Gaspode

Pearce is an accountat, wears an accounting hat, changed amortisation policicy, said FS102 that, depreciated down the left side, amortised down the right, he'll never straight line method, the figurs add up right.
 

Just giving my take on it. Louts picking on an easy target sickens me. Duncan Ferguson’s about the same age as Whitty, I’d like to see them being a bit silly with him.
I’m pleased an apology seems sufficient for you, that would have been a throughly unpleasant experience for Whitty, and not the first one he’s had to endure if my memory serves me correctly so I hope both the perpetrators have a lousy few months.
I’ve got a lad I’m proud as punch of. Polite, gentle, respectful, thinks of others before himself. He’s been on the wrong side of a bit of silliness and it ducked his head, he couldn’t understand why he was target of people he was no threat to.
These see you next tuesdays don’t give a toss about the consequences of their actions so don’t duckin’ give me all that silliness crap.
 
 

Watched it when it was on originally. Didn’t find myself caring about any of the characters - particularly Norton who came across as a bit of a wuss….Perhaps my expectations were too high though it seems there’s another series in the offing so I might need to re-watch it….

Avoiding this thread! ?

If Waghorn's wages will give us a bit of wriggle room to bring in a more effective player then I'm fine with him leaving. Yes he can have good games as per the last game of the season, but he has far too many anonymous games where he can't pass the ball 5 yards. To get us back on an even keel we need players who consistently get 6 out of ten, not one who occassionally gets an 8, but far more often delivers a 4.....

The way you were slating them beforehand, surely England have already far exceeded your expectations, so surely you ought to take some pleasure - or at least a little satisfaction - in that?

To be fair...........I don't think I'm the only one who thinks this................but I don't think you will ever get excited about anything!
And the last thing in the world England or anybody else needs at the moment, is catching the cold.
Any chance you can swap your sporting allegiance to tennis instead? lots of hot female players grunting might help!

Oh dear

I don’t reckon Boris is capable of installing a camera in a smoke detector - pretty much guaranteed that he’d fall off the table….

I would guess that the next EFL press release will be under cover of the aftermath of the England game tonight , so we should know more by tomorrow.

I don’t reckon Boris is capable of installing a camera in a smoke detector - pretty much guaranteed that he’d fall off the table….

Are people seriously moaning about a player putting in the hard yards in the summer, enjoying their football and showing a desire to be in the team?
No one is suggesting he's the only player doing it but Jesus surely we should be commending the lad for showing some bloody passion and desire to get back fit!!!
But no, we have to pull him down and say, well others will be, and his sessions aren't that hard, or he's got a seven year old keeper.... So what, he's practising a thing called technique....
FFS this forum.... 

And now Harry’s been sent off…. Never a red, but Wales have been poor with disciplinary issues for the whole tournament….

I don’t think they’re that good….

I don’t think they’re that good….

The problem is that if the governing body do not state the approach that must be taken, then people will be creative in order to gain an advantage - particualrly whereby the rules prevent owners from competing with others that seem to have an unfair advantage (as is the case with parachute payments) - being creative may be questionable ethically, but it's quite clearly not cheating if the governing body has been too lax to set out (in advance) what is and what isn't allowed. A one line change to the rules when we first started with our 'unusual' depreciation method would have sorted this - the EFL were too incompetent to think through the implications and let it go for several years. We have not breached their rules because their rules are badly written/implemented and allowed us to take the approach that we did.....

Pretty sure that’s the case - also banned from suing the EFL.
Folk need to remember that getting to the Championship was Wycombe‘s day in the sun - the biggest thing that has ever happened to them. Now, after failing miserably to stay up, they have an opportunity to be in all the papers again and be interviewed on the radio and on TV. The EFL verdict was like all their Christmases rolled into one and they will milk it as far as they possibly can…expect far more tweets and crowing to the press about how they’ve been cheated out of their rightful place - to be fair it’s all that they’ve got….

The problem is that if the governing body do not state the approach that must be taken, then people will be creative in order to gain an advantage - particualrly whereby the rules prevent owners from competing with others that seem to have an unfair advantage (as is the case with parachute payments) - being creative may be questionable ethically, but it's quite clearly not cheating if the governing body has been too lax to set out (in advance) what is and what isn't allowed. A one line change to the rules when we first started with our 'unusual' depreciation method would have sorted this - the EFL were too incompetent to think through the implications and let it go for several years. We have not breached their rules because their rules are badly written/implemented and allowed us to take the approach that we did.....

The problem is that if the governing body do not state the approach that must be taken, then people will be creative in order to gain an advantage - particualrly whereby the rules prevent owners from competing with others that seem to have an unfair advantage (as is the case with parachute payments) - being creative may be questionable ethically, but it's quite clearly not cheating if the governing body has been too lax to set out (in advance) what is and what isn't allowed. A one line change to the rules when we first started with our 'unusual' depreciation method would have sorted this - the EFL were too incompetent to think through the implications and let it go for several years. We have not breached their rules because their rules are badly written/implemented and allowed us to take the approach that we did.....

The problem is that if the governing body do not state the approach that must be taken, then people will be creative in order to gain an advantage - particualrly whereby the rules prevent owners from competing with others that seem to have an unfair advantage (as is the case with parachute payments) - being creative may be questionable ethically, but it's quite clearly not cheating if the governing body has been too lax to set out (in advance) what is and what isn't allowed. A one line change to the rules when we first started with our 'unusual' depreciation method would have sorted this - the EFL were too incompetent to think through the implications and let it go for several years. We have not breached their rules because their rules are badly written/implemented and allowed us to take the approach that we did.....

The problem is that if the governing body do not state the approach that must be taken, then people will be creative in order to gain an advantage - particualrly whereby the rules prevent owners from competing with others that seem to have an unfair advantage (as is the case with parachute payments) - being creative may be questionable ethically, but it's quite clearly not cheating if the governing body has been too lax to set out (in advance) what is and what isn't allowed. A one line change to the rules when we first started with our 'unusual' depreciation method would have sorted this - the EFL were too incompetent to think through the implications and let it go for several years. We have not breached their rules because their rules are badly written/implemented and allowed us to take the approach that we did.....

The problem is that if the governing body do not state the approach that must be taken, then people will be creative in order to gain an advantage - particualrly whereby the rules prevent owners from competing with others that seem to have an unfair advantage (as is the case with parachute payments) - being creative may be questionable ethically, but it's quite clearly not cheating if the governing body has been too lax to set out (in advance) what is and what isn't allowed. A one line change to the rules when we first started with our 'unusual' depreciation method would have sorted this - the EFL were too incompetent to think through the implications and let it go for several years. We have not breached their rules because their rules are badly written/implemented and allowed us to take the approach that we did.....

Innocent question matey - are you actually a Rams fan? You seem to be taking great delight in our current prefdicament and the opportunities it presents to slate the club, its employees and its owner. These are not the actions of someone that would normally class themselves as a fan....

The problem is that if the governing body do not state the approach that must be taken, then people will be creative in order to gain an advantage - particualrly whereby the rules prevent owners from competing with others that seem to have an unfair advantage (as is the case with parachute payments) - being creative may be questionable ethically, but it's quite clearly not cheating if the governing body has been too lax to set out (in advance) what is and what isn't allowed. A one line change to the rules when we first started with our 'unusual' depreciation method would have sorted this - the EFL were too incompetent to think through the implications and let it go for several years. We have not breached their rules because their rules are badly written/implemented and allowed us to take the approach that we did.....

The problem is that if the governing body do not state the approach that must be taken, then people will be creative in order to gain an advantage - particualrly whereby the rules prevent owners from competing with others that seem to have an unfair advantage (as is the case with parachute payments) - being creative may be questionable ethically, but it's quite clearly not cheating if the governing body has been too lax to set out (in advance) what is and what isn't allowed. A one line change to the rules when we first started with our 'unusual' depreciation method would have sorted this - the EFL were too incompetent to think through the implications and let it go for several years. We have not breached their rules because their rules are badly written/implemented and allowed us to take the approach that we did.....