Gladram

1 hour ago, Wolfie said:

Another what?

Another "not good enough" player who's signed for a League One team, after Charles Verman and Kyle McAllister, who we'll play against this season.

and another one

With Kyle McAllister joining Forest Green Rovers, we'll be tripping over "not good enough" players next season.

4 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I'm not even sure this is correct. I don't remember them saying it was not compliant, wasnt the issue more to do with the IDC ignoring the expert witness?

Yep, we lost as we didn't have an expert witness to counter the EFL's one.

48 minutes ago, angieram said:

Yep, we are.

And us. Don't think we'll get away with wearing it during the game. 4 or 5 rows behind us won't be able to see the pitch

I think part of the issue is the other players don't trust him to keep the ball when he receives it with his back to the goal. As this is how most passes come to our forwards when moving the ball through the lines we are effectively a player short. Kamil Jozwaik has improved this part of his game and Louie Sibley needs to do the same.

With the ball at his feet going towards goal he's much better.

11 minutes ago, oldtimeram said:

Did Morris spend any of his own money, or did he just borrow and not pay it back?

The more I hear about how he's ruined the club the more I despise the man

The £250 million figure been banded around includes £160 million Morris loaned the club which he won't get back. It may not be that high but it was reported to be £100 million when he was still hoping to sell the club.

The owner loaning a club money is the standard way of funding them. If things go well they get their money back, if not it's written off.

11 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

Part of having an expert witness provide evidence is the the jury (or panel of judges in this case) decide on the competence of the witness.  You can't just have someone rock up and claim to be an expert and then be required by law to take it on faith that they are. The 3 judges on the panel clearly listened to Prof Pope's evidence and decided he was unfit to be an expert witness - there are repeated statements in their written report about him being unaware of the very rules he was giving evidence on, him not understanding his actual role as an expert witness and generally not being at all useful.  It's quite frankly bizarre that that would all be ignored by the appeals panels.

Obviously we should have presented our own expert witness, but I do wonder if we thought the point we lost on was so self-evident that we didn't actually need to prove it was true. We basically lost because the EFL argued that when FRS102 says "from use and disposal" it actually only allows "from use" and the other 2 words are entirely superfluous.  If you're going argue that words don't mean the things they mean, then we'd still be there now arguing over every word in the dictionary.

I agree with what you say but the original question was why the appeal panel hadn't mentioned  ICAEW, I was attempting to answer this. They didn't reexamine the evidence just looked at the procedure followed and decided there was an error in law.

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

Oddly it wasn't even mentioned in the Appeal hearings report. You would think it was a very relevant fact. But the ICAEW are only an accounting body, the Appeal panelists were all lawyers and they are much more knowledgable of course about everything especially accounting matters. 

The appeal didn't reexamine the information. It was looking at the procedure followed. Primarily the weight of evidence from each side and decided that the EFL had an expert witness who said our amortisation policy was wrong. We didn't counter this with our own expert. Therefore they should of accepted the EFL's experts evidence.

They're knowledge as accountants shouldn't have any weight. They're there to judge on the information presented at the hearing.

1 hour ago, MuespachRam said:

Let me know when you want me to go around on knock on their door, I live in Portsmouth NH….

Give it a couple of days. Don't want to put them off this early ?

58 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

Another BZI in the waiting.

If you google them Google takes you to the Carlyle Group, an investment firm worth billions. Its only when you search a bit more do you find the Carlisle Corporation, with a website akin to BZIs and a revenue less than 5 million dollars a year.

They must be the broker for a bigger buyer.

Think you've googled the wrong company. Try http://www.carlislecapital.com/

We have to remember he's played more games for us this season than the prevoius 2 or 3 in total. His match fitness and therefore influence will fluctuate, he'll be better in games we have more ball possession. 

Keep the faith in his natural ability, he's got something the others don't, pure natural talent.

14 minutes ago, jimtastic56 said:

IF the sun is right about a £3k cap on wages , Beilik will probably take the biggest hit. He is possibly on £20k-£30k a week. We all expected Keogh to take reduced wages while injured, so why not Beilik ? After all the new owners will have to square up with him and he will probably walk out at some point anyway.

It didn't say there was a cap just that the players we signed this season would only get £3K. The other players would get 2/3rds of their normal salary.

On 15/09/2021 at 11:56, jimbo jones said:

2 wickets in 2 balls, 27-2

Du Plooy with a combined 0 runs from 3 balls in the match.

Perhaps when you know a player doesn't like or want to bat at number 3, don’t keep sending him out there ?‍♂️
 

We’ve got to find a number 3 batsman from somewhere.

Lasted 4 balls this time.

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results"

18 minutes ago, RamLad1884 said:

MSD take control, likely lease it back to the club (or phoenix club should it come to it). 10-15 years time under a stable ownership they buy the stadium back again. 

Why would MSD take control? From what people are saying Pride Park isn't part of the administration. 

19 minutes ago, Derby blood said:

Bought my WBA tickets monday evening, still not received them through the post yet, as anyone received there tickets yet, always bloody problems with Derby at the mo. 

I'd guess they're sending the Birmingham tickets out first. I think the ticket office only work Tuesday to Friday. 

14 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

They did that. Just look at the quotes I posted on the previous page. 

But they aren't 'experts'? just IDC members, so it needed countering by another expert to enable them to form this view. I think this is why the LAP found against us.

My Birmingham tickets purchased on Friday have arrived. Ticket office works Tuesday to Friday so was hoping they be posted out yesterday.

He played Premier League game in May this year.

Semi reliable sauce so may get away with it

Just to join in the guessing game.

DCFC were told to submit restated accounts for the 2016, 2017 and 2018. They say "we've submitted HMRC compliant accounts to Companies House and can't change them but we will provide information showing how they would look using your preferred amortisation policy".

As with everyone else no clue, just a guess which fits the little info we have.

4 minutes ago, Dan_Ram said:

Assume this is just a standard process relating to the outstanding accounts rather than a move towards administration?

This is for recent accounts which aren't even referenced in the EFL statement. 

This suggest this week was an exception.

I'm the opposite. With sitting in the West Stand Upper and the multi year discount my seat is now a lot cheaper. Hopefully same price next season.

20/21 ticket prices below.