PistoldPete Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 21 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said: I misread that to ask if Rishi Sunak to investigate fraud by the EFL. Animal is a Ram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkle Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 3 minutes ago, Dai Capp said: I think Pauline Latham took the time to meet with both DCFC and EFL yesterday so should have both sides of the argument... if so it’s interesting that she has tabled her motion to be heard today - she may well have told the EFL that is what she is doing hence that pathetic statement from the EFL last night. SaffyRam, ariotofmyown and Dai Capp 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkle Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 Just now, PistoldPete said: I misread that to ask if Rishi Sunak to investigate fraud by the EFL. Might be an option in the future Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheff Ram Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 1 hour ago, ptt1 said: The middleborough claim is based entirely on an estimate of the lost revenue by Gibson and his band of merry men. He seems to have missed the fact that against that revenue there would be considerable increase in cost relating to playing in and competing with other teams in the premier league. The latest table I can find is for 18/19. 11 teams lost money and this was pre covid. The teams comparable to boro Watford profit £10m Burnley £5m palace £3m. Brighton lost£19m sheff utd lost £21m Bournemouth lost £32m Norwich lost £39m. So if this claim is about money you have to take net benefit in to account and the net benefit is probably £0 or even a loss. Spot on. Very selective figures used in arriving at the "lost revenues" he is claiming. The more and more that you pick over Gibson's claim, the more ridiculous it becomes. It would be laughed out of court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffsRam Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 So it’s £7m, then we let Marshall, Baldock, Jags and Shinnie go and suddenly it’s £13.5m?! No, no vendetta at all. **** right off you bunch of ****s ?? i-Ram, DCFC1388, GenBr and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angieram Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 1 minute ago, StaffsRam said: So it’s £7m, then we let Marshall, Baldock, Jags and Shinnie go and suddenly it’s £13.5m?! No, no vendetta at all. **** right off you bunch of ****s ?? This is 4 months old. Calm down. ariotofmyown, Kinder, RoyMac5 and 5 others 4 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andicis Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 1 minute ago, StaffsRam said: So it’s £7m, then we let Marshall, Baldock, Jags and Shinnie go and suddenly it’s £13.5m?! No, no vendetta at all. **** right off you bunch of ****s ?? Read the date on the article. We needed 13.5m from October. We're in January now so it's less. Nothing has changed. RadioactiveWaste and StaffsRam 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_ram1 Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 If the EFL are allowing claims between teams for rule breaches, this would open each team up to endless breaches. Section 5 in the EFL rules state 24 Requirement to Play Full Strength Sides in League Matches 24.1 Each Club shall play its full strength in all Matches played under the auspices of The League unless some satisfactory reason is given. In the event of the explanation not being deemed satisfactory the Board shall refer the matter to a Disciplinary Commission which has the power to impose such penalties as it shall think fit. If any team played a weakened team to rest players etc. this would be in breach of the EFL rules. If this weakened team lead to a relegation or promotion rival getting extra points, this would be the same as Derby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 1 hour ago, Gritstone Tup said: It just needs someone to meet Gibson in court and it gets thrown out. Mel Morris should have done this and a proper bidder would also do this. This is no doubt why Gibson never took us to court. And why now we are in administration they (with Wycombe) have filed a claim to be a creditor, it can't now go to court while we're in administration. AndyinLiverpool 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffsRam Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 16 minutes ago, angieram said: This is 4 months old. Calm down. 16 minutes ago, Andicis said: Read the date on the article. We needed 13.5m from October. We're in January now so it's less. Nothing has changed. Lol, ok ok, I’ve put the AK47 and the one way ticket to Preston away again! ? Ram-Alf, Eddie, GenBr and 2 others 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JfR Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 1 minute ago, dan_ram1 said: If the EFL are allowing claims between teams for rule breaches, this would open each team up to endless breaches. Section 5 in the EFL rules state 24 Requirement to Play Full Strength Sides in League Matches 24.1 Each Club shall play its full strength in all Matches played under the auspices of The League unless some satisfactory reason is given. In the event of the explanation not being deemed satisfactory the Board shall refer the matter to a Disciplinary Commission which has the power to impose such penalties as it shall think fit. If any team played a weakened team to rest players etc. this would be in breach of the EFL rules. If this weakened team lead to a relegation or promotion rival getting extra points, this would be the same as Derby Incidentally, this could quite reasonably be invoked against Middlesbrough, who, last season, released over £20m worth of strikers in the form Britt Assombalonga and Ashley Fletcher in the last few weeks of the season, before their contracts were officially due to end. They then, in the final game of the season, lost to Wycombe, allowing the latter side to rise from last place to 22nd on the last day of the season. In that game they didn't start a recognised centre-forward, forced to play two wingers as makeshift frontmen instead. Would that result have been different with Fletcher and Assombalonga up top? We'll never know, of course, but it's no less speculative than Middlesbrough's case. RoyMac5, strawhillram and i-Ram 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 4 minutes ago, JfR said: Incidentally, this could quite reasonably be invoked against Middlesbrough, who, last season, released over £20m worth of strikers in the form Britt Assombalonga and Ashley Fletcher in the last few weeks of the season, before their contracts were officially due to end. They then, in the final game of the season, lost to Wycombe, allowing the latter side to rise from last place to 22nd on the last day of the season. In that game they didn't start a recognised centre-forward, forced to play two wingers as makeshift frontmen instead. Would that result have been different with Fletcher and Assombalonga up top? We'll never know, of course, but it's no less speculative than Middlesbrough's case. And gave a GK his only league game of the season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MackworthRamIsGod Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 Have Quantuma spoke at all? Just wondered if they have let wind they might issue a statement in light of the EFL statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angieram Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 Mucker1884, ariotofmyown, DarkFruitsRam7 and 12 others 7 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 14 minutes ago, dan_ram1 said: If the EFL are allowing claims between teams for rule breaches, this would open each team up to endless breaches. Section 5 in the EFL rules state 24 Requirement to Play Full Strength Sides in League Matches 24.1 Each Club shall play its full strength in all Matches played under the auspices of The League unless some satisfactory reason is given. In the event of the explanation not being deemed satisfactory the Board shall refer the matter to a Disciplinary Commission which has the power to impose such penalties as it shall think fit. If any team played a weakened team to rest players etc. this would be in breach of the EFL rules. If this weakened team lead to a relegation or promotion rival getting extra points, this would be the same as Derby Bearing in mine each club can name 25 players in a squad, In theory anyone can name a weekend squad, Rest their top goalscorer and play a fullback, As long as they are squad members then all is fine. BUT!, If someone gets relegated through our team being decemated through sales to make our finances through to the end of the season, They could have a case against the EFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 4 minutes ago, angieram said: No wonder we shipped in 6 when playing with a Rugby Ball ariotofmyown 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldben Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 https://www.airads.uk/ Still haven't figured out what should be said on the banner to fly over Middlesbrough fc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GboroRam Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 1 hour ago, sage said: So EFL, do you have a vendetta against Derby County? EFL not getting involved. "Hand me the black cap, I'll be needing that" RadioactiveWaste and Crewton 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkFruitsRam7 Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 RadioactiveWaste, BriggRam, rammieib and 9 others 2 9 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gritstone Tup Posted January 18, 2022 Share Posted January 18, 2022 21 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said: This is no doubt why Gibson never took us to court. And why now we are in administration they (with Wycombe) have filed a claim to be a creditor, it can't now go to court while we're in administration. They can’t be a creditor unless a court says we owe them something. The first port of call has to be everyone going to court? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now