The Administration Thread

[PistoldPete]

23 minutes ago, Curtains said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-10514843/Derby-County-admins-meet-Wycombe-owner-preferred-bidder-expected-week.html

Parasite no 2 still pops up. 

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

13 minutes ago, Curtains said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-10514843/Derby-County-admins-meet-Wycombe-owner-preferred-bidder-expected-week.html

 

Changed that a little

Couhig has said Derby was guilty of USING A QUANTIFIABLE ACCOUNTING PROCEDURE and Wycombe's claim is that an EFL APPEAL BY KANGAROO COURT AFTER QUALIFIED AUDITORS HAD FOUND NO WRONGDOING  LEAD TO DERBY GETTING AN UNJUSTIFIED  points deduction UNDER DURESS FROM THE EFL WITH A PROMISE IT WOULD SPEED UP A SALE. the Chairboys being relegated from the Championship to League One WAS THEIR OWN FAULT FOR BEING RABBLE AND LETTING ANDRE WISDOM OF ALL PEOPLE SMASH IN AN INJURY TIME WINNER AGAINST THEM, ON TOP OF THE FACT THEY WERE PROMOTED BY DUBIOUS METHODS IN THE FIRST PLACE. IT IS ALSO NOTED THAT THE CHAIRBOYS SHOULDN'T ACTUALLY BE A LEAGUE CLUB AFTER BECOMING EMBROILED IN A HIGHLY DUBIOUS PURCHASE OF A STRIKER YEARS AGO WHICH LEAD TO BRITOL ROVERS MAKING A COMPLAINT THAT TODAY WOULD HAVE SEEN THEM PLAYING IN THE VANARAMA DIVISION.  IT IS ALSO NOTED THAT THIS GEEZER WHO PROTESTS ABOUT NO ONE ADDRESSING HIS CLAIM HAS BEEN IN NO RUSH TO SIT DOWN WITH PETERBROUGHS CHAIRMAN AFTER 18 MONTHS WHO IS PISSED OF THAT THE POINTS PER GAME SCENARIO DENIED THEM A PLAYOFF PLACE 

Hope they've brought a ball gag to this meeting.  He talks that much they may die of old age or rack up another 10 million in HMRC interest before he finishes.

[i-Ram]

24 minutes ago, Curtains said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-10514843/Derby-County-admins-meet-Wycombe-owner-preferred-bidder-expected-week.html

I suspect this will put the curse on us, but I get the impression that Q are more or less going to tell Wycombe to duck off, and I dont think the EFL are likely to stand in their way. I think the EFL have had different guidance from their Lawyers as to the claims, including timings, of Boro and Wycombe, and Q know they can strong arm this through.

[PistoldPete]

1 minute ago, i-Ram said:

I suspect this will put the curse on us, but I get the impression that Q are more or less going to tell Wycombe to duck off, and I dont think the EFL are likely to stand in their way. I think the EFL have had different guidance from their Lawyers as to the claims, including timings, of Boro and Wycombe, and Q know they can strong arm this through.

You would think Efl would be a witness in the Wycombe claim.. and even they would have to say there was a due process which would never have been finished in time for Derby to be relegated in 2020/1.

[StaffsRam]

Could we offer to refurbish Wycombe’s car park with some really nice-looking traffic cones?

[i-Ram]

4 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

You would think Efl would be a witness in the Wycombe claim.. and even they would have to say there was a due process which would never have been finished in time for Derby to be relegated in 2020/1.

I agree, although it didn’t help that the very same muppets prepared an alternative fixture list at the time.

[Mucker1884]

Time to put our hands in our pocket, and offer Mr Coolpig what is rightfully his...

 

 

 

[PistoldPete]

18 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

I agree, although it didn’t help that the very same muppets prepared an alternative fixture list at the time.

Yes that’s because they hoped the IDC would have relegated us , but didn’t, to the EFL’s disappointment. 

[vonwright]

5 hours ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

Quoting myself but I've just read regulation 95 which does indeed in my opinion allow Boro to claim. It also therefore allows every other club to claim against each other if you can show you may have been affected by another's actions. 

I guess the point of the rule was to have some sort of backstop to prevent clubs suing each other in court, and doing their washing in public. But if clubs don't trust the arbitration process, or if the process is too slow and spurious claims don't get weeded out quickly, then it's probably better these cases do end in court. 

The rule is part of the problem but I'd also blame Wycombe and Boro for their use of the rule. It's never been put to this use before and there's a reason for that - clubs suing each other for 'damages' in this way could become an epidemic and is bad news for the game. 

Perhaps the EFL need to specify the cases where they would arbitrate and say 'for anything else you need to take it to court'. 

Edited February 15, 2022 by vonwright

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

12 minutes ago, vonwright said:

I guess the point of the rule was to have some sort of backstop to prevent clubs suing each other in court, and doing their washing in public. But if clubs don't trust the arbitration process, or if the process is too slow and spurious claims don't get weeded out quickly, then it's probably better these cases do end in court. 

The rule is part of the problem but I'd also blame Wycombe and Boro for their use of the rule. It's never been put to this use before and there's a reason for that - clubs suing each other for 'damages' in this way could become an epidemic and is bad news for the game. 

Perhaps the EFL need to specify the cases where they would arbitrate and say 'for anything else you need to take it to court'. 

Totally agree, but I think its too late to close the stable door as the horse has bolted with Gibson digging in the spurs.

[NottmRAM]

Anyone else started perusing free agents on transfermarkt?

[Oldben]

Free agents don't help understand the embargo, sure the club can sign them as long as the current squad size isn't bigger than efl allowable size which just happens to be almost the minimum amount for a squad.

The next issue is derby can't compete on salaries for those free agents, spend amount on salaries is restricted under the embargo

The next is is that with Derby in its current position, which quality free agents would look derbys way, unless of course the salaries paid were high.

[Crewton]

Quote

I don't think (Wycombe's claim) will be an impediment. In fact, we don't consider that as something the purchasers need to look at. We think there is a way through,' administrator Andrew Hosking told BBC Derby.

'The Wycombe chairman believes passionately in their position and we will endeavour to try and reach out to them to see if an accommodation can be reached.'

So why isn't Mel Morris "reaching out" to Couhig, as he apparently did to Gibson, to resolve this? 

I'd have hoped that Quantuma would have prepared the defence to Couhig's claim (which only really needs the timelines of the process and the various areas of responsibility setting out) and suggested to the bidders that the claim is about as valid as last year's TV license so why not just take the minimal risk and get on with it, but Mel did offer to sort it, did he not? 

Has the Cowboy Clown rejected Mel's advances?

As an aside, I noticed that he only spends a maximum of 25% of his time in the UK, so he's not even a taxpayer here. He probably even claims back the VAT on horse-shoeing services...

[NottmRAM]

I think if that cynical view is true, then Derby would be bottom of the league and if any player was going to sign just for the money then they'd be the wrong signing.

Edited February 15, 2022 by NottmRAM

[NottmRAM]

3 minutes ago, Crewton said:

So why isn't Mel Morris "reaching out" to Couhig, as he apparently did to Gibson, to resolve this? 

I'd have hoped that Quantuma would have prepared the defence to Couhig's claim (which only really needs the timelines of the process and the various areas of responsibility setting out) and suggested to the bidders that the claim is about as valid as last year's TV license so why not just take the minimal risk and get on with it, but Mel did offer to sort it, did he not? 

Has the Cowboy Clown rejected Mel's advances?

As an aside, I noticed that he only spends a maximum of 25% of his time in the UK, so he's not even a taxpayer here. He probably even claims back the VAT on horse-shoeing services...

Because the hourglass has run out of sand.

[Ewe Ram]

1 hour ago, Mucker1884 said:

Time to put our hands in our pocket, and offer Mr Coolpig what is rightfully his...

 

 

 

This made me laugh out loud. I’m such a child 

[Gritstone Ram]

1 hour ago, i-Ram said:

I agree, although it didn’t help that the very same muppets prepared an alternative fixture list at the time.

Wasn’t the fixture list set up based upon the outcome of a IDC that decided to fine us £100000 rather than a points deduction and we had to resubmit our accounts by 18 August but a points deduction for them was never going to happen for last season.

Edited February 15, 2022 by Gritstone Ram
IDC LAP DC duck knows

[vonwright]

18 minutes ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

Totally agree, but I think its too late to close the stable door as the horse has bolted with Gibson digging in the spurs.

Yep. There's the rules and then there is the unwritten 'spirit' of the rules, and that's a fragile thing that's just been hurled to the floor. Bit like cricket: once one or two batsmen stopped 'walking', it didn't take long before no one did. 

[Rambalin]

30 minutes ago, Oldben said:

Free agents don't help understand the embargo, sure the club can sign them as long as the current squad size isn't bigger than efl allowable size which just happens to be almost the minimum amount for a squad.

The next issue is derby can't compete on salaries for those free agents, spend amount on salaries is restricted under the embargo

The next is is that with Derby in its current position, which quality free agents would look derbys way, unless of course the salaries paid were high.

Re your last point Derby may be a attractive proposition 4.5k a week is better than 0 a week. A short 3 month contract puts the player in the shop window and if he preforms well  the chance to pick up a better deal elsewhere next season 

[B4ev6is]

5 minutes ago, Rambalin said:

Re your last point Derby may be a attractive proposition 4.5k a week is better than 0 a week. A short 3 month contract puts the player in the shop window and if he preforms well  the chance to pick up a better deal elsewhere next season 

Or picks up a deal at derby also