting full accounts?

[vonwright]

18 minutes ago, Topram said:

So nothings changed again what are these meetings even doing apart from wasting time? Just the same story over and over 

I suppose it's impossible to tell. They might have made a lot of progress or none. What I find incredibly frustrating is the way all parties - even the MPs - hide behind "commercial confidentiality" and "it's a complex situation" as an excuse to say nothing about anything of consequence.

Is there a good reason, for example, the MPs couldn't give us a summary of what they think the main problems are, and how they think they should be resolved? What they think of the Boro and Wycombe claims, and whether they are a major stumbling block? Whether they think the EFL should say whether Boro and Wycombe are football creditors? And so on.

It's ridiculous how little we actually know about what's happening, what the disagreements are, and how our political representatives - having heard from both sides - think they should be resolved.

"It's complex" - yeah, we know, that's why we need you to explain it to us, having heard from both sides.

"Commercially confidential" - some bits, but not necessarily the bits we are interested in. And if the EFL and/or administrators are insisting you say nothing about anything as a condition of having meetings, let's hear that. And let's hear you complaining about it.

Edited January 28, 2022 by vonwright

[Ghost of Clough]

Just now, RandomAccessMemory said:

Sorry ?

I thought it was best to check as it means we wouldn’t have been punished in either of the years Boro and Wycombe are claiming they were disadvantaged for.

No worries.

If you may recall, Gibson's first claim was because Derby should have been penalised in 18/19 given the EFl charged us with failing the 15/16-17/18 period. His sole argument was relating to the stadium sale.
Upon restating the amortisation figures, the period of overspend shifted and so too did the year we should have been penalised. However, Gibson has since decided it's the amortisation policy which is the problem, and it's not the season we should have been punished, but one of the seasons which falls inside a rolling 3 year period.

[Ghost of Clough]

1 minute ago, Animal is a Ram said:

Forgive stupid question, but...

Does this mean P&S is not part of the accounts - i.e. submtting for P&S is a separate process to submitting full accounts?

Not silly at all. They're separate documents. 

[PistoldPete]

1 minute ago, vonwright said:

I suppose it's impossible to tell. They might have made a lot of progress or none. What I find incredibly frustrating is the way all parties - even the MPs - hide behind "commercial confidentiality" as an excuse to say nothing about anything of consequence.

Is there a good reason, for example, the MPs couldn't give us a summary of what they think the main problems are, and how they think they should be resolved? What they think of the Boro and Wycombe claims, and whether they are a major stumbling block? Whether they think the EFL should say whether Boro and Wycombe are football creditors? And so on.

It's ridiculous how little we actually know about what's happening, what the disagreements are, and how our political representatives - having heard from both sides - think they should be resolved.

The very least I would expect is to signal what exactly is being done… other than just talking… what if any progress has been made?