Jump to content
oneBoro Forum

ScarBoro

Members
  • Content Count

    322
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

ScarBoro last won the day on November 10 2020

ScarBoro had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

143 Excellent

About ScarBoro

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. If they avoid preseason they aren’t getting paid - logical to weigh up options until end of June but after that you have no income if you are a free agent. Some players, those with several clubs chasing them, might think it better to accept no money coming in for a few weeks in hope of having a bidding war for their services, but it’s a risky option as others have said.
  2. He was out injured for a long time before Chrsistmas, wasn’t he? I guess if they were worried about long term prognosis that could have influenced thinking. After all if he had got him contracted for another 3 or 4 years and he hadn’t recovered properly, then everyone would be criticising the club. You can understand them being cautious until they had definite news of recovery - even if type of injury wasn’t usually a long term issue.
  3. Yea - I can see that. I guess West Brom are in a much poorer negotiating position - but they will probably try to hold out for more now, now they know Norwich have money and a bigger need.
  4. I wouldn’t be happy if I was a Norwich fan though! He’s got three years left on contract, so no immediate need to sell unless they are totally skint. Thought they might be more ambitious this time - you can understand them selling the first time they came up, but they should have a bit more money this time. Have to see if they spend it on reinforcing other areas, but seems as though they are preparing for another relegation.
  5. I think he is “bottom half of championship” quality - he would do an ok job for some sides, but not any side looking to get into promotion contention. I do at least find it hopeful that Warnock has said something like that in his interview - albeit in a softer way. That and the recognition that ML should only be offered something if he is prepared to come and show he is properly fit are pointers that Warnock is looking for improvement. problem will be whether he can find improvements within budget who want to come to us or whether we just get other similar quality players being touted as
  6. When he left it said it was by mutual consent. That’s often used as an euphemism for being sacked. If that was case he would be entitled to his notice period pay - he was contracted until this June. Clubs prefer to pay a contract off as and when the monthly salary was due. That means if an ex- manager finds a new job they don’t have to pay up the rest of the contract period. Sometimes the manager and the club agree a part pay-off saving the club money and allowing the manager to find a new job. Could explain why he is still bookies favourite for Celtic job but nothing has happened - if th
  7. Not any more. Only one year in Premier League, so only two years parachute payments, like Boro. So you would imagine they are having to cut costs fairly drastically this year - but they still beat us to .Collins!
  8. Whatever figure it is will be skewed by the wages of relegated clubs from the past two seasons who are still on their PL contracts - eveN with any relegation clauses. The likes of Derby - Keown was on £24k per week according to the reports of his lawsuit against DC - will also raise the average.
  9. To sue anyone successfully, you would have to prove you suffered a loss and that they caused it through Illegal actions or through breaking rules.. The League didn’t actually cause any loss - although they were maybe a bit slow to react to it? It was DC that got into the play-off position and it was DC that allegedly fiddled the rules. So I can see that Boro could have a case against Derby for financial loss - had the League found DC had fiddled the stadium values. Whether that amounts to a successful case in the law courts is another matter, and whether the one issue they have been found guil
  10. I’ve now found the detail of Boro’s involvement in the appeal process that has delayed it all. It does look as though there was only one hearing. It seems Gibson was intent on suing Derby when they got into playoffs instead of Boro, on grounds that they fiddled their way in by breaching league rules. So, when the disciplinary commission dismissed the case against Derby over the ground revaluation, Boro sought to appeal that decision and also join in the appeal against the accounting rules that the EFL was instigating. This meant there had to be an Arbitration Panel sitting to decide this
  11. Surely to goodness they could have heard all the issues at one hearing? To be fair to Gibson, it sounds as though the FL agreed with him, otherwise they could have simply dismissed the issues without hearings.
  12. Re Derby. From DM today Derby avoided a points deduction last August when an independent disciplinary commission cleared them on two charges brought by the EFL. One of those related to the £81million sale of Pride Park to a company set up by Morris, allowing the club to turn a loss into a profit. The other — and the charge upon which the EFL have won their appeal — concerns Derby's valuation of players. The club did not use the accepted practice of including the depreciation of player assets in their accounts and sources claim this removed losses in excess of £30million ov
  13. To be fair, if you employed a consultant for a short period, he could probably draw up a list of questions for the clubs and their auditors to answer and certify that would uncover practically all attempts to manipulate the accounts.
  14. Different companies do have different amortization methods - and as long as the auditors are Ok with it showing a fair view, then the is no problem and the accounts get signed off. I’m sure I read somewhere though that the Derby method had never been used by anyone else in the FL. It was dreamt up by Derby, obviously because it helped them massively with FFP. I guess because everyone else in league used one method the FL didn’t have the sense to realise someone sometime would try to manipulate it. Consequently they didn’t ask the right questions, or tell whoever looked at the accounts to look
  15. Thing is, it was pretty technical. I guess the FA have got someone looking at accounts submitted by each club, for things like stadium sales or where the auditors have put some kind of qualification on the accounts. This was simply a different way of depreciating players value, approved by the auditors, so no notes and unless you were really clued up would be easily missed. It was probably only when they got the complaints about the stadium sale they really looked at the accounts in depth and probably got an expert to review them. A clever idea by someone that nearly came off. I agree -
×
×
  • Create New...