I agree with @drcongo about that sentence, particularly since it's scarcely more than a week ago that we beat Bournemouth.
As for the rest of the statement, I think it's something of a masterpiece. It doesn't commit us to anything at all, but certainly acknowledges the possibility that legal action may happen at some point in the future. If we did absolutely nothing or took a case to the Supreme Court, you couldn't say that this statement was in any way misleading. It takes some skill to be quite that non-committal.
Occasionally coming out on top sounds worst to me than often falling narrowly short...I like the statement though. I am sure the EFL will leap into action...
We have gone into battle with teams assembled for nine-figure sums, and often fallen narrowly short.
We've occasionally come out on top, I'd have mentioned that rather than how often we'd fallen short. Very odd sentence.
I’m guessing it’s emphasising we could have done something similar but didn't and got bloody close whereas the team that cheated was just a point above
Exactly. Pretty clear warning that we’re prepared to consider the option of legal action, but without commuting to it.
‘The club trusts that the correct decision will be reached...’ also makes it perfectly clear we think the ‘correct decision’ is a points deduction this season. But stops short of actually saying so.
@OakwoodExile said:
There's no need to have mentioned the frequency at all. How does this sound to you @Wendoverman ?
"We have gone into battle with teams assembled for nine-figure sums, and sometimes we've beaten them."
I'd have gone with something like:
"We have gone into battle with teams assembled for nine-figure sums, and shown we can compete with them."
How about
"We have gone into battle without a pot to piss in against teams assembled for nine-figure sums, and whilst we got a couple of hidings we gave some out too - Hello Boro. Despite the referees displaying incompetence that could easily be mistaken for corruption we didn't stink out the division as first suggested and it appears others have had to resort to cooking the books just to compete"
If Rotherham or Sheffield Wed had held their leads Derby would have gone down.
It's not like Borough clocked those sudden draws then threw our game late on.
What's Boro's involvement with Derby anyway? Have seen them mentioned a few times but not clocked why.
@Malone said:
Think everyone above bar @Morris_Ital is totally missing the point of the very carefully picked wording.
Nobody is quibbling about the first half of the sentence. You think the second half is referring specifically to the narrow and very late loss against Derby? If so, it's wording so carefully picked as to be impenetrable.
200 or so acquaintances as followers seems a look to me. ?. So maybe I qualify as one of your total nobodies @Malone. However I do not use Twitter or Facebook - evil platforms, not like the Gasroom.
Comments
We've occasionally come out on top, I'd have mentioned that rather than how often we'd fallen short. Very odd sentence.
Nice pedantry.
I agree with @drcongo about that sentence, particularly since it's scarcely more than a week ago that we beat Bournemouth.
As for the rest of the statement, I think it's something of a masterpiece. It doesn't commit us to anything at all, but certainly acknowledges the possibility that legal action may happen at some point in the future. If we did absolutely nothing or took a case to the Supreme Court, you couldn't say that this statement was in any way misleading. It takes some skill to be quite that non-committal.
Occasionally coming out on top sounds worst to me than often falling narrowly short...I like the statement though. I am sure the EFL will leap into action...
I’m guessing it’s emphasising we could have done something similar but didn't and got bloody close whereas the team that cheated was just a point above
There's no need to have mentioned the frequency at all. How does this sound to you @Wendoverman ?
"We have gone into battle with teams assembled for nine-figure sums, and sometimes we've beaten them."
Exactly. Pretty clear warning that we’re prepared to consider the option of legal action, but without commuting to it.
‘The club trusts that the correct decision will be reached...’ also makes it perfectly clear we think the ‘correct decision’ is a points deduction this season. But stops short of actually saying so.
I'd have gone with something like:
"We have gone into battle with teams assembled for nine-figure sums, and shown we can compete with them."
Great use of the word RAMification too
How about
"We have gone into battle without a pot to piss in against teams assembled for nine-figure sums, and whilst we got a couple of hidings we gave some out too - Hello Boro. Despite the referees displaying incompetence that could easily be mistaken for corruption we didn't stink out the division as first suggested and it appears others have had to resort to cooking the books just to compete"
Think everyone above bar @Morris_Ital is totally missing the point of the very carefully picked wording.
Tinfoil hat time!
If Rotherham or Sheffield Wed had held their leads Derby would have gone down.
It's not like Borough clocked those sudden draws then threw our game late on.
What's Boro's involvement with Derby anyway? Have seen them mentioned a few times but not clocked why.
@Malone Bit of a long-running thing relating to the sale of Pride Park as far as I understand. Some explanation here.
It gets better ?
And better ?
And here was me thinking we'd had it with crackpot conspiracy theories last year.
Nobody is quibbling about the first half of the sentence. You think the second half is referring specifically to the narrow and very late loss against Derby? If so, it's wording so carefully picked as to be impenetrable.
Who's Mel Greensmith? Is he/she actually talking with any inside knowledge or just a Twitter keyboard warrior?
I can't believe how many are picking apart the statement.
I believe I have a picture here
Surely you know the Gasroom well enough to know that’s exactly what we would do!
Seems like a well-written, sensible statement to me.
The chilling undertone to the statement is surely there although RC/statement did omit "as a lawyer myself".
Derby were using Transfermarkt for their player valuations. I'd laugh if that wasn't so dodgy.
Good explanation of the whole thing here
Unsurprising, he blocked me when I mentioned that his cerebral capacity may be somewhat limited.
How do you find these total nobodies with 200 or so aquaintances as followers
I don't. They find me - and seemingly half the Wycombe fans on Twitter.
200 or so acquaintances as followers seems a look to me. ?. So maybe I qualify as one of your total nobodies @Malone. However I do not use Twitter or Facebook - evil platforms, not like the Gasroom.
So it seems the Derby takeover is off...
Does that materially change anything??