Jump to content

The Administration Thread


Boycie

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

there are also very few duties owed club to club.  The exceptions include duty for one club not to disparage the other. And the duty of utmost good faith one to the other which you have highlighted dAvid . Which as you say is expressly only for the Efl to bring action.

and as for duty not to disparage.. which club has been disparaging who , Mr Gibson?

This is because unlike the Premier League, the regulations are not lateral, they are between club and league. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, hiltonram said:

David, I am going to write to my MP again, do you have any bullet points I should put to them besides the one you have pointed out above?

I think it's time for the MP's to put the pressure on because the EFL have ignored their requests first time around.

Regulations 3.5 and 4.4 need highlighting.

You can also question how impartial are the EFL, given the threat of legal action from Boro, are they allowing or even encouraging Boro to go for us instead to protect themselves.

It's in the Championship clubs best interests that Boro target us rather than the EFL, as any compensation would come from the TV/media deals as that's their only revenue streams.

This then swings back round to regulation 3.5 and 4.4 where it should not even be possible for Boro to go directly for us.

The why they are is covered above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, ossieram said:

What do you joke about?

Interesting question. I wonder about your motivation for asking and whether you are inferring that any humour will always involve offending someone. If so, I do not agree with that. And, my original post was not claiming to be "holier than thou" or anything like that. I just think there are limits to what people should say because of the impact that they have on others. Do you not agree?

Freedom of speech does not mean "free to say anything". With freedoms, comes responsibility. With being part of a society means caring about others in that society.

Heck, none of that is very funny, eh? in addition, I apologise for not answering your question directly.

EDIT: in order to draw a parallel and to quote you joke.

Aswell as believing humour should strive to be non-offensive, I am vegetarian. That doesn't mean that I do not eat. It just means that I eat food that is better for me - and for the planet (cue to start another argument, no doubt).

From Max and Paddy:

Paddy: "I could not be one of those vegetarians"

Max: "Nah, man cannot live on chips alone".

====

Finally, apologies to all for going off topic

Edited by IslandExile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bobby said:

When you are taken over if you sign your current squad on their current contracts won’t you end up in the same position again? 
Surely any new contracts will have to be given that are sustainable, the ones the likes that Lawrence are on you obviously couldn’t afford, what makes you think these players will take a pay cut?

 

No, because the current wage bill is more than sustainable

A major problem in the past was having a wage bill greater than 100% of club revenue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bobby said:

But aren’t you still losing 1 million a month, surely (and it’s not just Derby) out goings have to be less than incomings.?

This is where the whole “allowed to lose £39million over three years “ falls down, teams actually work to that, Why? Surely they should be working at at least breaking even. It only takes a minor blip to screw it up and put teams over.

wasn’t it Risdale who included qualifying for the champions league every year in Leeds Budget?

It has taken QPR 7 years to get anywhere near sustainability and we are still losing money each month, sooner or later players and more importantly agents are going to have to come to terms with receiving less money or half the league will end up in the position you are currently at.

Losing over £1m a month when you exclude almost 66% of the club's income (which comes in during the summer):
Season Tickets = £6m
League Distributions = £8m
Sponsorship = £5m

Average of over £1.5m a month...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, roboto said:

Other clubs have been relegated because they don't have the fight and/or spirit to dare and do the impossible to survive.

Other clubs have had to remain in the Championship and immediately lose out on over one hundred millions of pounds in prize money and parachute payments because 75% of promoted teams (or whatever the figure was) have cheated in order to do achieve it.

Following through with that line of logic, the result of one particular club (ie Derby) being cheated out of those winnings lead to a spiraling list of events which ultimately saw them end up in Administration. It's nothing to do with our mismanagement, it's all because someone else cheated.

As such that club should be compensated for that £100m+ and given their rightful place in the Premier League.

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

36 minutes ago, IslandExile said:

Interesting question. I wonder about your motivation for asking and whether you are inferring that any humour will always involve offending someone. If so, I do not agree with that. And, my original post was not claiming to be "holier than thou" or anything like that. I just think there are limits to what people should say because of the impact that they have on others. Do you not agree?

Freedom of speech does not mean "free to say anything". With freedoms, comes responsibility. With being part of a society means caring about others in that society.

Heck, none of that is very funny, eh? in addition, I apologise for not answering your question directly.

EDIT: in order to draw a parallel and to quote you joke.

Aswell as believing humour should strive to be non-offensive, I am vegetarian. That doesn't mean that I do not eat. It just means that I eat food that is better for me - and for the planet (cue to start another argument, no doubt).

From Max and Paddy:

Paddy: "I could not be one of those vegetarians"

Max: "Nah, man cannot live on chips alone".

====

Finally, apologies to all for going off topic

Sorry I asked ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, David said:

This is what we're up against. 

C4CCDEFF-8BBC-47EC-BE9C-2DCF11CE0CB5.jpeg
 

Reporter for TalkSport and Sky Sports. I mean, it's just total and utter poo. 

Exactly which clubs have been relegated by the EFL?

Plenty of clubs have been fined and / or docked points as a punishment, but who has actually been relegated?

Is this really what the general public think?

It wouldn't surprise me if, whether we survive this season or not, the EFL (if they continue to exist after the eventual end if this whole fiasco) will try and increase the points deduction for breaches of P&S regulations, thereby effectively relegating any team that breaks the rules.

Perhaps that is what this is all about. The EFL believe that any club breaking P&S rules should be relegated. If we had 'bought into that', and we're still say 10 to 15 points from safety, the EFL would have approached this whole sorry saga in a different way. We might not have had to sell off the players, and we might even have had a new owner. Who knows?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, IslandExile said:

Interesting question. I wonder about your motivation for asking and whether you are inferring that any humour will always involve offending someone. If so, I do not agree with that. And, my original post was not claiming to be "holier than thou" or anything like that. I just think there are limits to what people should say because of the impact that they have on others. Do you not agree?

Freedom of speech does not mean "free to say anything". With freedoms, comes responsibility. With being part of a society means caring about others in that society.

Heck, none of that is very funny, eh? in addition, I apologise for not answering your question directly.

EDIT: in order to draw a parallel and to quote you joke.

Aswell as believing humour should strive to be non-offensive, I am vegetarian. That doesn't mean that I do not eat. It just means that I eat food that is better for me - and for the planet (cue to start another argument, no doubt).

From Max and Paddy:

Paddy: "I could not be one of those vegetarians"

Max: "Nah, man cannot live on chips alone".

====

Finally, apologies to all for going off topic

I was vegetarian in January….and as this insinuates all my culinary repertoire consists of is chips, I am retrospectively offended.
Further to this, under new guidance issued by the EFL, I can be simultaneously vegetarian and omnivorous as no one has the right to tell me what I am/am not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, roboto said:

Other clubs have been relegated because they don't have the fight and/or spirit to dare and do the impossible to survive.

Not all even get relegated. Just looking at the Championship...

P&S
Birmingham - deducted 9 points, 17th
Sheff Weds - deducted 6 points, 24th
Derby - deducted 9 points (plus 12 for admin), currently 23rd
Reading - deducted 6 points, currently 21st

Administration
Palace - deducted 10 points, 21st
Portsmouth - deducted 10 points, 22nd
Wigan - deducted 12 points, 23rd

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...