Boro and wycombe suing Derby County



steadybreeze said:
I've enjoyed reading your thoughts on the whole business mate, you seem to have a good grasp of the situation. Can you see a way out of this mess for Derby and football in general. There are 260+ pages about it on our forum but tbh it's getting so close to us not existing anymore that it's just mass hysteria
Click to expand...

For Derby, you need to get out of administration pronto. You simply can't move on if that happens. Accept relegation is now an inevitability, even with Rooney's semi-miraculous performance (which, as an aside, has strengthened his management credibility enormously); you simply won't have a competitive squad after this month's fire sale. Then be patient; Bolton and Wigan have shown how it takes time to build a competitive L1 squad from admin.

On a wider note, an independent regulator and a more equitable distribution of income (PL and EFL) is essential, including scrapping parachute payments, which are unnecessary if SCMP is introduced. Also SCMP across the EFL, even at the cost of possibly widening the gap between PL and Championship.
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
For Derby, you need to get out of administration pronto. You simply can't move on if that happens. Accept relegation is now an inevitability, even with Rooney's semi-miraculous performance (which, as an aside, has strengthened his management credibility enormously); you simply won't have a competitive squad after this month's fire sale. Then be patient; Bolton and Wigan have shown how it takes time to build a competitive L1 squad from admin.

On a wider note, an independent regulator and a more equitable distribution of income (PL and EFL) is essential, including scrapping parachute payments, which are unnecessary if SCMP is introduced. Also SCMP across the EFL, even at the cost of possibly widening the gap between PL and Championship.
Click to expand...
I honestly don't know what to think about Parachute payments. Any club with players on average premier league wages that gets relegated to the Championship is going to be doomed without Parachute payments to soften the blow, if not teams going down are more likely to go bust straight away. It does give an unfair advantage to them though when you look at the size and cost of Wba/Fulham/Bournemouth squads. It needs looking at though..
 
steadybreeze said:
Touted as a way out of the mess, for any legal minded boffins
Click to expand...

Until a claim is heard and settled, there is no liability. The problem is that once the assets are sold into a newco, that newco has no liability other than for any football creditors and 3%% of other unsecured creditors which were admitted as valid claims by the administrators and appear on their schedule of creditors. If a claim is settled before Derby exit administration, any settlement could become a creditor at that point, although I would argue that the nature of the claim, which is essentially for damages, don't fall under the definition of football creditors, and would be unsecured creditors. If, on the other hand, it's settled post-sale, the claim would fall entirely on the old Derby, which will at that point be in liquidation. Clearly, it's in Boro and Wycombe's interest to delay until the claim is settled. The risk is that Derby get expelled and liquidated without a sale, which is the worst possible outcome for everyone. The owners are playing a very dangerous game, and the rest of football will not forgive them for causing the death of a founder member of the Football League.
steadybreeze said:
I honestly don't know what to think about Parachute payments. Any club with players on average premier league wages that gets relegated to the Championship is going to be doomed without Parachute payments to soften the blow, if not teams going down are more likely to go bust straight away. It does give an unfair advantage to them though when you look at the size and cost of Wba/Fulham/Bournemouth squads. It needs looking at though..
Click to expand...

It's also what drives the rest of the division to pay ridiculous wages.
 
Last edited:
Wycombe Fan said:
Our claim, just so you know, is because after the season had finished Mel Morris admitted in an interview that he delayed getting the finances in on time on purpose, as he knew that would then mean that Derby were deducted points this season rather than last, so they would stay up instead of us, so they could then claim the 6 million TV money. That's what prompted our claim, unfortunately its a bit of an American thing I think, like our owner. Like I say most of us don't want it, we went down because we ddnt get enough points. You'll find quite a few Derby fans actually think we have more of a claim than Boro, who's claim is ridiculous. Derby have been cheating horrendously for years, and the fans were quite happy to put up with it while Morris was there. But I do not want them to go bust over it
Click to expand...
Not trying to take offense but as an American what does this mean.
If there’s anyone that got the shitty end of the stick here it’s Bury FC IMO.
Derby owner pulled a shrewd bit of business there if that’s the case. £6m is nothing to sneeze at.
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
Until a claim is heard and settled, there is no liability. The problem is that once the assets are sold into a newco, that newco has no liability other than for any football creditors and 3%% of other unsecured creditors which were admitted as valid claims by the administrators and appear on their schedule of creditors. If a claim is settled before Derby exit administration, any settlement could become a creditor at that point, although I would argue that the nature of the claim, which is essentially for damages, don't fall under the definition of football creditors, and would be unsecured creditors. If, on the other hand, it's settled post-sale, the claim would fall entirely on the old Derby, which will at that point be in liquidation. Clearly, it's in Boro and Wycombe's interest to delay until the claim is settled. The risk is that Derby get expelled and liquidated without a sale, which is the worst possible outcome for everyone. The owners are playing a very dangerous game, and the rest of football will not forgive them for causing the death of a founder member of the Football League.


It's also what drives the rest of the division to pay ridiculous wages.
Click to expand...
Sorry for being thick but why highlight that bit?
 
nelford_safc said:
I hope I get to see Wycombe cease to exist.
Click to expand...
Had Wycombe voted the other way it would have had absolutely no bearing on the outcome, as it was that resounding.

It had no relevance to Sunderland anyway, we were outside the play-offs before the vote and remained outside the play-offs afterwards. Had the season been allowed to finished we had as much chance of coming mid-table as we had of finishing in the play-offs.

Only one club to blame for us not going up that year…
 
steadybreeze said:
Sorry for being thick but why highlight that bit?
Click to expand...

Because anything not admitted by the administrator is not a valid creditor, and is entitled to nothing from either the proceeds of administration nor any subsequent payment from the newco. In legal jargon, they haven't "proved their debt". To get payment from the newco, they need the validity of the claim to be admitted by the administrator prior to administration being completed.
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
Because anything not admitted by the administrator is not a valid creditor, and is entitled to nothing from either the proceeds of administration nor any subsequent payment from the newco. In legal jargon, they haven't "proved their debt". To get payment from the newco, they need the validity of the claim to be admitted by the administrator prior to administration being completed.
Click to expand...
So does that statement favour the administrators or Boro, have the administrator's admitted the validity? Getting a sore head here 😃
 
Sallycinamon said:
Had Wycombe voted the other way it would have had absolutely no bearing on the outcome, as it was that resounding.

It had no relevance to Sunderland anyway, we were outside the play-offs before the vote and remained outside the play-offs afterwards. Had the season been allowed to finished we had as much chance of coming mid-table as we had of finishing in the play-offs.

Only one club to blame for us not going up that year…
Click to expand...
Not the thread for it but there's arguments either way. It was absolutely ridiculous that it was put to a vote in the first place given everyone would be biased one way or the other.
 
jsdftm04 said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1483197444582170630

Didnt realise this was still rumbling on. Seems like boro are after 40-50m for missing out on the playoffs and Wycombe for relegation.

Prospective Derby owners won't buy the club incase they're liable for these. Could end up with the club going to the wall. I get its infuriating they missed out on the playoffs but its not just because Derby overspent surely? No guarantee they'd have won the playoffs yet want 40-50m?
Click to expand...
Can we sue Wycombe & COVID Virus for being PPG out of the playoffs and they voting for it…Hate that club like Wycombe I say win your money on the pitch not in the court rooms and voting to not play for your own benefits Have some ethics to the league Wycombe
 
Last edited:
Urgent question in the House Of Commons and MP's asking for the goverment to tell the EFL not to kick out Derby on 1st February and intervene to save them and tell Wycombe and Middlesbrough to end court cases.
 

Back
Top