MadAmster

Excellent 2nd half, control was not good in the 1st half. He's a young lad learning his trade, he'll have good and bad spells. Happy to have him this season. If we go up, we might be able to have him next season as well...

Just now, MadAmster said:

Clubs shouldn't pay agent's fees. Players have a contract with their agent, DCFC doesn't. The agent represents the player. Players should pay their agent, not the club.

 

I will expand on my thoughts on agent payments. Again, if I am wrong on this please feel free to educate me.

The agent represents the player and will get a % of the player's wages for that representation. Nothing wrong there IMO. They provide a service and should get paid for that service.

However, it is commonplace that clubs also pay the player's agent. I find it simply wrong that an agent bills both sides of the agreement.

If a club asks an agent to source this or that player then a fee to the agent is justifiable.

53 minutes ago, B4ev6is said:

I personal think that we are running at a profit and with roadrider are back suggest we now able to run them and pay for use of them. If we were running at loss then they would have not been brought back.

Efl saying we give derby a clean slate but yet give all thse stupid restrictions so clearly still punishing us now we been treated  badly but yet been allowed get away with it.

We need remained that what efl have done to us and keep pressure on them.

The club will be running at a profit. Full(ish) ground (25K+) for home games bringing in the money. Not allowed to pay transfer/loan/agent's fees although I do agree with the last one. Clubs shouldn't pay agent's fees. Players have a contract with their agent, DCFC doesn't. The agent represents the player. Players should pay their agent, not the club.

Roadrider. The contact address to get seats is with Skills coaches. I think Skills are running the service. The club is merely letting fans know the service is available. I may be wrong, however...

The restrictions are in the 2 year business plan DCFC wrote and EFL accepted. I'd like to think they might look at how we've been "responsible" and "good boys" this season and ease them restrictions a little but I won't be holding my breath.

On 05/02/2023 at 01:58, caymanram said:

It’s all good news for sure but of all the top teams we have by far the toughest run-in with away games at Wycombe, Weds, Plymouth, Barnsley, Portsmouth….

The optimist says this could be good news as it gives us the opportunity to win against the top two… but the pessimist says that we could quite likely lose some of these 6 pointer games and that kills our auto promo (or even top 6) chances.

Maybe it’s best if Weds are promoted before we play them last game …. Although in truth the easiest game would probably be if they are cemented in third place and with the  playoffs beckoning they rest a few players in the last game …???

We've already had Pompey away. 0-0 draw on Friday 18th of November.

37 minutes ago, Brailsford Ram said:

If his nightmare comes to fruition i-Ram, be kind to him; take him out of Walkley for a week to convalesce with you in Littlehampton for it might be the first time in his life he has spent a week at the seaside.
 

Maybe Walkley actually has a Littlehampton and there is where his insecurity all starts...  ?

20 hours ago, FlyBritishMidland said:

The sale of the ground is an important bit.  Regardless of any amortisation method, within or outside the rules, retrospective rule changes and whatever else.  Our finances were in such a state that we had to rely on selling the ground.  If we hadn’t done that, we’d have breached FFP regardless of accounting approach.  And if we should have not had to rely on that.

And this had further complications once we were in administration as the deal for the ground had to be negotiated separately as it wasn’t part of the deal.  Many experts said the same and it was used as a reason why some administrators wouldn’t touch our case.  And all of that comes down to the actions of one man.

The ground sale was what convinced me we were in the deep and sticky, financially. With the sale of the ground we made a £14M profit that season. Sounds good until you realise that, without, we'd have made a loss of £66M... Thanks Mel.

Starting to look like there's a lot of us hoping for General Sale for the Barnsley game. We've already booked flights, hotel, Neppy coach.... just need match tickets now...

Didn't finish this sentence in my previous post so here it is in full...

What I feel they should have done was to have told us we couldn't use it anymore and that, either from the 20/21 season or the 21/22 season we should have reverted to linear depreciation. That would have been fair under the circumstances.

51 minutes ago, vonwright said:

I'm far from an expert but is it really fair to say 'the rules were retrospectively changed'? I thought it was more a case that a) we were the only club using our 'retained value' amortisation, and b) it had never been tested whether this fit the existing rules. I realise people use such accounting methods in other industries but wasn't the issue whether it was appropriate to do so in a footballing context?

I also tend to think that even if the EFL was wrong on this point, we were still in terrible financial trouble. Their ruling certainly didn't help, but they were right that the method we used his huge losses that were _not_ going to be recouped in the way our accountancy method suggested.

The rules were retrospectively changed to include banning the depreciation method. A method MM told them we were ging to use back in 2015. Why did it take them 4 years to decide there was something "iffy" with the method? The 12 point administration penalty was, using hindsight, inevitable as the debt was unsustainable and MM couldn't/wouldn't continue to pay for the mess he'd made. IMO we got screwed over with the other 9 point FFP penalty. We had stayed, very narrowly, within FFP limits by the depreciation method and the sale of the ground. To me, an advocate of natural justice, the EFL should have recognised their culpability in accepting the method in 4 years' accounts before finally deciding they didn't like it. They used a blanket, cover any and all eventualities clause that gives them carte blanche to take action if they believe something, although not specifically banned, gives a club an unfair advantage. What I feel they should have done was to have told us we couldn't use it anymore and that, either from the 20/21 season or the 21/22 season. We would have been the first club to survive a 12 point deduction. The whole thing would have been sorted much earlier, we'd still be a Championship side and Gibson wouldn't have liked the outcome. A definite win=win situation ?

21 minutes ago, Foreveram said:

Less than 3,000 tickets left now.

That'll be 6000 then if you count the ones Morecambe won't sell.

20 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

 

IMHO we were caught by the fact Mel Morris pissed too many people off. 

Which is exactly what I wrote. (y)

1 hour ago, sage said:

There will be people who get tickets for their ranking next season, but will pass on tickets at face value if it's a ground they have been to before many times like Barnsley.

Hopefully, someone will read my post and offer exactly that...

54 minutes ago, Wistaston Ram said:

Strange prediction.. I'll go for 2561 left in the home end

Nice one ?  

12 hours ago, Inverurie Ram said:

Hopefully see you at Barnsley, I’m like you, hoping to get tickets, after spending loads on bus’s, trains, hotels and flights. 

Ours got ridiculously expensive. We booked, initially, flights from Amsterdam to Donington. Cheapest destination and only 30 minutes from Derby by bus. The flights turned out to be cheaper via Booking.com, at £150 return each, than direct with the airline, Flybe. Last week Flybe went belly up. Because we booked through Booking.com we're not covered by ATOL so we are now pinning our hopes on the Credit Card company refunding our money. Immediately booked KLM flights into Brum at £300 apiece. The bus from EMA to Derby was a fiver return last time I used it, might be a couple of quid dearer now. Train from Brum International £25 return. All in all that's 500 apiece so far and we haven't had a drink or any food yet..... here's hoping the credit card company comes through... 

3326 tickets left in the home end...

4 of us flying over for Barnsley. Hoping to get tickets as it's my birthday weekend. Flight, hotel and Neptune Coach all booked and paid for. February 10th at 10:00, if there's any tickets left, we'll be hitting the site to book. If we can't then our backup plan is Burton v Accrington, hospitality.

I don't expect we'll get extra as the entire lower section is taped off, apparently for safety reasons.

Let's get out of L1 first before thinking about whether we could be as successful in the SBC. One week into July we had 5 players. On zero outlay, LR put together a good squad which PW has got more organised and on a roll. IMO, this squad would likely end up between 12th and 16th in the SBC next season if we went up. PW would, most definitely, get some new blood in and we might lose a couple, especially of the older players. I don't see Curt or Stears in the squad next season. Didzy might manage half the games. Next season, as things stand, we still can't pay transfer/loan/agent's fees so it will be free loans, free transfers or free agents. Obviously the "aim" would be promotion but, realistically, midtable is as much as we could hope for.

Let's not try to run while we're still perfecting walking.

Morecambe have a very good home record and a poor away record. I see that away record not improving on Saturday.

13 hours ago, BramcoteRam84 said:

Yes we were treated unfairly by the EFL. Changed the rules retrospectively then punished us with -9 points, other clubs allowed to circumvent FFP with no come back (our neighbours down the road being one), changed the rules to help clubs out during COVID, we should have had our points reduced, we didn’t. Throw in administration-12 points and then a 2 year business plan which has no purpose other than to restrict our ability to compete, it’s nothing to do with whether we can run sustainably. I agree with a points deduction for administration but the 2 year business plan as well is ridiculously harsh. Yes we have been treated unfairly.

The reason we have been treated unfairly by the EFL is Mel Morris, he pissed them off, he pissed off Steve Gibson and the EFL allowed him to wage war against Mel and Derby. We also now know the reason Derby didn’t file their accounts for years was not really due to the EFL action, it was Mel concealing the real situation from the outside world and fans that he was no longer paying the bills.
 

Yes we were treated harshly and continue to be, All roads for our plight lead to Morris, if he’d never darkened our door we’d still be a championship club, possibly better. Thankfully we are now on the rise again with a sensible relatable owner and a relatable passionate and capable management team. I really hope Clowes and Warne can take us all the way to the prem and keep us there with team spirit and work ethic alongside a sensible transfer policy and not the ridiculous approach Forest have taken (it will come back to bite them if not this year then at some point in the next 2 or 3 - look at Everton)

A 2 year business plan is an EFL requirement for all clubs coming out of Administration. The EFL has a sort of skeleton, the club puts the meat on the bones and then it's down to the EFL whether they accept the plan or ask for amendments. To the best of my knowledge, DCFC's plan was accepted first time. They didn't write it, we did.

On 31/01/2023 at 15:59, RoyMac5 said:

Doesn't mean they were either.

Them's the rules of the EFL Club.

The amortisation (player depreciation) issue. It's a weird one. Under UK Government accounting rules (FRS102), the methodology used by DCFC under MM (he told the EFL he was going to use that method in 2015, why did it take them 4 years to decide it was "illegal" under EFL rules?) is 100% legal and used by many firms. In 2019 there wasn't a specific EFL rule disallowing its use. 

The first tribunal, which contained some accountants (logical when it's an accounting issue) found the club not guilty. The EFL decided to appeal, on the very last day they could lodge an appeal. The appeal committee contained ZERO accountants to adjudge this accounting issue. They found DCFC guilty. We had to amend and resubmit several years accounts and the end result was we were seen to have broken FFP limits in, IIRC, 3 seasons. That led to the 9 point deduction.

Several months later, the EFL introduced a new rule disallowing the methodology DCFC had used. Yes, that's right. They made a rule to stop anyone else doing it. So, why did we get found guilty. The answer is that they have, alongside the specific rules, a catch all get out clause to the effect that they can decide something is wrong if they feel like it. In this case DCFC was using a different amortisation methodology to the rest of the Championship sides and that was, somehow, despite being legal, unfair to the other clubs.

Did we get shafted? IMO most definitely. Why were we shafted? Again, this is a personal opinion. MM had ruffled too many EFL feathers and was involved in a spat with another SBC club chairman and together they saw a way to "get their own back".

Move to 2023 and it seems Chelsea are doing the same, or something very similar. UEFA will be changing their rules next season to stop anybody else doing it. Chelsea have got in first and will get away with it.

Strangely enough, I'm glad someone got burnt, unhappy it was us but I sincerely hope that the EFL and PL (hopefully UEFA and FIFA too) change the rules in order to ensure no other club can get into the situation we were in.  

23 hours ago, angieram said:

All this talk of HD viewing, is anyone else actually going to the game tonight? ?‍♀️

Apart from me, @Foreveram and @B4ev6is, of course! 

Where are the East Stand refugees sitting? 

Flights, hotels et al make more than half a dozen games a season unaffordable. 2 home games thus far. Barnsley away is booked for 4 of us. Just hope now we can get tickets. It's an expensive trip too. Booked the flights with Flybe who have gone belly up so had to book with KLM now. 300 for the flight each. Put a claim in to get the Flybe money back from the credit card company... no guarantee though. Doing FGR away too. Flights and hotel booked. Again 4 of us. I know someone in the heirarchy there so we are already in. Other games this season? Possibly Wendy away and maybe Fleetwood at home. My finances will be happy to see the closed season arrive. ;)

1 hour ago, jimtastic56 said:

Don’t think you got anything for finishing 5th in those days but League and cup winners missed out on European football. 70’s football was dangerous but I think the West Ham fans coming tonight are more likely to be wearing posh suits and chuckling about how cheap the beer is.

We would have qualified for the UEFA Cup that season in 5th.

That young Vale lad posts his videos on youtube. I, for one, will be following him to see how he develops.

3 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

You can debate whether it’s punishment.  The fact someone said on here that’s what it is not proof of anything, far from it !
 

Posters on here have also pointed out  that the restrictions are in part  intended to stop you benefitting from the creditor write off and to stop you failing again. And that these reasons argue in favour of leniency if you overperform financially 

My understanding of "punishment" is something someone else decides, unilaterally, do to you. 6 of the best, detention, prison, fine etc. We are currently operating under a business plan put together by DCFC and agreed to by the EFL. I see it as insurance against repeating the same mistakes.

1-2