Derby_Dave

He did against Middlesbrough I think.

I can only find that Tranmere were keen on taking him on loan but nothing confirmed anywhere.

EFL regulation 24 covers the fielding of a weakened team in a championship league game see below,
Regulation 24 The Requirement to Play Full Strength Sides in League Matches 
24.1 Each Club shall play its full strength in all Matches played under the auspices of The League unless some satisfactory reason is given. In the event of the explanation not being deemed satisfactory the Board shall refer the matter to a Disciplinary Commission which has the power to impose such penalties as it shall think fit.
My preposition  is that if the EFL forces DCFC by means of this Embargo, to knowingly have the Rams field a weakened side at the start of the season, then they will be guilty of breaking their own regulations, and to my mind if we some months later we were able to strengthen the team, and go on a good set of results, we could seriously affect both relegation and promotion in the league.
My view is that given we only currently have without any additional players a team that will find it very difficult to get results, then the EFL is playing with fire, and for once maybe it could be Mr Gibsons team that could be adversely affected.
I am going to write to the EFL to point out they will transgress their own regulations if they do not see sense.
 

Thanks for that reminder!!

People take him seriously ?

What really stings and gives life to the allegations of a vindictive nature in all this, is the “the EFL reluctantly” .. why reluctant ? There was some wrong doing, the Independent panel gave a sanction .. so that’s it .. why “reluctantly” ? It stinks as an attitude and is fundamentally wrong on so many levels. You have a system where there is a complaint and a system that provides for an independent panel to adjudicate but somehow the The body that represents the clubs, that drew up the system in the first place isn’t prepared to accept its outcome in an appropriate manner .. Why would you appeal or even reluctantly accept a verdict given by a system you designed ? The independent committee is designed to give a balanced view, to remove the partisanship the EFL shouldn’t be showing in any case , but clearly is. 

Link and sauce please

Nah but they will claim it if it's a success

........ and breathe!

Belgium.

Its the sort of horribleness we miss. Too often we get bullied and beat by physical teams. I wouldn't be against having some spite in the middle of the park. 

Time to close this embarrassing thread. How on earth he even bypassed our legal team/ board amazes me.
A poor mans Michael Knighton , and that’s stretching it. If I had to draw an exact comparison, it would be Lord Melbury from Fawlty Towers.
Get it locked ⚽️

Some of the football was pretty Meh at times..
If he had stayed without Mount and Tomori I suspect that last season would have been a big struggle for him with no better finish than Cocu achieved (and the usual crowd calling for his sacking).

The signings, by and large, were dross.

Are you saying he was wrong about CKR? He's good for team spirit, but if we weren't desperate we would never have signed him.

Could we persuade him to take a step down? 

I don’t want this idiot anywhere near this football club.
Pretending a house is yours when it isn’t to counter rumours of not having money is an embarrassment.
I do not want him associated with this club.

I love football and I love this club but when is it just going to be about football !!! You can blame players and managers and coaches for bad performances on the pitch but how the club is run is down to one person and that’s Mel .....he’s a fan and Thankyou for trying and using your own money to try and help us go forward but the fact is the mess off of the pitch with the efl etc is down to Mel ...I for one will be glad when he’s gone and that is meant with no disrespect to Mel Morris 

The future’s bright.

The future’s bright.

We’ve had more transition seasons than there’s been Fast and Furious movies!

That explains 1 year.
Any explanation for the rest? 

Keogh left his brains in the bottom of his glass that night and failed to marshall his teammates properly.
Captaincy is not just a bit of rag around the arm, it carries ultimate responsibility to be the best example; to lead, to enforce common sense, and facilitate public & personal safety and discipline. He failed miserably at that time and carries the can.
The other two characters have been penalised at the maximum permitted by the club and have been dealt with fines, driving bans and criminal records by the courts. They are zeros in my eyes; I wouldn't have cared less if they never kicked a ball for the club again - but maintaining their squad status (for now) might salvage some value from them on the pitch (debatable) and as club assets (debatable again). 
Keogh's ill-taken decisions have cost him his career, and it's a bit gobsmacking IMHO for him to have the gall to refuse a huge (if reduced!) sum of money in wages when he is singularly incapable of contributing to the team. 
A gift horse disregarded, and a fair offer from the club in the light of his irrelevance to the club's progress. So, for him to refuse it leaves me quite happy with the club's decision to dispense with his 'services', such as they are.
The players need to regroup, show maximum togetherness and effort, and establish a credible identity with the fanbase by actually achieving club targets on the pitch.