Jump to content

The Administration Thread

Boycie

By Boycie
in Derby County Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 49.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Most active in this topic

  • PistoldPete

    1853

  • RoyMac5

    1695

  • Ram-Alf

    1252

  • Curtains

    1191

Popular Days

Most active in this topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

maxjam
maxjam

So... I went to the shop shortly after the announcement to grab some 'celebration juice' for tonight and met a guy in a Derby shirt holding a 4 pack of Bud and asked him if he was celebrating as

Cam the Ram
Cam the Ram
angieram
angieram

I haven't got time to mop up sexist comments,  I am too busy making cups of tea for the other mods! 

Posted Images

Dan_Ram

Dan_Ram

Posted
Posted

Just seen Birmingham have received no punishment for the Maxi Lopez saga. The blame has been placed squarely on the individuals and no punishment for the club. Shame our situation couldn’t have been viewed as such.

Similar situation for Peterborough who have just been given a 3 point suspended penalty for not declaring a person of significant interest in the last hour.

Can’t help but wonder how hard they would have come down on us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gee SCREAMER !!

Gee SCREAMER !!

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Dan_Ram said:

Just seen Birmingham have received no punishment for the Maxi Lopez saga. The blame has been placed squarely on the individuals and no punishment for the club. Shame our situation couldn’t have been viewed as such.

Similar situation for Peterborough who have just been given a 3 point suspended penalty for not declaring a person of significant interest in the last hour.

Can’t help but wonder how hard they would have come down on us.

Still ongoing from what I can see

 While there has been no update on the charges against the club, the EFL have confirmed that the individuals involved have admitted to breaching regulations.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sparkle

Sparkle

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, ram59 said:

Suspended for 8 months, I wonder how many CEOs they're likely to appoint in the next 8 months? It seems to be a totally pointless 'punishment', literally.

The EFL get £50,000 for their Christmas bash and travel expenses which can’t be overlooked 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RoyMac5

RoyMac5

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, littleover ram said:

So can we take legal action against Peterborough if they pip us to the play offs? That’s the precedent the EFL have set 

I'm assuming that if Clubs decide to take any actions then they will have what we didn't - time. I don't believe we'd have been held to ransom for any other reason, we couldn't let the situations play out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oldben

Oldben

Posted
Posted

Here are more examples of situations where the EFL has been criticized for its approach to punishments and perceived inconsistencies:

Bolton Wanderers: Bolton faced a winding-up order in 2019 due to unpaid debts, which led to a 12-point deduction and a transfer embargo. However, critics argue that the EFL should have intervened earlier and provided more support to the club, which was in a dire financial situation.

Bury FC: Bury was expelled from the EFL in 2019 after failing to provide financial guarantees, leaving many fans angry and disappointed. Critics argue that the EFL's handling of the situation was too harsh and that more could have been done to help the club avoid expulsion.

Wigan Athletic: Wigan entered administration in 2020 and faced a 12-point deduction. Some critics believe that the EFL should have shown more leniency given the exceptional circumstances surrounding the club's ownership change and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on football finances.

Sheffield Wednesday: Sheffield Wednesday received a 12-point deduction (later reduced to 6 points on appeal) in the 2020-21 season for breaching financial rules, specifically for the sale of their stadium to their owner. Critics argue that other clubs have engaged in similar practices without facing the same level of punishment.

Charlton Athletic: Charlton faced a transfer embargo and points deduction in 2020 for failing to provide the EFL with sufficient evidence of their financial stability. However, some critics argue that this punishment was harsher than those imposed on other clubs for similar breaches.

Blackpool FC: Blackpool faced financial and ownership issues under the Oyston family, leading to fan protests and legal battles. Critics argue that the EFL failed to properly monitor the situation and impose appropriate sanctions to prevent the decline of the club.

Leeds United: In the 2018-19 season, Leeds United faced criticism for the "Spygate" incident, in which they were caught spying on Derby County's training session ahead of a match. The EFL imposed a £200,000 fine on the club, but some argued that the punishment was too lenient and did not serve as a deterrent against similar behavior in the future.

Coventry City: In 2019, Coventry City faced a potential expulsion from the EFL due to an ongoing dispute regarding their stadium, the Ricoh Arena. Critics argued that the EFL did not do enough to mediate the situation or find a solution that would allow the club to remain in the league. Ultimately, Coventry reached a temporary ground-sharing agreement with Birmingham City, which prevented expulsion.

Luton Town: In 2008, Luton Town was deducted 30 points for financial irregularities, which ultimately led to their relegation from the Football League. Some critics argued that the punishment was overly harsh and that the EFL did not take into account the club's efforts to address the issues and cooperate with the authorities.

Portsmouth FC: Portsmouth faced financial difficulties and multiple ownership changes in the early 2010s, which led to points deductions and relegations. Critics argued that the EFL could have done more to monitor the club's financial situation and ensure proper governance, which might have prevented the club's decline.

QPR: Queens Park Rangers faced a fine of £41.965 million in 2018 for breaching Financial Fair Play rules during the 2013-14 season. Some argued that the EFL's decision was delayed, causing uncertainty for the club and its supporters. Others felt that the punishment was too severe compared to similar breaches by other clubs.

Birmingham City received a nine-point deduction in 2019 for breaching financial fair play rules, while Derby County faced a smaller points deduction for similar breaches. This inconsistency can create confusion and frustration among clubs and fans.

Some believe that the EFL has treated certain clubs more favorably than others, particularly those with connections to the league. Middlesbrough's owner, Steve Gibson, has reportedly had close links with the EFL. While there is no concrete evidence of favoritism, critics argue that Middlesbrough's punishments for financial breaches have been relatively lenient compared to clubs like Derby County, which has faced more severe penalties.

The EFL has been criticized for its inability to effectively enforce regulations and impose meaningful sanctions. In some cases, clubs have been found guilty of breaching rules, yet the penalties imposed seem insufficient, such as a transfer embargo or a minimal points deduction. Critics argue that these lenient punishments do little to deter clubs from violating the rules.

The EFL has faced criticism for not being transparent in its decision-making processes, which can lead to confusion and speculation about the fairness of penalties. This lack of transparency can fuel the belief that the league is not fit for purpose and that it favors certain clubs over others.

These examples highlight the perceived inconsistencies and failings of the EFL in applying punishments and managing club issues. Critics argue that these cases demonstrate the need for reform and improvement in the EFL's governance and decision-making processes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ghost of Clough

Ghost of Clough

Posted
Posted

You appear to have downplayed the situation in a number of instances here

37 minutes ago, Oldben said:

Here are more examples of situations where the EFL has been criticized for its approach to punishments and perceived inconsistencies:

Bolton Wanderers: Bolton faced a winding-up order in 2019 due to unpaid debts, which led to a 12-point deduction and a transfer embargo. However, critics argue that the EFL should have intervened earlier and provided more support to the club, which was in a dire financial situation.

Administation = 12 points (applied following season due to league position)

37 minutes ago, Oldben said:

Bury FC: Bury was expelled from the EFL in 2019 after failing to provide financial guarantees, leaving many fans angry and disappointed. Critics argue that the EFL's handling of the situation was too harsh and that more could have been done to help the club avoid expulsion.

Administration in 2019 = 12 points. CVA failed in March 2020, new CVA sought, no proof of club being bought out of administration, then kicked out of the Football League in November 2020

37 minutes ago, Oldben said:

Wigan Athletic: Wigan entered administration in 2020 and faced a 12-point deduction. Some critics believe that the EFL should have shown more leniency given the exceptional circumstances surrounding the club's ownership change and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on football finances.

The failure here was the EFL allowing the takeover to go through, only for those new owner(s) to almost immediately put the club into administration.

Administration = 12 points

37 minutes ago, Oldben said:

Sheffield Wednesday: Sheffield Wednesday received a 12-point deduction (later reduced to 6 points on appeal) in the 2020-21 season for breaching financial rules, specifically for the sale of their stadium to their owner. Critics argue that other clubs have engaged in similar practices without facing the same level of punishment.

If you dig through the forum history, you'll find the 6 points was in line with our own P&S overspend (based on the final agreed figures)

37 minutes ago, Oldben said:

Charlton Athletic: Charlton faced a transfer embargo and points deduction in 2020 for failing to provide the EFL with sufficient evidence of their financial stability. However, some critics argue that this punishment was harsher than those imposed on other clubs for similar breaches.

Which points deduction was that?

37 minutes ago, Oldben said:

Blackpool FC: Blackpool faced financial and ownership issues under the Oyston family, leading to fan protests and legal battles. Critics argue that the EFL failed to properly monitor the situation and impose appropriate sanctions to prevent the decline of the club.

The EFL were powerless to intervene against an existing owner

37 minutes ago, Oldben said:

Leeds United: In the 2018-19 season, Leeds United faced criticism for the "Spygate" incident, in which they were caught spying on Derby County's training session ahead of a match. The EFL imposed a £200,000 fine on the club, but some argued that the punishment was too lenient and did not serve as a deterrent against similar behavior in the future.

Coventry City: In 2019, Coventry City faced a potential expulsion from the EFL due to an ongoing dispute regarding their stadium, the Ricoh Arena. Critics argued that the EFL did not do enough to mediate the situation or find a solution that would allow the club to remain in the league. Ultimately, Coventry reached a temporary ground-sharing agreement with Birmingham City, which prevented expulsion.

Luton Town: In 2008, Luton Town was deducted 30 points for financial irregularities, which ultimately led to their relegation from the Football League. Some critics argued that the punishment was overly harsh and that the EFL did not take into account the club's efforts to address the issues and cooperate with the authorities.

Administration = 10 points
Misconduct = 10 points (fees to third party agents)
Insolvency rules = 10 points (not sure what this was)

37 minutes ago, Oldben said:

Portsmouth FC: Portsmouth faced financial difficulties and multiple ownership changes in the early 2010s, which led to points deductions and relegations. Critics argued that the EFL could have done more to monitor the club's financial situation and ensure proper governance, which might have prevented the club's decline.

Portsmouth first went in to administration in the PL. Critics argue that the actions of those administrators directly resulted in Portsmouth going into administration in the Championship 15 months later.

37 minutes ago, Oldben said:

QPR: Queens Park Rangers faced a fine of £41.965 million in 2018 for breaching Financial Fair Play rules during the 2013-14 season. Some argued that the EFL's decision was delayed, causing uncertainty for the club and its supporters. Others felt that the punishment was too severe compared to similar breaches by other clubs.

The punishment was in line with the rules set by the member clubs. However, due to their promotion to the PL, the PL refused to punish them due to those rules not applying to their league. THis resulted in P&S, with shared rules between the PL and EFL.

37 minutes ago, Oldben said:

Birmingham City received a nine-point deduction in 2019 for breaching financial fair play rules, while Derby County faced a smaller points deduction for similar breaches. This inconsistency can create confusion and frustration among clubs and fans.

As per my Sheff Weds comment. The one thing the EFL can be credited for, it the consistency in the points deductions for P&S overspend

37 minutes ago, Oldben said:

Some believe that the EFL has treated certain clubs more favorably than others, particularly those with connections to the league. Middlesbrough's owner, Steve Gibson, has reportedly had close links with the EFL. While there is no concrete evidence of favoritism, critics argue that Middlesbrough's punishments for financial breaches have been relatively lenient compared to clubs like Derby County, which has faced more severe penalties.

The EFL has been criticized for its inability to effectively enforce regulations and impose meaningful sanctions. In some cases, clubs have been found guilty of breaching rules, yet the penalties imposed seem insufficient, such as a transfer embargo or a minimal points deduction. Critics argue that these lenient punishments do little to deter clubs from violating the rules.

The EFL has faced criticism for not being transparent in its decision-making processes, which can lead to confusion and speculation about the fairness of penalties. This lack of transparency can fuel the belief that the league is not fit for purpose and that it favors certain clubs over others.

These examples highlight the perceived inconsistencies and failings of the EFL in applying punishments and managing club issues. Critics argue that these cases demonstrate the need for reform and improvement in the EFL's governance and decision-making processes.

The EFL are consistent in the punishments they've given clubs for administration and P&S once it is agreed what the failure actually is. However, there is inconsistency in reaching that agreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oldben

Oldben

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

You appear to have downplayed the situation in a number of instances here

Administation = 12 points (applied following season due to league position)

Administration in 2019 = 12 points. CVA failed in March 2020, new CVA sought, no proof of club being bought out of administration, then kicked out of the Football League in November 2020

The failure here was the EFL allowing the takeover to go through, only for those new owner(s) to almost immediately put the club into administration.

Administration = 12 points

If you dig through the forum history, you'll find the 6 points was in line with our own P&S overspend (based on the final agreed figures)

Which points deduction was that?

The EFL were powerless to intervene against an existing owner

Administration = 10 points
Misconduct = 10 points (fees to third party agents)
Insolvency rules = 10 points (not sure what this was)

Portsmouth first went in to administration in the PL. Critics argue that the actions of those administrators directly resulted in Portsmouth going into administration in the Championship 15 months later.

The punishment was in line with the rules set by the member clubs. However, due to their promotion to the PL, the PL refused to punish them due to those rules not applying to their league. THis resulted in P&S, with shared rules between the PL and EFL.

As per my Sheff Weds comment. The one thing the EFL can be credited for, it the consistency in the points deductions for P&S overspend

The EFL are consistent in the punishments they've given clubs for administration and P&S once it is agreed what the failure actually is. However, there is inconsistency in reaching that agreement.

Thank you for sharing your perspective on the situation. It's important to acknowledge that there are often different viewpoints and opinions when it comes to the actions of organizations like the EFL. While the EFL may have been consistent in their punishments for administration and P&S, there may be issues with their decision-making processes and transparency that lead to confusion and frustration among clubs and fans. It's clear that there is a need for reform and improvement in the EFL's governance and handling of club issues to ensure fairness and consistency for all involved.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...