StarterForTen

1-1

Curtis  Davies 

4 minutes ago, Steve How Hard? said:

Good one. I'm laughing so much, it hearse. 

 

 

 

And so the endless cycle of this thread spins again. 

6 minutes ago, Curtains said:

The new Colin Todd

No pressure then. 

2-0

FRGS: Lawrence 

26 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

How did clubs amortise before Bosman ruling came in? Did they estimate what a player would be worth at the end of the players contract and then apply straight line amortisation to that estimated value? 

Didn't they just work with buckets full of cash??!! No need to amortise when there's no book-keeping to worry about!!

9 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Nope. If P'boro had won, and then we beat them...much better than Reading being 5 points away.

I’d say the prospect of beating Peterborough and going up to 22nd is a far greater morale boost 

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but didn't we not fail the P&S limit for the 20/21 season - by a couple of million if I recall?

If that is the case, then isn't Wycombe's argument exactly the same as Middlesbrough's appeared to be, in that because Derby 'cheated' we had a stronger team than allowable finances would have created and, therefore, finished higher in the League as a consequence?

I’d say we’ve just about ‘earned’ enough points to stay up already - 39.

So now the lads have to win back the points that the actions of others have robbed off them.

15 games to ‘re-win’ 21 points. Pin that on the dressing room door Wazza!

10 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

It does include the ones we have that he wants to retain presumably - we have so few under contract from July 1st 

This may have been dealt with already but at some point we will reach the threshold for the minimum number of players of 'professional standing' won't we? I can't remember what the parameters for that are. Just wondering when that will allow the club to resign some of the players regardless of embargo status?

6 minutes ago, OohMartWright said:

So what’s the collective term for a group of Gibsons? A Bamford? A twatter? Short and curlies?

A pube of Gibsons?

49 minutes ago, Ken Tram said:

What is an accord?

When I first read, "... they have reached an accord on a resolution of the claims ...," I took it to mean that they have agreed how they will resolve the claim, which could mean the process that they will follow.

However, a pundit was saying that it means that it means that a final resolution has been agreed, which may or may not include a settlement of cash, for example.

Can someone explain the range of possibilities that could be covered by the use of the term accord?

Could it be a process that has been agreed, or does it mean that an outcome has been agreed?

If Mr Gibson has agreed an ACCORD does that make him an ACCORDION?

ie: A wheezy wind box that makes an excruciating bleating sound when you press his buttons and put the squeeze on?

(Definition works for MM too)

So, 30 matches played and into the last third of the season.

Over the 30 matches, our points-per-game (PPG) is 1.3...

Over the last 15 games, our PPG is 1.47...

Over the last 8 games (cos can't do 7.5!), our PPG is 1.75...

Despite the many, many, hurdles thrown in our path we are getting better and better!

We are on track - keep up the current rate and we'll finish on a deduction adjusted total of 46 points (67 earned on the pitch).

The greatest escape of all time is on.

51 minutes ago, Keepyuppy said:

He’s also got a bit of Adama Traore about him too.

I said the very same thing to my son last night!

3 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

In all seriousness, sorry but I don’t get it when there are other candidates just as strong.

It's just that he's a known entity to many supporters.

Better the devil you know than the darling you don't.

EDIT: That said, I do think his particular business model for club ownership would serve DCFC very well. I think he'd be an excellent fit to reposition the club to a sustainable - and exciting - future.

11 hours ago, Yani P said:

You would think any potential owner would want this all done and dusted to secure the long term futures of these young players.

Good point. The ability to sign up the cream of our soon-to-be-free-agent playing squad and secure the future economic rights of holding their playing registrations could easily be more valuable than the potential cost of any compensation claims from the claimant clubs.

When was the last time we scored four in a game??

Losing our legs a bit in centre mids. Need Thompson 

3 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

I'm aware that you will all have strong views on Gibson but I'm 99.9% certain he would support this kind of arrangement, he doesn't want your club to go out of business. 

Maybe he doesn't, but it does appear that he feels that the Club (or perhaps Mel) has not yet paid a sufficiently high a price for the historical financial breaches for which they have accepted a punishment on.

Makes you wonder what is the price he'll accept - and I'm not talking about a monetary figure for compensation - it's all about sporting sanctions. So is that liquidation? Is it relegation? Is it the complete dismantling of the squad and a reset position so far down the scale that you need binoculars to see where you have come from?

6 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

Hhhmmm is it?, People who go to the high court to seek anonymity after cases get their wish...if it's not in the public intersest.

Other than for a few exceptions - or the imposition of a so-called Super Injunction - the High Court is an open forum

2 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I think Boro claim was against Dcfc and its Directors. So it was against him and Pearce . Hopefully not Roy Mac as well.

Surely MFC's claim - as it currently appears to stand - is a claim levied by one EFL member against another EFL member. Effectively an internal dispute of two members within a private members club.

For it to be any more than that, then a Letter Before Action will need to have been served on specific individuals and/or a legal entity I doubt that has been done.

58 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

But no longer, Boro/WW/EFL are going after DCFC not MM

They are actually going after compensation for their perceived losses. If Mel Morris warrants to the court that he will take personal responsibility for any liabilities that are proven - which he is legally capable of doing - then it should make no difference at all.

The High Court hearing will test too see if the actions of Derby County Football Club caused proven damage to Middlesbrough Football Club (and possibly Wycombe Wanderers) and, if that is decided, then to what degree compensation shall be set. If that is the case, then Mel's warrant will mean that he will be obliged to pay it, and all associated costs.

If the two clubs with claims (or threat to make a claim) for damages believe they have been wronged, then this is a wholly acceptable pathway for them to seek their justice.

IF.... justice is actually what they are seeking!

52 minutes ago, 1967RAMS said:

Not saying it’s not true but can’t see the point of a medical ahead of a summer move. Anything can happen in 6 months. Surety he would sign subject to a medical after the season finishes 

The contractual obligations start when he signs, hence the medical now,even though the player registration won’t transfer until his Derby one ends 

Udders Felt 3 Derby 0

A game too far for our defence. 

2 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

There's been no credibility in their claims anyway, I'd be amazed if most of the other clubs thought there was.

Bang on.

If other clubs thought they had credibility, they would be banging in claims too.

At the moment Wycombe and Boro have merely bought a ticket in the Weekly Meat raffle at the EFL Arms. They may end up with a side of lamb for the freezer; might be a pack of sausages, or - most likely - not even a pork scratching.

(If they do win, I hope they get a plate of tripe)

2 minutes ago, Curtains said:

That’s what it might be. 
Reminds me of all the other things the EFL have won or overturned against Derby and MM 

If truly independent, just imagine if the Panel return a decision that suggests the grievances are due to EFL process rather than Club misdemeanour?