The Administration Thread

[Rev]

23 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

One poster mentioned about joining another league  if things get really silly here with the EFL, and whilst the national league is most likely on demotion and a premiership 2 is unlikely anytime soon ( which would actually be a good thing for football) where we were invited to join along with the likes of Sunderland Sheffield Wednesday etc. Are there any other options ? Well actually the MLS option is not so stupid and maybe a possibility, why? Well the Americans don’t mind teams traveling all over, they like the commercial exposure and the TV exposure. The MLS has very good attendances with an awful lot of European/ Latino population who love and watch real football. Whilst still unlikely for us it would be a heck of a lot better than being 17 leagues lower down if we started again and a new owner might just say let’s have a look at it.

You have to pay a franchise fee to join the MLS. 

Around $300 million for the last entrant.

[Ram-Alf]

29 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

One poster mentioned about joining another league  if things get really silly here with the EFL, and whilst the national league is most likely on demotion and a premiership 2 is unlikely anytime soon ( which would actually be a good thing for football) where we were invited to join along with the likes of Sunderland Sheffield Wednesday etc. Are there any other options ? Well actually the MLS option is not so stupid and maybe a possibility, why? Well the Americans don’t mind teams traveling all over, they like the commercial exposure and the TV exposure. The MLS has very good attendances with an awful lot of European/ Latino population who love and watch real football. Whilst still unlikely for us it would be a heck of a lot better than being 17 leagues lower down if we started again and a new owner might just say let’s have a look at it.

It does say all purpose

[Ram a lamb a ding dong]

A lot of squabbling on here and general lack of clarity which is having such a negative effect on us all; me included.

My take is as follows:

EFL continue to slopey shoulders everything 

MFC and WWFC to reject Mels offer as they know they stand zero chance in court

Mel to come back in and take an indemnity to accept any potential financial loss.

Appleby to take over

All to be done this month

Agree that once a resolution is reached EFL to change regs asap to ban any future claims between clubs incl retrospective

MFC and WWFC to be chased up for compo by Q due to their farcical behaviour. EFL most likely to be also.

[CBRammette]

Anyone with access to Jim at Rams Trust or similar involved in the meeting later know if they will be picking up on the position with Mike Ashley as mentioned in today's article? I am member of Rams Trust but in between work calls only have time to quickly look st forum!

[PistoldPete]

26 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

You seem to be claiming MFC are including Morris (and presumably Pearce and McFarland) in their claims against Derby based on one statement on the MFC Webpage. Both Gibson’s open letter type pronouncements have been erratic, so why hang your hat on that one point. Look at all the EFL Hearing/Appeal documentation on the stadium and amortisation points. It’s just EFL DCFC & MFC being named as the participants in the hearings and appeals.  MFC’s continuing claim is really very unlikely to have now been changed to drag in Morris, and Pearce and McFarland. Be interesting if they did drag in Pearce who was on the EFL board at the time ?

You mention Chansiri above, and yes I do see that the EFL did try to include him, and other directors, in the Sheffield Wednesday Stadium Hearing. However they did soon drop that, presumably under some legal pressure. I suspect the EFL were taking the view that their actions were fraudulent (not that they had the legal powers, nor for that matter anything within their rules ?) in that Chansiri and Co. had deliberately (and perhaps unlawfully) changed the date of the Stadium sale, and also therefore deliberately filed incorrect P&S figures too.  Nothing within DCFC’s hearings, and the recorded outcomes, suggested Morris was committing fraud or any other unlawful wrongdoing. 

 

Well I agree Iram that all we have to go on is  MFC statement . And I also agree Gibson is a ranting unreliable Bamford. 
 

Chansiri was charged by Efl for breach of utmost good faith. Which doesn’t require anything as serious as criminality at all. MFC ‘s claim against Derby is for systematic cheating which I would say is a worse accusation than what Chansiri was accused of . As you say that claim against Chansiri was later dropped.

actually Efl did as an afterthought try and claim dishonesty similarly against Derby . But that too failed. 

all of which really shows what utter Bamfords both Efl and Gibson are. 
 

 But whatever Boro ‘s trumped up allegations are there is no obvious reason why they can’t claim against Morris if they want .. and their statement suggests that they have. 

[Day]

3 minutes ago, CBRammette said:

Anyone with access to Jim at Rams Trust or similar involved in the meeting later know if they will be picking up on the position with Mike Ashley as mentioned in today's article? I am member of Rams Trust but in between work calls only have time to quickly look st forum!

Could drop him a PM, Jim is now on the forum -  @RamsfanJim

[Ram a lamb a ding dong]

Both statements from MFC have been written by a kid on a YTS scheme. Cannot believe that a professional outfit should write absolute garbage and childish name calling.

As much as MM is 100% to blame, you cannot argue with the detailed and considered response.

MFC are a Mickley mouse outfit run by petty clowns. So hope they fail miserably to go up and get hit by FFP.

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

8 minutes ago, David said:

Could drop him a PM, Jim is now on the forum -  @RamsfanJim

Ive just dropped a line to Jim about getting a specific answer if possible to the 4.4/4.5 EFL rule about clubs not claiming off one another.

[PistoldPete]

19 minutes ago, Ram a lamb a ding dong said:

A lot of squabbling on here and general lack of clarity which is having such a negative effect on us all; me included.

My take is as follows:

EFL continue to slopey shoulders everything 

MFC and WWFC to reject Mels offer as they know they stand zero chance in court

Mel to come back in and take an indemnity to accept any potential financial loss.

Appleby to take over

All to be done this month

Agree that once a resolution is reached EFL to change regs asap to ban any future claims between clubs incl retrospective

MFC and WWFC to be chased up for compo by Q due to their farcical behaviour. EFL most likely to be also.

Yes I like all of that. Although last paras are a bit contradictory .. let’s ban clubs from suing each other but only  after we have sued MFC , WWFC and the eFL! 

mel providing indemnity has been mentioned, but not sure about that . It would be nice if he could pay all our debts. If he doesn’t can he pick and choose which ones he pays? I’m not that familiar with insolvency law but it sounds a bit wrong , there’s supposed to be a priority order. 

I think his “come after me “ suggestion is a good one. 
 

 

 

 

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Ram a lamb a ding dong said:

Both statements from MFC have been written by a kid on a YTS scheme. Cannot believe that a professional outfit should write absolute garbage and childish name calling.

As much as MM is 100% to blame, you cannot argue with the detailed and considered response.

MFC are a Mickley mouse outfit run by petty clowns. So hope they fail miserably to go up and get hit by FFP.

Certainly some questions about the professionalism particularly the latest one 

[Ghost of Clough]

1 minute ago, Monty said:

Certainly some questions about the professionalism particularly the latest one 

I thought the first one was the least professional statement I have ever seen

[PistoldPete]

2 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

I thought the first one was the least professional statement I have ever seen

It was. Especially considering they have commenced proceedings against us. Aren’t they supposed to be confidential? And how do they know Wycombe lost out because of our cheating? What’s Wycombe case got to do with Boro? 

Gibson is a total bAmford.

[TheresOnlyWanChope]

48 minutes ago, Rev said:

You have to pay a franchise fee to join the MLS. 

Around $300 million for the last entrant.

Maybe we could get a deal. An ‘English’ or overseas division- can get Bury involved and anyone else. Obviously a crazy suggestion but still more palatable than joining some Asda league. 

[CornwallRam]

49 minutes ago, Rev said:

You have to pay a franchise fee to join the MLS. 

Around $300 million for the last entrant.

To be fair, that would also be the cost of using the roadrider for a fan going to every away game.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

I thought the first one was the least professional statement I have ever seen

‘The administrators were appointed in September but have consistently refused to engage with MFC’s attempts to engage with them to reach a resolution’

One example of what I meant 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

still think EFL will prefer the LAP route to the High Court .. but why should the venue make that much difference . I hope that isn’t the sticking point.. take Morris through the LAP if necessary but leave DCFC out of it.

Pete, you have read Morris' statement where he outlines his previous experience at the EFL hearings. He clearly has no faith in that organisation any more and would not expose his personal assets to any process overseen by them and who can really blame him for that? The majority on this forum has been shouting for weeks about the injustice DCFC has suffered at the hands of this inept organisation. Would you personally offer yourself up to the jurisdiction of the EFL from what you have now seen?

Mel is no longer a director of DCFC and as an individual citizen he does not have suffer them anymore. Nor should he have to indemnify DCFC for the parasite claims in the EFL arena. His voluntary offer to fight the parasite claims in the High Court is commendable, notwithstanding his previous conduct as the owner of DCFC. The High Court offers the highest and most equitable form of justice available in the UK. It settles claims between individuals, private sector companies, international companies and individuals, government and public bodies. It is available to all but not member clubs of the EFL because the organisation prefers to keep it within its own walls where kangaroo justice prevails.

DCFC has fully accepted the penalties handed down by the EFL - the 21 points deduction - and in terms of EFL jurisdiction there the matter should end. The claims of the parasite clubs are for them and them alone and the place to settle them is in the High Court if that body rules that it can hear them.

Whatever this week holds for us it going to be very interesting. Either all parties accept the chance of allowing the MFC/WW v Morris proposal or the EFL continues its path to looking increasingly ridiculous. Remember the millions of people across the world who have an interest in English football will be watching with close interest. If the EFL does nothing to remove the current impasse, many of those millions will begin to understand and sympathise withe the hurt and feelings of injustice that all of us as Derby supporters have shared for much too long now. The EFL could be on the brink of hari-kari.

Wednesday night's world premiere of the film 'Rooney' will help focus on what is being done to our football club. Now is the time for us to see if there is any common sense and fairness left behind the walls of that overwhelmingly self-interested body called the EFL.

Edited February 7, 2022 by Guest

[atherstoneram]

12 hours ago, Inverurie Ram said:

It's like watching and reading about the latest on the soaps on the TV.

EFL - Eastenders

The Administrators - Coronation Street

Middlesbrough - Eldorado

Wycombe Wanderers - Towie The Only Way Is Essex

The Bidders - Byker Grove

Don't forget Crossroads with the wooden actors,i wonder who is playing Benny?

[Ghost of Clough]

3 minutes ago, Monty said:

‘The administrators were appointed in September but have consistently refused to engage with MFC’s attempts to engage with them to reach a resolution’

One example of what I meant 

The original statement was basically "Derby were cheating ?" repeated several times with a few "it's not fair that Derby had a massive 50% of our budget to spend over that specific monitoring period"

[atherstoneram]

12 hours ago, vonwright said:

That's my understanding, too. They are willing to let the court consider: 'Is the EFL entitled to have rules stating that it can kick out a club that fails to respect 'football debts', or in this case 'football claims' - ie claims that would become 'football debts' if substantiated at an EFL hearing? Can it do this even though it basically means treating these claims differently to how claims like this are treated by law?' And the court might say they are fine to do that: this is a members' club which can have whatever membership rules they want. In which case the company (Derby County) could still push ahead with a sale and ignore the claims (as per law), but the EFL could then kick them out (for breaching EFL rules). As long as that is the case, no one is going to buy the club. 

It might be worth seeking a ruling on that, but we might well lose. In any case, the issue we really need settled is: 'Do these specific claims have any merit and are Middlesbrough and/or Wycombe owed any damages?'

I don't think the EFL were offering to have that heard in court. They like to keep such things house. 

To which I would say: okay EFL, but these are unique circumstances. Derby's very existence is as stake and if Morris is willing to take the financial risk if the matter is heard in court, then why not? Doesn't it give everyone what they want, while also (crucially) actually giving Derby some chance or survival? Isn't it putting the potential financial burden where you want it to be (on the reckless former owner) and not on the stricken club? If the EFL is serious about being flexible and 'pragmatic', if it is serious about wanting to save Derby, and if Middlesbrough and Wycombe don't want to kill the club either - they should agree. 

If M&W refuse because 'these things are usually dealt with in house' - not good enough. We will all suspect they basically mean 'It is easier for us to control the process and keep squeezing until you burst'.

The EFL needs to put very public pressure on them to accept this as the 'pragmatic' solution everyone claims to want. 

Whilst i agree with most of this it is not MM they are after personally it is the actions they perceive he took while the owner of DCFC

[atherstoneram]

11 hours ago, ilkleyram said:

Yes, except private members clubs cannot ignore the law of the land, can they (genuine question).  They’re not allowed to discriminate on grounds of sex or race, or pay lower than the minimum wage, or sack people unfairly or not pay their income taxes or the duty on cigarettes or alcohol. So where lies the difference?

Yes they can,you still have gentlemens clubs where females are not allowed but other laws also apply that they cannot pay below minimum wage etc.