Rich84

As @PistoldPetesays, everyone apart from Prof Pope seems ok with what was done which suggests @Chris_Dthat maybe he's the one getting paid to say what a client wants.......
Surely, the only ones that matter in any case with compliance are those at Companies House? If it wasn't conforming to the requirements they would have been all over it.
It is clear that we exploited the poorly written rules and once Maguire highlighted it for what ever reason/agenda he had the EFL are saying it isn't correct to their 'hidden' interpretation, just because no one else has tried it that we know of.
They should take it on the chin and amend the rules if that's what they want it to be like in future,  not penalise retrospectively 

The IDc thought the opposite , and they had an accountant on their panel. So you had Derby’s CEO an accountant, Derby’s auditors ,  Efl’s finance director, an Icaew audit team, an accountant on the IDc all seeing nothing wrong . Yet a panel of lawyers found a breach of an accounting standard . Not exactly convincing .

He is a good player, I like him, but I do feel sometimes he holds on to the ball for too long. If he released the ball sooner we would have been away a couple of times last night. 

Weird how we see things differently. I normally rate him but thought last night was not one of his best. He seemed to slow the game down too much on occasion, chose the wrong pass and delayed the pass too often.

We've only lost 3/11 this season after losing 11/16 at the end of last season

I know allsop was at fault but no more than Lawrence with the cross for ckr about 5 minutes earlier 
it’s always the keepers that get the blame 
 

You mean the order that was settled within four days of it being issued?  The one in january 2020 when he had signed contracts for the club to be taken over so any debts should have been paid by someone else?

You were implying that it isn't sensible to challenge people who are out of order.
I think it's eminently sensible and will continue to do so.

Doesn't the traffic start to build up before 84 mins?
Shame we weren't founded in 1875!
 
?

That's not strictly true... They went as far as saying that it was regrettable that they could not sanction us further, on the advice of their own counsel.
Not sure why you are arguing otherwise to be honest, we all read it at the time ?‍♂️

 

You can only sell a player if there is genuine interest in the player at a price that makes it worthwhile - he's hardly pulled up any trees while he's been here and he's also shown the world that he has off-field issues that he struggles to cope with. Maybe the bid (if there really was a bid) was so low that the club decided it made more sense to hang onto him (particularly as we were already under an embargo that may have made replacing him almost impossible.....)

A £20 million loss of revenue is not a "straw", nor is the collapse of possible sales of the club, or collapse in an effective transfer market for players below Premier League level.
 
And as I have said many times the historic losses are not really relevant unless it can be shown that admin was inevitable anyway even without covid, which given pattern of reducing spending, and Mel's past forbrbearance  I don't think it was.  

As many people have said , our case is much stronger than Wigans precisely because we went into administration 18 months after covid started its effect so the cumulative losses due to covid had built up to over £20 million.. arguably much more than that when you factor in the effect on player valuations etc, as Stoke are trying to do. Wigan packed in after only three months.
 
Also their owner filed for administration days after taking ownership which hardly helped Wigan's case at all. 

I'd guess that what we have now will remain in place for now.
Even if the card and postage only costs a quid each, why spend 10k+ if you don't need to, when it could be the difference between a redundancy or not?

Yeah, they also have an extremely negative view of everything connected with club. 
Anyone who saw Bielik play last season and still thinks we overpaid for him is having a laugh.
Whether we should have spent that kind of money is a different issue.

I had an email about it at 9 a.m. this morning. Have you checked your inboxes? 
Now we have confirmed our season tickets they are available to us and us only, right up to kick off.

I hope @Carneroresponse is the reasoning behind this, rather than start to look at the negatives in a tweet..... something we accuse so many in the twitter world of doing! £8m owed for Bielik for instance....
 

Sorry, should have said, it is in the Cook thread, but have quoted it

That's correct, deliberate handball.

I thought his yellow was for a deliberate handball after Max had given him an awkward pass. I could be wrong - it has been known!

Or just ban those idiots and continue to let sensible drinkers to drink

Thanks @angieram, I was trying to say the fight and spirit shown suggests they will stick around even if wages are deferred,  was early in the morning..... i agree with @jonothat technically non payment of wages is a breach of contract, but if it is agreed then fair enough,you may dislike it but accept it (as per RR and other husinesses) but look at Sheff Weds, they just didn't get paid and they stuck around

Yes @angieram and @Rich84 .. i was perhaps a little hasty - it was the first sentence that really triggered my response. 
 
Anyway, I guess we’ll find out .. I think my concern is not so much the points deductions but the potential to simply lose players before the fight has begun. 
 
 

I think that's what he meant, Jono. Rest of post would suggest that.

Plus lots of our players must still live at home with Mum & Dad?! ?