Jump to content

The Administration Thread


Boycie

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, Woodypecker said:

I hope the EFL & parasites realise the scale of disruption and economic loss that the loss of DCFC could inflict on the city.

I am also thinking of the effect all of this drawn-out, destructive action but MFC, WW & The EFL of 2025 Derby's City of Culture Bid. The short list of candidate cities is being judged imminently.

The organisers won't want a tarnished location with doubt over the facilities available. If Derby's bid fails, I would be looking closely at how to take action against EFL for creating the whole cycle of accusations, arbitrations, and bogus claims that led to the demise of DCFC. 

I think that the ambiguity of the status and (potentially) even the access to Pride Park Stadium can negatively affect the bid.

Imagine the gigs, forums, heritage, commercial and family 2025 events that may be displaced through the ultimate lack of a venue like PPS.

I assume Team Derby / MPs are pointing out these dangers! 

How do the Bid judges feel about the Stadium purpose & ownership? If DCFC are liquidated and a 'small' Phoenix club emerged with no finance muscle to operate PPS, the stadium site purpose might even change.

EFL & the parasites will have nowhere to run if DCFC's status wrecks the Bid.

Great post

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Coconut's Beard said:

It is if you forget that we wouldn't have breached multiple periods had our perfectly valid amortisation policy been allowed, or had been able to correct our course with the EFL acting earlier and saying no to the method rather than letting us use it for a other couple of years.

Yes, of course if you forego all sense it all starts to add up

Just wondered where our 9 points came from and I can understand now. By no means do I lend credibility to the idea our amortisation charge in the first place was by any means right or fair

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

I don’t think para13 says very much more than I have already said Kevin. The clubs , their officials and the Efl owe a number of duties under the Efl regulations. It is as the para says a multi party agreement between the Efl, the clubs and others ( including club officials).

But each Efl regulation has to be tested for 3 things:

1) what is the duty

2) who owes that duty

and 

3) who they owe that duty to 

 

only if the regulation satisfies the test 

1) a duty that has been broken by Derby

2) Derby owe the duty 

3)the duty is owed to boro. 

can Boro bring a claim for loss… assuming they can prove a causal link between the breach and the loss they are claiming.

that’s my understanding. PS I am not a lawyer so I could be wrong. Even if I was a lawyer I could be wrong too.

 

I think it’s quite different - it’s not about duties, it’s about contractual rights.  The clubs are in contract with each other under the rules and if there’s a breach of contract (ie a breach of the rules) then other parties to the contract can sue. The ordinary rules of contract would apply to ascertain whether losses have been suffered and whether they are recoverable by way of damages, subject to terms implied into the contract. The EFL rules are a mess 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, winktheram said:

How does this then sit with the rules 3.5 and 4.4. David has highlighted. Is it one or the other. Clubs can't claim against each other or yes they can through arbitration. I am struggling to understand the contradiction?

Covered in posts between me and PistoldPete today if you want our thoughts 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So does anyone have any idea how long the EFL will let this impasse go on for. Mel has released a statement, theoretically can MFC and WW? sit on their hands for 45 years without responding? 
 

Surely the EFL can say ‘look if you think you have a case respond within 10 days or we will dismiss both claims’. 
 

I have no faith in the EFL at all, corrupt and rotten to the core and definitely not fit for purpose. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, atherstoneram said:

If Derby don't get City of culture it won't be anything to do with the club,a lot seems to think the city revolves around the club but in reality it doesn't.

Who cares about reality ? the EFL, Boro/WW don't seem to care about the reality of this situation or the reality that their claims are spurious ?

If it helps put pressure on someone to actually do something then its an angle that should be pushed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

I think it’s quite different - it’s not about duties, it’s about contractual rights.  The clubs are in contract with each other under the rules and if there’s a breach of contract (ie a breach of the rules) then other parties to the contract can sue. The ordinary rules of contract would apply to ascertain whether losses have been suffered and whether they are recoverable by way of damages, subject to terms implied into the contract. The EFL rules are a mess 

Kevin you seem to see things that aren’t there. What contract is this you speak of? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I noticed Reading were allowed to sign Tom Ince. I don’t imagine his wages are cheap. Embargo doesn’t appear to apply to Reading.

Just a quick reminder, we have signed players under embargo as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I noticed Reading were allowed to sign Tom Ince. I don’t imagine his wages are cheap. Embargo doesn’t appear to apply to Reading.

Reading are operating under an agreed business plan set by the EFL, it's not the usual type of embargo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

For what reason would Reading be under embargo?

They swapped a high earning non playing defender at Reading for INCE - both on extreme championship wages but maybe a slight financial benefit for Reading - if it was looked at in isolation then it might be questionable but no one ever understands what the EFL are doing and they tend to treat all clubs differently  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Dimmu said:

Just a quick reminder, we have signed players under embargo as well.

Free agents on limited wages I think... Ince will be on very high wages. We've been under embargo even before we were found to have broken FFP. Some restrictions were needed for us , but not allowing us to renew contracts now is just outrageous. 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, David said:

Reading are operating under an agreed business plan set by the EFL, it's not the usual type of embargo

The Club has also agreed to adhere to a Business Plan focused on a number of financial targets, including controlling player-related expenditure, with the objective of moving the Club towards P&S compliance in forthcoming reporting periods.

https://www.efl.com/news/2021/november/efl-statement-reading-football-club/

Here you go @PistoldPete

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...