The Administration Thread

[PistoldPete]

7 minutes ago, Chris_D said:

Standard can mean both enforced under a requirement, or what was usual in the circumstances.

He said standard by every club. Not every club uses the same policy. Straight line may be common but it isn't universal.

[Indy]

14 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

Using a different method isn't cheating. Using a different method to show that you passed FFP when in fact you failed is cheating, which is why your club accepted a 9 point deduction for it.

This makes no sense at all. If using a different method isn’t cheating (which it isn’t), then using that (legal) method to pass FFP also isnt cheating. 
 

I suspect we accepted a 9 point deduction in order to draw a line under it and facilitate a sale. I don’t remember any admission of guilt (similar to paying out an out of court settlement). 

Edited February 8, 2022 by Indy

[May Contain Nuts]

Any article that says the claims are "not a major stumbling block" can be disregarded right away. We know for a fact that they are.

Also any article that brings the administrators fees into it as a means of comparison to the unfounded claims, attempting to make £6m of extortion money seem reasonable because the administrators dare get paid for their job.

Edited February 8, 2022 by Coconut's Beard

[Kathcairns]

37 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

Gibson isn't on the board of the EFL. No, I don't think any collusion has gone on. Of course there is a connection, Gibson threatened to sue the EFL if they didn't enforce their own rules properly, they then enforced their own rules properly. No, I don't want a situation where league tables are player out in court, I also don't want a situation where one clubs cheating potentially costs another club money/a shot at promotion. I'd think go for it.

Not sure if this is right, but did'nt he sell something to his haulage company. Would'nt you call that cheating cause i think it is. Anybody on this post please correct me if i am wrong.

[LeedsCityRam]

1 hour ago, BoroWill said:

There is no legal method for Gibson or Middlesbrough to personally pursue Morris over this. Mel Morris knows this and thus his offer is completely vacuous. If Mel Morris would like to indemnify any claim for Derby County then I'd imagine the offer would be accepted instantly.

That's not my understanding - they could pursue Morris under novation, which is different in nature to an indemnity. In essence it releases the club from the obligation of settling any potential debts (instead of Morris paying them back at a later point) - I'd argue given Morris' track record, it's probably the safest method for DCFC & indeed Gibson/the other one to collect any awards should they win their cases.

https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/novation

That said, we all know Gibson isn't really interested in his day in court. His sole intention is to apply what he believes is the correct form of punishment & what the EFL openly asked the DC to deduct points for back in May - our relegation. The delays, the relentless bullying of a pretty compliant EFL, the conveniently timed media stories and leaks are all designed to unsettle the club so the potential miracle of Rooney keeping us up never happens.

Its cowardly, immoral & totally disproportionate to the 'crime'. We have been found guilty of one thing - applying an amortisation method that the EFL retrospectively disagreed with that was signed off by independent auditors & submitted to the EFL at the time. That's it. The spending was actually less than Boro & other clubs during the periods in question & nothing maliciously aimed at one club.

Nothing personal by the way & thanks for coming on to explain your POV.

 

 

Edited February 8, 2022 by LeedsCityRam

[Animal is a Ram]

8 minutes ago, Chris_D said:

Standard can mean both enforced under a requirement, or what was usual in the circumstances.

I'm aware of the duality of the meaning - which is what I qualified with the second part of my post.

The issue was that the 'Derby method' was not fully fleshed out - and not sufficiently explained by Morris and Pearce.

[Eatonram]

14 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

I will continue to try and find the link. The article stated something along the lines of our claim being smaller than what the administrators would end up taking as their final payment, and had £5-6m as the ballpark figure.

Edit: Found it

Lets say for the sake of arguement that Boro would "accept" £3m (how kind of them). This overlooks the fact that, in insolvency law, this does not represent a "debt" that the administrators can legally pay, particularly if it had to be Paid as a football debt at 100% when other creditors (like HMRC) are likely to be forced to accept 25%. It is just not possible for the Admins to bung Gibson cash to go away. Can you not get this??? Seriously??

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

41 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

Gibson isn't on the board of the EFL. No, I don't think any collusion has gone on. Of course there is a connection, Gibson threatened to sue the EFL if they didn't enforce their own rules properly, they then enforced their own rules properly. No, I don't want a situation where league tables are player out in court, I also don't want a situation where one clubs cheating potentially costs another club money/a shot at promotion. I'd think go for it.

Unless it's Bournemouth, Watford and Forest with player trading, QPR, Villa, Leeds who would likely have failed if not not promoted or clubs transferring club liability to a haulage business amongst countless others.

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

40 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

I think we'll probably finish top 6, then it's  easiest to sue from that point.

FTFY

[Eddie]

25 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

It is making allegations against directors in their roles as directors, not pursuing them in a court of law after they have stepped down from a limited company. There really is no connection whatsoever.

At the moment, Gibson isn't pursuing anybody through a court of law - he is laying a speculative claim against DCFC before the EFL's kangaroo court which has the secondary effect of putting the entire takeover process into a 'fatal embrace' (i.e. no takeover before settlement, no settlement before takeover). I wish he would go to court, because his speculative argument doesn't even tip the 'laws of probability' beyond a 25% chance of promotion, Waghorn or no Waghorn.

[Ram-Alf]

16 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

Using a different method to show that you passed FFP when in fact you failed is cheating, which is why your club accepted a 9 point deduction for it.

The statement above makes sense as I have now edited it, Only makes sense, I never said it was right.

Here you go, You can have this sentence back...Using a different method isn't cheating.

[Archied]

8 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

Using a different method isn't cheating. Using a different method to show that you passed FFP when in fact you failed is cheating, which is why your club accepted a 9 point deduction for it.

Football is in a mess , Morris clearly tried to sail as close to the wind as he could re breaking / bending rules to gain advantage,no argument there the man’s a disgrace for what he’s done to OUR club , but let’s be right here Gibson himself has sailed very close to the wind with debt moving and other stuff , countless other clubs have been  and are doing it too ,

the thing is any right thinking REAL football fan at this point says STOP , if this was Morris or any other owner of Derby perusing boro or any other club on the verge of going out of existence I would be making my feelings felt to our club that it’s TIME TO STOP ,

we are football clubs , we all have our days in the sun and our bad times but our clubs are the heart of our city’s / towns with histories and links through the generations, if people like Morris, Gibson and the efL can’t respect that at least us fans of all club should 

[Ramos]

48 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

Gibson isn't on the board of the EFL. No, I don't think any collusion has gone on. Of course there is a connection, Gibson threatened to sue the EFL if they didn't enforce their own rules properly, they then enforced their own rules properly. No, I don't want a situation where league tables are player out in court, I also don't want a situation where one clubs cheating potentially costs another club money/a shot at promotion. I'd think go for it.

So the thing is Derby didn’t even get promoted. There’s a long list of teams that have broken FFP and gained promotion so can you explain why Steve Gibson hasn’t been going after them? Including villa in the main season in question. And I bet Bournemouth are in big trouble if they don’t go up this season. But bet you dont see Gibson going after them. It’s always been a vendetta against morris and now seemingly Derby county as an institution. 

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

21 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

Using a different method isn't cheating. Using a different method to show that you passed FFP when in fact you failed is cheating, which is why your club accepted a 9 point deduction for it.

They accepted it, unwisely, as the EFL made it clear that it would expedite the sale of the club.  Till your club stuck their oar in. 

[Stive Pesley]

Just read the identical BAWT and Ramstrust minutes from last night - but they are different to the minutes that my local councillor posted on Facebook. Several questions are answered at much more length - particularly the  Stepehen Pearce one.

Apologies if this has already been covered - not had time to read the gazillion pages that have been added in the last 4 hours!

[Indy]

I’m sure we must’ve discussed this at some point, but I’ve just re-read the judgement on Middlesbrough’s application to join as an affected party in our original case (covering both stadium valuation and amortisation). I remembered that their request to join as a party (and therefore be considered to be awarded compensation by the panel) had failed. What I had forgotten was that the ruling also said that they could not commence their own arbitration regarding these matters. That being the case - why can we not just point at this finding and say an independent panel has already ruled that this current action is not permissible?

https://www.efl.com/contentassets/c9fc5dceaa7f4b62b81dca0b9e2f7c9d/2020.10.26---decision-on-mfc-redaction.pdf

 

 

[TooFarInToTurnRed]

17 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

My original wording was that every other club used it, somebody else introduced the word standard and I carried on with it. 

Are you sure that every other club uses straight line amortisation fairly?

Is it not true that clubs cheat this regularly by claiming Impairments in favourable accounting periods like Stoke have most recently due to Covid and I believe was common among teams being relegated from the PL but must say haven’t checked.

[Indy]

1 minute ago, TooFarInToTurnRed said:

Are you sure that every other club uses straight line amortisation fairly?

Is it not true that clubs cheat this regularly by claiming Impairments in favourable accounting periods like Stoke have most recently due to Covid and I believe was common among teams being relegated from the PL but must say haven’t checked.

And didn’t Parry mention in one of his emails that clubs were able to nominate which year the profit from a player sale fell into if it affected FFP? This sounded really dodgy to me. You either insist that the accounts reflect the reality of what happened or you don’t. I expect Sheffield Wednesday would be very interested to hear that profits form the sale of assets can be nominated into an adjacent accounting year if needed …

[duncanjwitham]

10 minutes ago, TooFarInToTurnRed said:

Are you sure that every other club uses straight line amortisation fairly?

Is it not true that clubs cheat this regularly by claiming Impairments in favourable accounting periods like Stoke have most recently due to Covid and I believe was common among teams being relegated from the PL but must say haven’t checked.

You'll never guess which club's 2017 accounts this comes from:

[Addingham Ram]

1 hour ago, BoroWill said:

Gibson isn't on the board of the EFL. No, I don't think any collusion has gone on. Of course there is a connection, Gibson threatened to sue the EFL if they didn't enforce their own rules properly, they then enforced their own rules properly. No, I don't want a situation where league tables are player out in court, I also don't want a situation where one clubs cheating potentially costs another club money/a shot at promotion. I'd think go for it.

Following Gibson threat (as you refer to it), the EFL is now actually going against their own rule which states that member clubs cannot take action against each other with regards to breaches of P&S regulations. Only the League can take such action, which they already have done. So what has Gibson got on the EFL that they are prepared to break their own rules?