I see they are asking for more special dispensation from the EFL on the sell and loan back of a player. Not allowed to register new signings which the loan back would be so have done their usual ‘awwww pweeeeeaaaase’ to the EFL. I’m sure they will get away with that too. Why the fuck not. It’s not as if they’ve followed any other rules.
@TheAndyGrahamFanClub said:
I see they are asking for more special dispensation from the EFL on the sell and loan back of a player. Not allowed to register new signings which the loan back would be so have done their usual ‘awwww pweeeeeaaaase’ to the EFL. I’m sure they will get away with that too. Why the fuck not. It’s not as if they’ve followed any other rules.
He was having a pop at clubs taking advantage of their position to nick young players on the cheap yesterday. No shame
Never been a fan of Rooney (don't ask me, one of these irrational ones) so I find it even more galling that the media has pronounced him a deity because he has won a handful of games and chose not to walk away from a £90k a week job. So when he comes out with bullshit that clubs are taking advantage of poor Derby I must admit I struggle.
Interested to know if the EFL actually allowed the sale to Crystal Palace and immediate loan back to Derby of Luke Plange?
This would surely have been against the transfer embargo that Derby are under.
One rule for them another for every one else. Now where have I seen that demonstrated this week?
@Twizz said:
Interested to know if the EFL actually allowed the sale to Crystal Palace and immediate loan back to Derby of Luke Plange?
This would surely have been against the transfer embargo that Derby are under.
One rule for them another for every one else. Now where have I seen that demonstrated this week?
That deal could just have been a future agreement (that Plange would move in the summer) if it wasn't allowed to be structured that way, so it seems a reasonable thing to allow to get money into the club immediately.
@Twizz said:
Interested to know if the EFL actually allowed the sale to Crystal Palace and immediate loan back to Derby of Luke Plange?
This would surely have been against the transfer embargo that Derby are under.
One rule for them another for every one else. Now where have I seen that demonstrated this week?
That deal could just have been a future agreement (that Plange would move in the summer) if it wasn't allowed to be structured that way, so it seems a reasonable thing to allow to get money into the club immediately.
Yeah, presumably they aren't paying him anymore than he was already on if they are paying him at all and it's not a free loan.
An EFL condition of the proposed deal was that the players wage didn't increase. Just because the deal could have been constructed to not break the EFL embargo doesn't mean the EFL should have sanctioned the deal.
@Twizz said:
An EFL condition of the proposed deal was that the players wage didn't increase. Just because the deal could have been constructed to not break the EFL embargo doesn't mean the EFL should have sanctioned the deal.
You either want them to clear debt or not, I'm no fan of how they've handled any of this but allowing a player to be sold like this seems sensible and is likely to continue even after the transfer deadline. I think there is a precedent for that.
If it's a choice between them clearing the debt and them desisting from finessing the regulations at every turn, I'll go for the latter thanks. The integrity of the competition is more important than any one team, even if it were to cost us any form of remuneration.
@Twizz said:
An EFL condition of the proposed deal was that the players wage didn't increase. Just because the deal could have been constructed to not break the EFL embargo doesn't mean the EFL should have sanctioned the deal.
You either want them to clear debt or not, I'm no fan of how they've handled any of this but allowing a player to be sold like this seems sensible and is likely to continue even after the transfer deadline. I think there is a precedent for that.
I have no problem at all with the player sale, never did. BUT, they are under a transfer embargo because they haven't provided the EFL with the proof of funding that the EFL requested by 31st January and so shouldn't have been able to register the loan back.
And yet, the EFL don't uphold their own rules again because it's Derby asking. The more concessions given to Derby to help them avoid the consequences of their actions the less likely other clubs are to see overspending as an issue.
Is it possible the chief stumbling block is multi-millionaire and man responsible, Mel Morris, and his leverage over the ownership of the ground, we are a red herring.
Mark Goldberg and Ron Noades set an unfortunate precedent.
@eric_plant said:
We came close to being tenants at our own stadium of course. I wonder where we'd be now if Steve Hayes and his supporters had got their way
If we were lucky, bottom end of L2, playing in front of about 3000 people and 17000 empty seats.
EFL are sounding increasingly pissed off in each statement they release. Looking forward to one that just says "For fuck's sake Derby, pull your head out of your arse and own your mess."
What I take from that is that if we are found to have been cheated- whether that's through EFL arbitration, or whether that's through a court, then we will be classed as "football creditors" and will therefore be owed 100% by Derby. The punishment for not paying that is their golden ticket to the EFL.
We could still be owed 100% of nothing if that's what's ruled, but Derby were hoping to just put us at the bottom of the creditor list so we'd get nothing even if went to court and they were bang to rights.
Seems fair enough.
If the only reason they aren't liquidated is because they effectively stole money from us, then they're already dead.
Utter delusion still. They owe between £50-100m, have sold a few fringe players but no doubt still pay Wazza and the first team squad more than their total income let alone debt and won't even talk to other parties let alone properly negotiate.
I may have had a beer but I'd suggest one way out of this is the EFL rule that our claims aren't football debt yet and maybe even give them a year or two's grace before the claims are heard, and a ruling of slow payback terms if we win any case . That way whilst it still hangs over them a little they'd have to actually prove anybody was stupid enough to want to invest before they use the name of our club again.
@drcongo said:
EFL are sounding increasingly pissed off in each statement they release. Looking forward to one that just says "For fuck's sake Derby, pull your head out of your arse and own your mess."
The extension EFL gave them makes more sense to me now. It was given them (more of) the rope to hang themselves with.
EFL have now come in with the “get your head out the sand and start actually talking to the people you owe and might owe money too”.
Following the EFL statement, the DCFCFans forum is in meltdown calling everyone else corrupt! It's everyone else fault, it's all a huge conspiracy, everyone's trying to kill their club, etc. etc. etc. Nothing about how do we get ourselves out of the mess we created by building up £80m of debt. Oh! and give us back our stadium which has already been sold to reduce the debt to it's current level.
It appears that ejecting a founder member of the football league is unthinkable, but the EFL is not fit for purpose and should be disbanded. As the football league is run by the EFL, which is made up of representatives of the 72 member clubs, it would appear that Derby (Can't) Count-y fans wish to do away with the competition they can't be ejected from.
Comments
They aren't getting Dele Ali. He's going to Everton apparently.
I see they are asking for more special dispensation from the EFL on the sell and loan back of a player. Not allowed to register new signings which the loan back would be so have done their usual ‘awwww pweeeeeaaaase’ to the EFL. I’m sure they will get away with that too. Why the fuck not. It’s not as if they’ve followed any other rules.
Rules count for nothing in our days.
He was having a pop at clubs taking advantage of their position to nick young players on the cheap yesterday. No shame
Never been a fan of Rooney (don't ask me, one of these irrational ones) so I find it even more galling that the media has pronounced him a deity because he has won a handful of games and chose not to walk away from a £90k a week job. So when he comes out with bullshit that clubs are taking advantage of poor Derby I must admit I struggle.
So much at the moment from the government and police down seems to me to be an endless parade of incompetent, unpleasant farce?
Interested to know if the EFL actually allowed the sale to Crystal Palace and immediate loan back to Derby of Luke Plange?
This would surely have been against the transfer embargo that Derby are under.
One rule for them another for every one else. Now where have I seen that demonstrated this week?
That deal could just have been a future agreement (that Plange would move in the summer) if it wasn't allowed to be structured that way, so it seems a reasonable thing to allow to get money into the club immediately.
Yeah, presumably they aren't paying him anymore than he was already on if they are paying him at all and it's not a free loan.
An EFL condition of the proposed deal was that the players wage didn't increase. Just because the deal could have been constructed to not break the EFL embargo doesn't mean the EFL should have sanctioned the deal.
You either want them to clear debt or not, I'm no fan of how they've handled any of this but allowing a player to be sold like this seems sensible and is likely to continue even after the transfer deadline. I think there is a precedent for that.
If it's a choice between them clearing the debt and them desisting from finessing the regulations at every turn, I'll go for the latter thanks. The integrity of the competition is more important than any one team, even if it were to cost us any form of remuneration.
I have no problem at all with the player sale, never did. BUT, they are under a transfer embargo because they haven't provided the EFL with the proof of funding that the EFL requested by 31st January and so shouldn't have been able to register the loan back.
And yet, the EFL don't uphold their own rules again because it's Derby asking. The more concessions given to Derby to help them avoid the consequences of their actions the less likely other clubs are to see overspending as an issue.
Apparently one of the potential buyers thinks they're doomed https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60243825
And apparently it’s our fault.
"The January transfer window saw nine players leave Pride Park but the Rams remain under a transfer embargo."
Nine?? No first teamers though
Another £10k to be found - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60244274
Is it possible the chief stumbling block is multi-millionaire and man responsible, Mel Morris, and his leverage over the ownership of the ground, we are a red herring.
Mark Goldberg and Ron Noades set an unfortunate precedent.
Money = Leverage.
We came close to being tenants at our own stadium of course. I wonder where we'd be now if Steve Hayes and his supporters had got their way
If we were lucky, bottom end of L2, playing in front of about 3000 people and 17000 empty seats.
The absolute state of that flag. That's up there with the one at Wycombe with poppies and soldiers on it.
Yet another update
Yet again, I fail to see how on Earth they survive. EFL needs to crack the whip this is getting bizarre now.
EFL are sounding increasingly pissed off in each statement they release. Looking forward to one that just says "For fuck's sake Derby, pull your head out of your arse and own your mess."
What I take from that is that if we are found to have been cheated- whether that's through EFL arbitration, or whether that's through a court, then we will be classed as "football creditors" and will therefore be owed 100% by Derby. The punishment for not paying that is their golden ticket to the EFL.
We could still be owed 100% of nothing if that's what's ruled, but Derby were hoping to just put us at the bottom of the creditor list so we'd get nothing even if went to court and they were bang to rights.
Seems fair enough.
If the only reason they aren't liquidated is because they effectively stole money from us, then they're already dead.
Quelle surprise, their fans still don't (or don't want to) get it. Ostriches.
Utter delusion still. They owe between £50-100m, have sold a few fringe players but no doubt still pay Wazza and the first team squad more than their total income let alone debt and won't even talk to other parties let alone properly negotiate.
I may have had a beer but I'd suggest one way out of this is the EFL rule that our claims aren't football debt yet and maybe even give them a year or two's grace before the claims are heard, and a ruling of slow payback terms if we win any case . That way whilst it still hangs over them a little they'd have to actually prove anybody was stupid enough to want to invest before they use the name of our club again.
The extension EFL gave them makes more sense to me now. It was given them (more of) the rope to hang themselves with.
EFL have now come in with the “get your head out the sand and start actually talking to the people you owe and might owe money too”.
Following the EFL statement, the DCFCFans forum is in meltdown calling everyone else corrupt! It's everyone else fault, it's all a huge conspiracy, everyone's trying to kill their club, etc. etc. etc. Nothing about how do we get ourselves out of the mess we created by building up £80m of debt. Oh! and give us back our stadium which has already been sold to reduce the debt to it's current level.
It appears that ejecting a founder member of the football league is unthinkable, but the EFL is not fit for purpose and should be disbanded. As the football league is run by the EFL, which is made up of representatives of the 72 member clubs, it would appear that Derby (Can't) Count-y fans wish to do away with the competition they can't be ejected from.