Accrington Stanley (H) Mon 2nd Jan, 3pm KO

[Ram-Alf]

7 minutes ago, DavesaRam said:

I also believe that the EFL's hatred for Derby County dates back to the TV money negotiations when Mel sided with the then owner of Leeds United to set up a breakaway league. The first stage was a friendly between the two clubs. Yes, I know - a friendly between Derby County and Leeds United! And no, it never happened, just like the breakaway league, but the die was set. 

I don't remember this Dave, But I do remember Derby and Leeds Chairmen wanting to re negotiate the TV deal that the EFL sold the rights for for a pinch of salt.  

[Carnero]

29 minutes ago, The Last Post said:

I don't remember this Dave, But I do remember Derby and Leeds Chairmen wanting to re negotiate the TV deal that the EFL sold the rights for for a pinch of salt.  

I remember talk of a breakaway league too, with Villa, Leeds & Derby leading the agitators. Sadly we lost Villa & Leeds and were left all alone with the guns pointing squarely at us.

[kevinhectoring]

4 hours ago, DavesaRam said:

No, Gibson did threaten to sue the EFL for not taking action in time - he was whinging that they should have deducted us points for the season before, which would have kept Sheffield Wednesday up, if I recall correctly, that would be the basis for his lawsuit. That legal action would have wrecked the EFL, and Parry knew this so he pointed curls in our direction. Gibson's hatred actually came from us gazumping Middlesbrough for Martin Waghorn - the Smoggs had agreed a deal wit Ipswich Town, and then Mel marched into town and landed the striker. I can't remember whether it was a bigger offer to Ipswich, or, more likely, better terms for Waggy, but from then on the die was set. I also believe that the EFL's hatred for Derby County dates back to the TV money negotiations when Mel sided with the then owner of Leeds United to set up a breakaway league. The first stage was a friendly between the two clubs. Yes, I know - a friendly between Derby County and Leeds United! And no, it never happened, just like the breakaway league, but the die was set. All the EFL needed to do was wait for their moment. Kieran McGuire provided that by sticking his nose into someone else's business, which of course was his job! And BOOOMMM!!! Derby were done for.

Glad you mentioned the McGuire article. Likely indeed that this contributed to our downfall, then the man has the brass neck to come on here trying to get all chummy with everyone. Don’t blame him for trying to make a living but after that article he’s persona non grata. He should be banned 

if boro had sued the EFl, it would have damaged Boro much more than the EFl. Boro’s case against us was weak so it follows their case against EFl was weaker. Yes Boro threatened to sue EFl to encourage EFl to take action against Derby.
 

But I don’t think there’s any evidence to suggest that Gibson sued us because EFl wanted him to. 
Indeed Parry made it clear in Jan 21 that the Boro claim against us was a significant problem, one he tried to solve 

[DavesaRam]

12 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

Glad you mentioned the McGuire article. Likely indeed that this contributed to our downfall, then the man has the brass neck to come on here trying to get all chummy with everyone. Don’t blame him for trying to make a living but after that article he’s persona non grata. He should be banned 

if boro had sued the EFl, it would have damaged Boro much more than the EFl. Boro’s case against us was weak so it follows their case against EFl was weaker. Yes Boro threatened to sue EFl to encourage EFl to take action against Derby.
 

But I don’t think there’s any evidence to suggest that Gibson sued us because EFl wanted him to. 
Indeed Parry made it clear in Jan 21 that the Boro claim against us was a significant problem, one he tried to solve 

By insisting that the case be heard at the EFL Tribunal rather than in a court of law, which meant that the case could continue to hang over us. The case was so weak that it would have never made it to  court of law. Parry then refused to define whether the claim was a football or non-football debt, which again could have determined the effect of the claim against us. Instead it hung there preventing any attempt to be brought out of administration. Parry made some of the right noises, but in reality I don't think hen lifted a finger to help us until we had been consigned to relegation, which was his aim all along.

[kevinhectoring]

5 hours ago, DavesaRam said:

By insisting that the case be heard at the EFL Tribunal rather than in a court of law, which meant that the case could continue to hang over us. The case was so weak that it would have never made it to  court of law. Parry then refused to define whether the claim was a football or non-football debt, which again could have determined the effect of the claim against us. Instead it hung there preventing any attempt to be brought out of administration. Parry made some of the right noises, but in reality I don't think hen lifted a finger to help us until we had been consigned to relegation, which was his aim all along.

The case could only be heard in front of a tribunal. It’s what the EFL rules say. Also, get into the high court and a case (including appeals etc) frequently takes several years. The EFl tribunals system is much quicker.  And for some reason known only to Rick de Marco we agreed with Middlesborough that they had a right under the rules to sue us before a tribunal.  

As for Parry refusing to define whether the claim was or was not a football claim, as you put it, his view quite literally has nothing to do with it. It’s simply about interpreting the rules. The clubs make the rules. The tribunal interprets them 

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

19 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

Glad you mentioned the McGuire article. Likely indeed that this contributed to our downfall, then the man has the brass neck to come on here trying to get all chummy with everyone. Don’t blame him for trying to make a living but after that article he’s persona non grata. He should be banned 

if boro had sued the EFl, it would have damaged Boro much more than the EFl. Boro’s case against us was weak so it follows their case against EFl was weaker. Yes Boro threatened to sue EFl to encourage EFl to take action against Derby.
 

But I don’t think there’s any evidence to suggest that Gibson sued us because EFl wanted him to. 
Indeed Parry made it clear in Jan 21 that the Boro claim against us was a significant problem, one he tried to solve 

This . Mr Amortisation

[RoyMac5]

 

doh, wrong thread

Edited January 8, 2023 by RoyMac5