ck-

12 hours ago, B4ev6is said:

Well my school days took me years to get over but sadly bits still remain sadly bullies wrecked my life.

B4 - don’t let that be the case. I know it’s easy but me to say, but you’re better than that. 
I don’t always agree with your posts (I love the pink shirts ?) but your enthusiasm for Derby County is an inspiration. 
You have friends on here who will stick up for you. Think about them rather than the bullies. 

1 hour ago, CornwallRam said:

Man claims to have sent money. Money doesn't arrive.

Man claims money has been sent but the delay is anti money laundering check.

Money never does arrive.

Logically there are two options.

A, it was never sent.

B, it failed the anti money laundering check.

Whichever was the case, was that really someone we wanted owning our club?

C, the money laundering checks were ongoing but the buyer looking at the $h!tstorm around this decided he’s better off out of it and so withdrew. 
 

But generally agree with your point. Will be interesting to see if an undisputed clear explanation ever sees the light of day. 

4 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Yeah he might want a new account to keep things separate for accounting purposes that all makes sense. Nothing suspicious there surely? Proving "source of wealth" is easier said than done though, if his own bank was happy why are Q's bankers refusing the money? 

It’s a fair question, but presumably it’s because if you’re on the hook for any penalties as the receiving bank, you make damned sure of the provenance rather than trusting some other third party’s checks. 

2 hours ago, Chellaston Ram said:

3 of us are definitely in

Just need one more, and we can justify opening all the stands. And I'm in.

2 hours ago, mrdave85 said:

Used to know a Christopher Philip Bacon ??‍♂️

That’s reminded me that our old dentist was Richard Bacon. So that would be Dick Bacon …. well I suppose it is pork. 

12 minutes ago, Rev said:

There's a Mycocks Concrete local to us, was on the the Scott Mills show a while back.

Close the thread. You’ve won the internet today ?

14 hours ago, The Baron said:

You're assuming that the accounting policy, described as 'at best confusing, at worst seriously misleading' was picked up by the inspection. 

Thanks for coming on here and being so even handed with your debate. I’ve enjoyed reading your thoughts. 
On the above point, I’m not sure it was the accounting policy that was described in that way, but rather the explanation of the accounting policy. Subtle but important difference. 

2 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

Any clowes as to when it will happen ? 

It’s clowse

43 minutes ago, B4ev6is said:

I think we shall still get high end of 20k most weeks and I still get near 30k with certain teams we have massive support base.

I love your enthusiasm, but this made me chuckle. I think it’s a little too optimistic. Low 20k average would be a great achievement I think. 

8 minutes ago, Anag Ram said:

No but the Derby at Wembley 2023 ones have.

I still remember the “We’ll be back in 81” shirts!

7 minutes ago, Yani P said:

We need at least 2 goals so gotta shift Thompson and Plange  off 

That aged well

On 12/04/2022 at 17:22, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

Charlotte's sporting director Zoran Krneta added: "We're very happy to complete the permanent signing of Kamil to become our next Designated Player. He is a talented, technical winger that can play on both sides of the pitch who has started pivotal matches for one of the top national teams in the world. Kamil fills a position of need and is equally gifted in scoring goals and providing assists to his teammates."

Err ... Yeah ok

1 hour ago, I know nuffin said:

Think the last job the administrators will do will make him redundant

They can’t. He’s not redundant. The role of CFO will be required in a new organisation. You can’t make someone redundant and then appoint someone else into them exact same, or very similar, role. It’s basically constructive dismissal.

Sacking him is unlikely to be straightforward. While we may not be happy with the way things have turned out, it’s not obvious that he was actually incompetent at his job.

 Painful though it may be, if we truly want rid of him, we’d have to offer him an incentive to leave. 

i did vote “Sack him” but on reflection I’m not so sure.

5 hours ago, Wistaston Ram said:

I noticed the crowd grumbled a couple of times when he received the ball and did not play it forwards, instead turning and passing it back to a central defender. To be fair there was no movement by players ahead so at least we retained possession, rather than punt a hopeful ball up front.  I think he is an excellent prospect but maybe currently lacking confidence as others have suggested.

Interesting. I noticed a few times he tried some quite ambitious through balls that didn’t come off. Was good that he was trying some more incisive passing, but maybe after a few got intercepted he lost his confidence. 
Personally I’m of the opinion we should be taking a few more risks to get it forward quickly rather than this continued recycling to the keeper and central defenders that usually just ends up with a punt forward anyway. 
So I’m not going to criticise any player who is trying to be more positive

15 hours ago, duncanjwitham said:

Because we don’t want to spend 2 or 3 months trying to get over the line with a PB only for them to pull out and we’re back to square one. Wigan went through 4 preferred bidders before they got out of admin.  If that happens to us, with so much wasted time, we’re just dead.  We need to make the right decision now.

The same Wigan whose administrators are mouthing off about how great they were?

4 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

Binnies offered £30 million for the stadium and the club. A stadium that normally has twice the Preston gate. 
 

I don’t think Preston squad is worth more than ours tbh. Even if we only had five players. 

That works be true if it weren’t for the awkward fact that they’re 5 points higher in the table than we’d be without our 21 point deduction, and with a game in hand. 

Funny thing the English language. For example read rhymes with lead and read rhymes with lead, but read doesn't rhyme with lead and read doesn't rhyme with lead. 

33 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

OK here goes.

Chinese whispers is a game where a group of people will line up, The 1st person will whisper something in the next persons ear, This will be followed by the next person to the next person until the message reaches the last person, The last person then tells all what they were whispered, The 1st person who started the whisper will then either say...yes it's what I said, Or no it wasn't what I said.

The best would be is if you could get say 10 Chinese people to play the game, That would really be fun as it would be more authentic to have chinese people playing Chinese whispers.

Buzzzz - Repetition

19 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

I think there you're getting into a bit of a mess on the private vs public distinction. The analogy of someone's home doesn't quite stack up when you're using a public forum that is designed to allow for expressions of opinions.  If it was a restaurant that is purely a service industry which again is quite different to this specific example I think. There is little to no public service benefit to restaurants and no one has a direct need to enter a restaurant as it's the only restaurant in town. This is the issue with seeing forums (especially big forums such as twitter, facebook and on a smaller level this one) as merely services provided by someone. Once a platform becomes sufficiently big and influential it kind of transcends that claim. 

I didn't say it was unreasonable to ban them but I did say it's just not something I would have done.  But all this is kind of mute as I'm not the one running the show and I'm not a moderator, just one forum poster with very little to no influence. 

Fair point. Few analogies are perfect, and mine perhaps worse than most.  Always interesting to debate though. Thanks for your thoughts and for sharing them in a fair and reasonable manner. 

6 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

A) That's irrelevant to the point I made that you quoted B) I've seen plenty of people accuse twitter of having a conflict of interest and unfair, bad practices on the platform whilst spreading disinformation without being banned. But again that's a different question. 

Let’s try a different tack. Let’s imagine you’d invited a bunch of people to your house for dinner and one of them started treating you disrespectfully. I don’t think you’d just ignore them, I think you’d ask them to leave and not come back. 
if you provide a service it’s entirely up to you to decide who you’re prepared to let use that service. 
Now take it a step further and imagine it was a restaurant and you were dependent on other people believing your integrity. 
Perhaps I’m over thinking it ?

i can see your point, I just don’t think it’s unreasonable  for someone to be banned for calling another’s honesty into question. 

32 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

The point I was making is that there is a distinction between blocking someone on social media i.e., from access to your feed and blocking someone from the platform itself. It's not only a difference in capability but a difference in the type of action. 

Pretty sure if you went on Twitter and accused their owner of being corrupt, taking bribes to favourably misrepresent certain users, and assisting in the misrepresentation of information, they would ban you too. 

31 minutes ago, roboto said:

Pass to Plange is marginal. Probably offside with VAR, but we shouldn’t complain to get the rub of the green.

@Jimbo Ram Ravel was behind Plange and the ball when he got played through so that’s not offside either.

Two superb pictures. I thought Plange was offside but looking at their defenders feet positions, the trailing foot is at least 30cm beyond Plange’s leading leg. Plange is standing bolt upright, so there’s no way a ball playing part of his body is beyond that defenders trailing foot. 

Let no-one argue refs are against us. Miles off side. 
 

COYR!!!!

2 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

Did you not see 40% off kits yesterday?

1 sock and the shorts missing?

16 minutes ago, DCFC27 said:

Mad Mel’s over spending legacy, he has to write it off, all his mistake. I can get on board with him not wanting to carry on funding the club to some degree but him wanting any money for the stadium club etc  is a disgrace. 

Exactly this. If you buy a classic car, look after it well and make reasonable investments in parts, you can expect to recover most of your money, even make a profit if you’re lucky. 
If you buy that same car, buy a load of expensive and useless blingy accessories, put 2-stroke petrol it and hire / fire a succession of novice drivers to race it in the local demolition Derby, well I wouldn’t be expecting to have a saleable asset at the end of that inspired ownership.