The Administration Thread

[i-Ram]

4 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

David you’re totally and utterly correct in stating that the claims are spurious. But where you go off the rails is your claim that the EFL are ‘entertaining them’ 

The rules contain a mechanism - arbitration - to settle disputes between clubs. If a dispute is ongoing or even mooted, there is simply nothing the EFl can do - publicly - as regards the suit. Sure, they can have conversations behind the scenes and there is no doubt they have in our case.  But ‘entertaining the dispute’ is no more in their gift than dismissing it.

I hope you have gone to bed already and that you don’t have nightmares about that imaginary goblin Rick Parry 

The EFL’s provision within their Rules for Arbitration though can only have been written to expressly deal with failures to resolve disputes under commercial contracts, e.g. an attempt perhaps to avoid a stage payment being made under a transfer, or perhaps the unlawful ‘tapping up’ of another Club’s contracted player.

I cannot believe you can think that ANY non-contractual dispute between Clubs is a matter for the EFL to insist that the only way forward is through EFL convened arbitration processes.

[G STAR RAM]

What I can't understand is why we have a few groups writing open letters and having meetings with relevant parties but none of them are asking these important questions.

They are all asking pointless questions which just invite the usual rubbish generic answers.

Why are these groups not canvassing supporters to make sure they are getting the important questions asked?

It seems like they are more interested in making sure their groups are seen to be involved rather than having any actual meaningful involvement.

Sorry if I am misreading the situation but that's just how it comes across to me.

[Curtains]

https://www.football365.com/news/middlesbrough-claim-derby-administrators-have-refused-to-engage

From 4th of February.

 

[i-Ram]

@David the above represents a very fine body of investigative work which is very compelling. Thank you. I do hope both BAWT and RamsTrust read these posts, and take them up with Quantuma and the EFL because in my opinion they do clearly point the way as to how the EFL can and should have resolved this stalemate at a much earlier point. By applying rule 4.4 and informing all other Club’s that the decisions and awards of the LAPs was a full and final decision.

[G STAR RAM]

4 minutes ago, Curtains said:

https://www.football365.com/news/middlesbrough-claim-derby-administrators-have-refused-to-engage

From 4th of February.

 

Middlesbrough claiming that the EFL share their view that it is a football related debt, have the EFL gone on record to put this statement right? If not, why not?

[i-Ram]

7 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

What I can't understand is why we have a few groups writing open letters and having meetings with relevant parties but none of them are asking these important questions.

They are all asking pointless questions which just invite the usual rubbish generic answers.

Why are these groups not canvassing supporters to make sure they are getting the important questions asked?

It seems like they are more interested in making sure their groups are seen to be involved rather than having any actual meaningful involvement.

Sorry if I am misreading the situation but that's just how it comes across to me.

Hear hear.

[Day]

6 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

What I can't understand is why we have a few groups writing open letters and having meetings with relevant parties but none of them are asking these important questions.

They are all asking pointless questions which just invite the usual rubbish generic answers.

Why are these groups not canvassing supporters to make sure they are getting the important questions asked?

It seems like they are more interested in making sure their groups are seen to be involved rather than having any actual meaningful involvement.

Sorry if I am misreading the situation but that's just how it comes across to me.

These are questions that need to be directed to the EFL, as far as I’m aware only RamsTrust and MP’s have that direct line to hold meetings with them outside of Quantuma.

I have put across these to RamsTrust on Twitter, received a reply to say they will look into them.

The Supporters Charter Group hold meetings with Quantuma, who can’t really answer them and possibly want answers themselves.

Needless to say, still no reply from the EFL to the email I sent questioning the ability to be impartial and regulation 4.4

[Curtains]

15 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

What I can't understand is why we have a few groups writing open letters and having meetings with relevant parties but none of them are asking these important questions.

They are all asking pointless questions which just invite the usual rubbish generic answers.

Why are these groups not canvassing supporters to make sure they are getting the important questions asked?

It seems like they are more interested in making sure their groups are seen to be involved rather than having any actual meaningful involvement.

Sorry if I am misreading the situation but that's just how it comes across to me.

Not wanting to be critical but the whole thing seems rather toothless.

They don’t seem to get anywhere .

The answers always are standard Administrative text .

I think we should back David and this forum in a concerted campaign if that’s possible 

Edited February 10, 2022 by Curtains
Added

[G STAR RAM]

Just now, David said:

These are questions that need to be directed to the EFL, as far as I’m aware only RamsTrust and MP’s have that direct line to hold meetings with them outside of Quantuma.

I have put across these to RamsTrust on Twitter, received a reply to say they will look into them.

The Supporters Charter Group hold meetings with Quantuma, who can’t really answer them and possibly want answers themselves.

Needless to say, still no reply from the EFL to the email I sent questioning the ability to be impartial and regulation 4.4

The EFL are usually pretty good at responding but also very good at cherry picking which part of your questions they want to answer.

Im on to my 3rd e-mail asking how much Reading failed P&S by and how their points deduction was calculated in relation to ours.

Also on to 3rd e-mail asking why Boro have not been charged re their comments over DCFC systematically cheating.

[jono]

What seems so odd is that it seems there has been no time line / critical path / plan of action issued by the EFL. 
 

This is a matter that is disrupting their competition that all fans finance either from ticket sales or TV subscriptions.

Have I missed the blindingly obvious ? Everything from the governing body seems to be .. what they can’t do or who they have “invited” to discuss .. where are the instructions, orders, rulings ? 

[Day]

5 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Middlesbrough claiming that the EFL share their view that it is a football related debt, have the EFL gone on record to put this statement right? If not, why not?

Another good question.

It will come from this section of their latest statement which I will link below

Derby County considers those claims should not be treated as football related debts and that it would be wrong for the EFL to require the Club to have to continue to defend the claims as a condition of continuing membership in circumstances where they have been compromised by way of a restructuring plan. The EFL does not agree with that analysis.

https://www.efl.com/news/2022/february/efl-statement-derby-county-update/

They can argue they haven’t said they are football debts, but that bit in bold does suggest they side with Boro which is why they have gone on to use it in their statement.

I read it that way as well rightly or wrongly, when they have been suggesting the High Court to decide, there was no need to add “The EFL does not agree with that analysis” likewise when they voiced their “disappointment” with regards to the Stadium Sale verdict.

[Crewton]

You have to consider the possibility that many of the questions that you believe should be asked at SCG meetings with Quantuma but aren't, actually are being asked but the answers can't be published in the formal notes due to political or commercial sensitivities. 

[Curtains]

19 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Middlesbrough claiming that the EFL share their view that it is a football related debt, have the EFL gone on record to put this statement right? If not, why not?

“Boro welcomed that invitation, and the EFL saying on Wednesday that it disagreed with the administrators’ analysis that, under insolvency legislation, the club could avoid defending Middlesbrough and Wycombe’s claims and that they should not be treated as football-related debts.”

——————-

 

That statement is very revealing and serious 

 

[Day]

12 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

The EFL are usually pretty good at responding but also very good at cherry picking which part of your questions they want to answer.

Im on to my 3rd e-mail asking how much Reading failed P&S by and how their points deduction was calculated in relation to ours.

Also on to 3rd e-mail asking why Boro have not been charged re their comments over DCFC systematically cheating.

I sent one on the 20/01/22 with regards to the football creditor status, received a copy and paste reply on the 22/01/22.

I sent another to ask if they have received Mel Morris’s statement and offer on the 4th February, received a reply on the 5th to say that had and that it may be a solution for one part of the jam.

Third email went out on Monday with regards to their ability to be impartial and regulation 4.4 and yet to receive any kind of response.

Wasn’t fully aware of 3.5 on Monday otherwise I would have probably included that although I try not to send lengthy emails where certain parts could be easily ignored.

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, David said:

I sent one on the 20/01/22 with regards to the football creditor status, received a copy and paste reply on the 22/01/22.

I sent another to ask if they have received Mel Morris’s statement and offer on the 4th February, received a reply on the 5th to say that had and that it may be a solution for one part of the jam.

Third email went out on Monday with regards to their ability to be impartial and regulation 4.4 and yet to receive any kind of response.

Wasn’t fully aware of 3.5 on Monday otherwise I would have probably included that although I try not to send lengthy emails where certain parts could be easily ignored.

Yes get the feeling it is better just to ask one question so they cant sweep everything else under the carpet.

[Eatonram]

12 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Yes get the feeling it is better just to ask one question so they cant sweep everything else under the carpet.

My experience is that they do not like and do not answer direct questions. 

[Archied]

58 minutes ago, Boycie said:

Whist on his phone constantly.  I’ll give him 2 hours.

I have notified the fire brigade to be on standby

[WestKentRam]

The silence from Gibson following MM's statement of 4th Feb is deafening.

As others have pointed out, he surely will release a negative response just prior to the game on Saturday to try and gain an advantage in that, just as he tried to derail our play-off final preparations against Villa by announcing his intention of suing Derby three days before this match.

He managed to issue statements on 18th Jan and 4th Feb both in response to EFL statements of the preceding day. So he can work fast when he wants to and at other times drag his feet.

It doesn't seem to matter to him how this is affecting the club and the fans in particular, or perhaps it does. I sincerely hope there are behind the scenes discussions going on and he will give a positive reaction to MM's offer, but I am waiting to be disappointed and have the feeling that he is playing with us.

[G STAR RAM]

10 minutes ago, WestKentRam said:

The silence from Gibson following MM's statement of 4th Feb is deafening.

As others have pointed out, he surely will release a negative response just prior to the game on Saturday to try and gain an advantage in that, just as he tried to derail our play-off final preparations against Villa by announcing his intention of suing Derby three days before this match.

He managed to issue statements on 18th Jan and 4th Feb both in response to EFL statements of the preceding day. So he can work fast when he wants to and at other times drag his feet.

It doesn't seem to matter to him how this is affecting the club and the fans in particular, or perhaps it does. I sincerely hope there are behind the scenes discussions going on and he will give a positive reaction to MM's offer, but I am waiting to be disappointed and have the feeling that he is playing with us.

Difference is that Gibson had probably had prior sight or maybe even helped draft the EFL statements...

[Tamworthram]

I’m not expecting the release of any sensitive or confidential information. Nor even the name of the preferred bidder yet. What I do want to know though is what is the next stage, what are the blockers that need to be overcome and what are the timescales.

Are we going to arbitration? If so, when and when will a decision be reached? If we’re not what is the alternative path to resolving the situation and what are its timescales?

If arbitration is the way forward but there are barriers to overcome, what are the barriers and when can we expect them to be resolved? (Some have talked about Mel’s offer needs to be considered first. If this is true, what timescales have been put on obtaining a response?)

If an alternative path is the way forward, what is it and what is preventing progress?

If we’re at a total impasse, what are the EFL’s proposal (as the governing body) for forcing a way forward?

As I say, I completely understand certain information cannot be divulged but the apparent deafening silence (other than straight bat answers to questions put forward) from the EFL and administrators is frustrating. Maybe this is where the MP’s step forward again and demand a route to resolution.