The Administration Thread

[Donnyram]

48 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I think what's happening is that EFL do not like the idea of the "claims" being compressed now , even though they are not football creditors. Nor do they like the  connected idea of using statutory protection under insolvency law to avoid  dealing with them now instead via the League's  arbitration process. 

Because they know Boro will go after the EFL if they do.  Self preservation at any cost to DCFC

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Monty what I am saying is that nearly all the duties under Efl rules are from the club to the Efl , not club to club.

there are a few exceptions and 4.4 is one of them. But even on that there is an explicit statement that only the EFL can bring an action. 

Yes but for the ‘utmost good faith’ requirement only

[PistoldPete]

2 minutes ago, Donnyram said:

Because they know Boro will go after the EFL if they do.  Self preservation at any cost to DCFC

Well that’s the sinister side of it. Gibson trying to do the job of the EFL, because he doesn’t think they did a good job of it. 
 

so why doesn’t he go after the eFL instead? Well he did at first but then EFL and Gibson decided between them he could go after Derby instead.

[PistoldPete]

3 minutes ago, Monty said:

Yes but for the ‘utmost good faith’ requirement only

That’s what rule 4.4 is about.

[Ram-Alf]

10 minutes ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

Like all of us I don't know what's going on but surely DCFC or Mel Morris have to take this to court and fast. We have at least two parties waiting to buy us.....the delays are scandalous. 

This

I'm not going to call out Q, I can't believe they are sitting back smoking cigars and drinking fine wines while we choke to death, There must be a plan that is either being put in place or is in place to fight the EFL/Boro/WW.

We have posters on here that would make great Council who could/would challenge this in Her Majestys Courts, In less than 3 weeks DCFC could be no more, Q are aware of this, Silence is Golden so they say, I just hope Q are lurking in the shadows to pounce

[Donnyram]

31 minutes ago, WestKentRam said:

The EFL have already answered this in their statement of 17th Jan 2022:

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

8. Is there a conflict of interest at EFL Board level? What involvement do all Board members have in decisions relating to Derby County?

Any EFL Board members conflicted on any matter do not take part in any discussion and are asked to leave the meeting. In addition, any Director who is conflicted does not receive any board papers in respect of the conflicted matter. The position on whether any director is conflicted is reviewed on a meeting-by-meeting basis. At present there are two Board Directors conflicted in respect of the matter with Derby County and as such do not participate or engage in any of the decisions. 

Unfortunately this moral principle of confidentiality / conflicted representation didn’t stop sensitive information being leaked to the press on more than one occasion

[PistoldPete]

Just now, Donnyram said:

Unfortunately this moral principle of confidentiality / conflicted representation didn’t stop sensitive information being leaked to the press on more than one occasion

Yes I recall Gibson’s rant about the situation to the Boro forum owner. Where did he get all that information from? Derby being sold on the cheap he said? Where did he get that information from ? And all the rest? 
 

all very well saying the Boro guy on Efl board leaves the room  when dcfc discussed…. doesn’t mean to say he doesn’t find out what was discussed when he gets back in. 

[Donnyram]

8 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Well that’s the sinister side of it. Gibson trying to do the job of the EFL, because he doesn’t think they did a good job of it. 
 

so why doesn’t he go after the eFL instead? Well he did at first but then EFL and Gibson decided between them he could go after Derby instead.

Absolutely and it is documented in black and white with the arbitration records

[TheresOnlyWanChope]

9 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

This

I'm not going to call out Q, I can't believe they are sitting back smoking cigars and drinking fine wines while we choke to death, There must be a plan that is either being put in place or is in place to fight the EFL/Boro/WW.

We have posters on here that would make great Council who could/would challenge this in Her Majestys Courts, In less than 3 weeks DCFC could be no more, Q are aware of this, Silence is Golden so they say, I just hope Q are lurking in the shadows to pounce

Has this not been taken to a court yet? The time delays are ridiculous. A favourable court decision would then need a buyer to be named and a deal done which could take a while. 

[Ram-Alf]

1 minute ago, TheresOnlyWanChope said:

Has this not been taken to a court yet? The time delays are ridiculous. A favourable court decision would then need a buyer to be named and a deal done which could take a while. 

It's all quiet on the Western Front, That is what's so frustrating, We're all aware the Q have to keep their powder dry, It's like waiting for the bus, It's a straight road but you keep looking, Then all of a sudden 2 turn up ?

[kevinhectoring]

5 hours ago, Coconut's Beard said:

suppose at least you give us some idea what goes on in the minds of those entrenched in their position against Derby County, but you seem to present this opinion as the matter of inarguable fact, exactly as the 'opponents' would.

 

I DON’T think the EFL influences referees to deny us penalties. Does that mean I don’t properly support the club ?
 

I DO think the EFl disputes process is independent. I think so because I’ve seen how arbitration works, and worked with people who get involved in the EFL disputes process, as panel members and advocates. The key point is, the panel members  are appointed to be independent and are paid very well to be independent. And they get dropped from the list if their decisions are poor.  If you want to be cynical, follow the money. There are some reasons why the process can seem stacked against us but I won’t rehearse those again.  And why do people ignore that in 2 out of 3 of the amortisation hearings we got a great result ? Not the big one tho, admittedly

Yes I think the EFl is now in a place where they support our position in these claims. Yes I agree the weakness of the EFL months ago in standing up to Gibbo’s vendetta against Morris was appalling and is one of several reasons why we are in admin. MM has to share some of the blame for the EFL’s position on that, but it’s mostly because there’s no independent regulator (yet). If you’re accusing me of backing the EFl to the hilt on everything, that has no basis 

MM’s attack on the EFL’s decision making process is a broken record and an own goal. My barny with @Davidwas because for him with his influence to tell people the FC rule is ‘simple’ and ‘explicit’  was not helpful to our cause despite his best intentions. Anyone who can see what’s going on here knows it’s neither simple nor explicit. Explicit? I can’t even find a copy of the EFL’s insolvency policy  !! 
 

We all know how complicated it is and what’s the point in coming on here to read and write tribal nonsense that suggests everything is black and white. Refs are biased against us - give me a break 

[Alty_Ram]

Any EFL Board members conflicted on any matter do not take part in any discussion and are asked to leave the meeting. In addition, any Director who is conflicted does not receive any board papers in respect of the conflicted matter. 

Such is the level of suspicion and mistrust in their supposed impartiality that frankly I just don't know whether I can just take that as some definitive proof of impartiality and in any case it has no impact on pre and post meeting briefings between parties and whether pressure is applied outside of the formal meeting. Not being formally copied in on the email chain doesn't mean that you are not fully briefed and have had conversations and agreed a stance with other involved parties. I'm not saying this has happened because I simply don't know but nor is it at all beyond the realms of possibility. This is where we are at with a massive trust issue after so much opaque manoeuvring in the corridors of the EFL.

[TheresOnlyWanChope]

Just now, Unlucky Alf said:

It's all quiet on the Western Front, That is what's so frustrating, We're all aware the Q have to keep their powder dry, It's like waiting for the bus, It's a straight road but you keep looking, Then all of a sudden 2 turn up ?

A court hearing seems the only way to clear up this mess unless Gibson and Couhig are paid off (unlikely to happen). So surely this should have been done a long time ago, unless there is the argument about what kind of court this hearing will be heard in 

[atherstoneram]

1 hour ago, Kingpin said:

Surely NOBODY was naive enough to think he’d come straight out and say “ok Mel, as you wish. Me and you to court it is..” ? ??

He doesn't even need to respond to MM, he is no longer anything to do with the club apart from being the landlord of the ground we play on.

[kevinhectoring]

2 hours ago, i-Ram said:

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.

I-ram,  I posted an abbreviated version of the arbitration provision to try to stay on point. If you look at the provision (95.2) it sets out in chapter and verse exactly what does and does not fall within the scope of the arbitration requirement. This is the list:  

95.2.1    subject to Regulation 95.3 below, disputes arising from a decision of The League or the Board (‘Board Disputes’);

95.2.2    Disciplinary Appeals;

95.2.3    ‘Force Majeure’ appeals pursuant to Regulation 12.3 (Sporting Sanction Appeal);

95.2.4    applications pursuant to Rule 6 of Appendix 3 (Appeal Application and/or Review Applications under the Owners’ and Directors’ Test);

95.2.5    other disputes between The League and Clubs and between each Club arising from these Regulations or otherwise (‘Other Disputes’)

[Indy]

1 hour ago, WestKentRam said:

The EFL have already answered this in their statement of 17th Jan 2022:

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

8. Is there a conflict of interest at EFL Board level? What involvement do all Board members have in decisions relating to Derby County?

Any EFL Board members conflicted on any matter do not take part in any discussion and are asked to leave the meeting. In addition, any Director who is conflicted does not receive any board papers in respect of the conflicted matter. The position on whether any director is conflicted is reviewed on a meeting-by-meeting basis. At present there are two Board Directors conflicted in respect of the matter with Derby County and as such do not participate or engage in any of the decisions. 

I assume the 'two Board Directors conflicted in respect of the matter' are those from Boro and Forest. If so, is the Forest representative truly conflicted, or is it someone else? Is Jez Moxey at Burton likely to have a conflict of interest??

Club representatives

Nicholas Randall QC - Championship - Nottingham Forest

Peter Ridsdale - Championship - Preston North End

Neil Bausor - Championship - Middlesbrough

Jez Moxey - League One – Burton Albion

Steven Curwood - League One - Fleetwood Town

John Nixon - League Two – Carlisle United

It might be Moxey as he’s involved with the Appleby bid. Or it might have been Forest as, at the time, they were trying to asset strip us with low ball offers for our players. 

[PistoldPete]

6 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

 

I DON’T think the EFL influences referees to deny us penalties. Does that mean I don’t properly support the club ?
 

I DO think the EFl disputes process is independent. I think so because I’ve seen how arbitration works, and worked with people who get involved in the EFL disputes process, as panel members and advocates. The key point is, the panel members  are appointed to be independent and are paid very well to be independent. And they get dropped from the list if their decisions are poor.  If you want to be cynical, follow the money. There are some reasons why the process can seem stacked against us but I won’t rehearse those again.  And why do people ignore that in 2 out of 3 of the amortisation hearings we got a great result ? Not the big one tho, admittedly

Yes I think the EFl is now in a place where they support our position in these claims. Yes I agree the weakness of the EFL months ago in standing up to Gibbo’s vendetta against Morris was appalling and is one of several reasons why we are in admin. MM has to share some of the blame for the EFL’s position on that, but it’s mostly because there’s no independent regulator (yet). If you’re accusing me of backing the EFl to the hilt on everything, that has no basis 

MM’s attack on the EFL’s decision making process is a broken record and an own goal. My barny with @Davidwas because for him with his influence to tell people the FC rule is ‘simple’ and ‘explicit’  was not helpful to our cause despite his best intentions. Anyone who can see what’s going on here knows it’s neither simple nor explicit. Explicit? I can’t even find a copy of the EFL’s insolvency policy  !! 
 

We all know how complicated it is and what’s the point in coming on here to read and write tribal nonsense that suggests everything is black and white. Refs are biased against us - give me a break 

David was right about the football creditor rule. And now even the EFL are saying there is no dispute about that. Boro and wycombe are not football creditors. It’s simple . And explicit. 
 

so there should be no reason then why the claims cannot be compressed.
 

No We cannot find what efl’s insolvency policy is.

so we don’t know what it says or even what status is has. it is possibly internal guidance. So subordinate to the EFL rules. Which in turn is subordinate to statute. 

we have court appointed insolvency practitioners acting for the creditors of DCFC and frankly I prefer to rely on them than the EFL and their dodgy practices.

[Eatonram]

I do sort of agree with KH that the arbitration process is independent but it is just far to slow and no one seems capable of instigating it.

If the EFL want arbitration on a matter between Clubs it should be time limited and down to the claiment to start proceedings. 
in this country the “accused” do not take themselves to court. 

[LazloW]

 

So fed up now. I’m getting no work done at all because I keep refreshing Twitter and this site just hoping for some news, any news: good, bad or indifferent, I don’t care. 

The back and forth of this thread is mildly interesting and entertaining (at times) but it is mostly speculation, impotent rage and frustration. All understandable because we have no way of getting answers. I applaud those contacting the EFL directly and amazed you’re getting any kind of response, but we all know there will be nothing ground breaking coming from them. Even if they suddenly thought, ‘aggghh, we’ve cocked up here!’ they aren’t going to tell a fan that.

The fan groups are doing their best, but even this is ending up in dead ends. If the notes of the last meeting are anything to go by, the administrators are getting fed up too because their answers came across as quite snotty.

‘Team Derby’ is a great bit of PR from politicians and their ilk, but what influence do they really have, other than being higher profile ‘enquirers’ than fans? 

I saw that Rick Parry had said that he wasn’t going to be giving a running commentary, but frankly that’s what we need. Flurries of media activity followed by days of media silence are no good for anybody. Even if the release was ‘still no news’, at least that would be news (if you see what I mean).

I also cannot fathom why any of this hasn’t seen the inside of a courtroom yet. I’m sure it’s all to do with ‘the rules’, but if so can’t these be challenged on the basis of failing natural justice, restraint of trade, that the EFL broke their own rule!?!? (or something, WTF do I know! ????)

I don’t even know what point I’m trying to make. Sorry. Just venting like everybody else. I really ought to go and do some work before I get sacked. Come on you Rams… ? 

 

Edited February 10, 2022 by LazloW

[Tamworthram]

1 hour ago, Kingpin said:

Surely NOBODY was naive enough to think he’d come straight out and say “ok Mel, as you wish. Me and you to court it is..” ? ??

I don't expect it for one moment but, there has to be some kind of response or movement.