Carnero

Bury went into administration and were bought by someone who didn't have the where-with-all to run them, and then wouldn't sell them at a reasonable price ie couldn't find a buyer. I think that's what happened, we're miles away from that scenario, it was undoubtedly Collymore just being the cretin he undoubtedly is.

The Vultures are circling just waiting for us to fail , rubbing their hands with glee , can't wait for our fall from grace , they think we deserve it , they pray for it !. 
We are made of sterner stuff , One of the original members of this hallowed sport , if we go down we will come back stronger, I have no doubt of this . WE ARE Derby , WE DON'T LIE DOWN AND DIE !  ......COME ON YOU RAMS !!!

Well that sounds remarkably sensible.
I don't believe a word of it!

It's quite hard to see how things can be quite that bad whilst Mel is around. He's spent a lot, obviously doesn't want to spend any more, but is still apparently able to put in enough to keep the club afloat if needed.
As a fan, I can't see him letting the club fold for the sake of a few million, especially as the situation has been caused by him. Then there's the 'local' offer, which surely has to be better than liquidation. 
If he can't sell, I can see a fire sale and the academy closing. We'd be uncompetitive, but that's better than being an ex-club.
Then there's the question of who would put us into administration? Gabay or MSD would lose far more if the club folded. I think this is bit of unfounded speculation. 
My only slight concern is why no season ticket renewals yet? OK, things are up in the air, but getting some cash flow for the summer must be a priority. 

Well that sounds remarkably sensible.
I don't believe a word of it!

Although I am not a fan of Mac, I think it is very safe to say we would be easily safe by now had he been appointed instead of Rooney. Mac clearly has no input in the playing side, the style is the complete opposite for starters. 

Well that sounds remarkably sensible.
I don't believe a word of it!

Well that sounds remarkably sensible.
I don't believe a word of it!

Well that sounds remarkably sensible.
I don't believe a word of it!

Well that sounds remarkably sensible.
I don't believe a word of it!

Well that sounds remarkably sensible.
I don't believe a word of it!

Well that sounds remarkably sensible.
I don't believe a word of it!

My favourite line was:
"It is unclear at this stage if Wayne Rooney will stay on next season."
?

Well that sounds remarkably sensible.
I don't believe a word of it!

Agree fully. The problem is that we haven't been promoted and each season trying to compete at the top end of the Championship drains cash and creates P&S issues. That's why we are where we are, not because Mel been enriching himself.
It could have all been so different. We've had so many chances at promotion where we've fallen just short. The difference between success and failure at this level is very fine. A goal here or a save there and it could have all been so different. Obviously Mel has made some mistakes, and I've posted about many of them, but his decisions have been tested and ours haven't. 
I don't think any of us should feel any hostility to Mel. He's given it his all.

Two things: First, do you think MM bought the ground: A for his own financial benefit OR B because the club was in danger of breaching P&S rules. I think it’s B 
secondly: we all know MM is gagging to sell the club. Do you think in the context of a sale he will: A exploit his ownership of the ground (which could hamper a sale); OR B ensure the deal concerning the ground is reasonable from the club’s perspective, thereby facilitating a sale. I think it’s B. 
 
that’s all I’m saying. 
 
 

Yes I watched that, very good, good old Jim McLaughlin!

The ole Ben Slater Jinx ?

280-5 as the players shake hands. Batted well today to get the draw. Brooke Guest did enough to keep his place in the team for next week against Notts.....who haven't won for 30 matches ?

The Derry City story on Iplayer is a good documentary. 

Football club ownership is an ego trip. Always has been, always will be. The American owners before Mel were ridiculed for not spending money, but got lucky in having Nigel Clough as manager. He was prepared to work with what he had, and did a bloody good job of it until they were persuaded to give Mac the job. Mac took the squad of players he inherited to another level, but was never going to work to Nigel's budget.
The buck ultimately stops at Mel, and obviously I won't be sending a cheque. I will however continue to pay my part as a (now long distance) fan. Mel is "to blame", but I thank him for everything he's done because he's done it trying to get us promoted. He's failed, miserably, but he's lost a lot more money than the club has.

Am I missing something here? That report doesn’t say anything new.

Yeah, I had a quick look myself and I'm scratching my head as to where I saw it. I suppose there is a chance that conclusion was arrived at based on what could be appealled with any chance of a punishment being handed out.
The second charge was broken down in to 5 particulars. The EFL withdrew the 1st of those.
2. EFL felt FRS 102 means amortisation of players should be on as straight line basis. Dismissed and no chance of winning on appeal.
3. ERVs (assigning an estimated value prior to the expiry of a contract). Due to us not disclosing the policy clearly, the EFL misunderstood, thinking it was an assigned value at the end of the contract. Dismissed, and no chance of winning on appeal.
4. Reliability (not certainty) of ERVs. I suppose there's a chance this one could be overturned. However, the appeal is based on the evidence previously provided, and whether the verdict reached is fair based on that evidence. FRS 102 states 'expectation', rather than the EFLs case of 'entitlement'. For example, despite Bielik's injuries, we may still expect to sell him for £6m. It doesn't mean we will get £6m.
5. Disclosure of policy. We were already found guilty of this one. If appealing the punishment, it should be noted that it had no impact on our P&S position, and therefore can not be punished for failing it. That means no points deduction. It's a fine at most for deliberately misleading the EFL (due to not responding to their queries on the matter).
 
Summary: if it is the entire charge, there is zero chance of #1-3 beijg any different to the decisions already made. It would take a massive Gibson to overturn #4. A maximum punishment of a 'slap on the wrist for #5.

I'd take issue with JP's verdict that the club face 'serious punishment' if the appeal finds in the EFL's favour. My take is that the complaint surrounds how the change in amortisation policy was incorrectly reported, not an issue with the policy itself.
Let's be honest, if that is the case, anything more than a slap on wrist would be grossly unfair.

Franco Bruno?