Jump to content

atherstoneram

Member
  • Posts

    2,427
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by atherstoneram

  1. On 04/11/2022 at 16:05, GenBr said:

    Technology moves on. You don't need to go to the library anymore. Derbyshire libraries do give access to a good app though that lets you access loads of different magazines, etc though, but still no need to physically go to the building. And 35 is a bit of a random age to pick - a good chunk of that age range will have grown up without the internet, etc and would probably still have gone to libraries, much like myself, if they wanted to read something but couldnt buy it.

    As for the BBC I don't really care if they disappear. I don't watch or listen to anything other than the football and I don't pay for the tv licence either since I don't need it.

    If you are watching live football on TV or any streaming channels,you still need a licence even if you watch or record the EFL round up as it is viewed as being shown live.

  2. 2 minutes ago, TexasRam said:

    I agree you’re absolutely correct and the those who don’t fit are no longer wanted I get that. Let’s see how that pans out as the atmosphere dies on its arse. The goals seems to be a soccer aid type event crowd each week, it won’t be sustainable. Look at the attendances in the North V south stand week in week out, it tells me which people prefer. 

    There will still be an atmosphere, just a different way of creating that atmosphere. What some consider banter and goading some consider otherwise. The banter nowadays seems more personal,yes i have stood on the popside chanting at away supporters they were going home in an ambulance etc.

    As others have posted it doesn't happen in other sports and the tribalism is still there.

  3. On 27/07/2022 at 09:16, TexasRam said:

    Absolute minority, from my experience the boys and girls I know who go and support thier team are maybe a bit loud or sing songs that god forbid have the odd expletive in probably know more about our football club and football in general than most on here. They especially know more than the people who turn up now and again dont want to be offended by any bad language and would rather sit in silence, buy halfscarves and use  clapping sticks or god forbid “hold a can I have your shirt please placard”

    But that's the way the game is going,clubs would rather have families attending using clapping sticks etc which brings in more revenue rather than those who cause trouble, times are changing.

  4. 8 hours ago, Tamworthram said:

    What if a playoff semi final win was against a team who’s fans might have reacted differently - Leeds, Birmingham, Forest or Millwall. Would the punishment be different than a pitch invasion after a game against the likes of Brighton or Southampton? The benefit of a blanket ban is that it can (and should be) applied consistently without someone having to make a judgement call as to the level of risk of inciting the opposition fans or injuring one of their players. I’m with @Mucker1884 on this one and don’t really see the need to run on the pitch to celebrate an important victory.

    Even though actually implementing the punishment would be somewhat difficult (to say the least) in the event of a pitch invasion, the message should be the same.

    Not at all,just bring a ruling in that says a pitch invasion will result in x number of games played behind locked gates, yes everyone suffers but that will soon focus minds.

  5. 54 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

    Whilst the PFA might also be aware of potential dangers to their members if a few roles were reversed for example if a new employer decided to actually reduce the wages of players upon takeover 

    There is nothing whatsoever to stop a player seeking legal guidance from the PFA., as i have said no one on here are in possession of the full facts.

  6. 12 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

    The club being in admin did not affect the fact that once extended the players were on the same terms as they had agreed to.. it may have been EFL not allowing extensions until it became clear that derby had a route out of admin. . 

    No doubt the PFA would have been consulted either by himself or his agent as to where he stands legally.

  7. 3 hours ago, Tyler Durden said:

    If Byrne didn't agree to the extension taking place then why did he sign it then.

    By the fact that he did sign it meant he agreed to it unless your claiming duress? 

    What you're saying is really illogical. 

    Not at all, when he signed the contract we were not in administration, it puts the question of whether the administrators were legally allowed to activate the contract extension. 

  8. 3 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

    2. That's how these 'automatic' contract extensions work. The club cannot decide one day to slash an individual's wage just because they feel like it.

    3. Both parties were happy with the deal at the time of signing the contract. The contract would have given the club the option to extend based on whatever parameter was agreed at the time. Similar happened with Bent, except the contract allowed him to activate the extension, despite the club not wanting to extend.

    When the contracts were signed the club was not in administration, we were playing to a ceiling cap last season. Their contract was effectively up at the end of the season. Possibly the players concerned notified the club that were leaving at the end of the season and then the club then put the contract extension in place. Still don't think the administrators were able to offer them the salary that they were on.

  9. 8 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

    1. No it isn't.

    2. No

    3. They did... when the contract was originally signed.

    As regards #2 have you actually seen an agreement of their contracts. Or is that you just assuming ?

    #3 Might have been at the start of their contracts  but unless you have actually seen the contracts you cannot be sure what small print is contained in them.

  10. There are a lot of unknowns at play here.

    Who sanctioned the extensions, Rooney couldn't as he had no say in financial matters with the club being in administration.

    Would the administrators be in a legal position to implement the extension. Doubtful as their remit is to cut outgoings.

    Was the contract extension offered at a lower salary due to a salary cap being in place? In effect their contracts were up at the end of the season.

    Was there a clause in their contracts that said they could refuse the extension in case of relegation?

    Would have thought that both parties would have to agree on the extension taking place?

    As i said a lot of unknowns.

  11. 1 minute ago, Unlucky Alf said:

    WR is world renowned, Staying at home after a couple of holidays twiddling his thumbs would I'd have thought been pretty alien to him, I can't see him doing the Garden in his palatial home as he'd employ a gardener, So what would he do that sparks a little interest.

    Miss miss I know, Yes young Alf at the back...get back into football miss, Well done Alf...yes get back into football, It's what he wants, An environment he knows and people he can work with.

    The downside is this, If Colleen and the kids stay at home in the UK, I guess we can all guess what the future headlines will be concerning WR and the opposite sex, He aint going to stay faithful now is he...or will he ?‍♀️  

    Are you bothered, i'm certainly not. Don't care what happens to Rooney or his family, we don't have any influence on what they do.

  12. 8 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

    I think Compo is on it's way ?

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    image.png.9cd6e1c987887cc38477126c248d45b2.png

    We want to hope that Rooney says he paid Junes wages in lieu of paying up his contract otherwise if the FA prove it is Stretford we are going to be in trouble for contravening FA rules.

  13. 9 hours ago, angieram said:

    My take is that this is all too quick to have been decided since he resigned from Derby.

    In which case, he was probably in talks with DC United behind our backs whilst under contract to us.

    That doesn't sit comfortably with me, whatever he did for us last season.

    Probably the talks with DC United began after Kirchner pulled out of buying us and things are afoot with his agent and CK to carry on in the US what he was hoping would happen with us.

  14. 9 hours ago, Unlucky Alf said:

    "I want to spend more time with my family"...Wow!, I guess 2 weeks with the Family was too much ?

    Colleen said it was the longest time they had spent together on holiday as a family, then the Two of them went on holiday with friends, probably made Rooney realise he doesn't really want to spend more time with Colleen.

  15. 1 hour ago, ram59 said:

    But we did clear the debt, we paid enough to ensure the EFL didn't give a 15 point deduction and at the same time, the amount that we paid was also enough for the creditors to accept and to not force us into liquidation. So the debts have been cleared, if not paid in full.

    We know how much we had to pay to keep the EFL happy, 25%. What we don't know, is how much the creditors were prepared to accept, maybe it was the 25% or maybe we've had to pay more, maybe 30% or so?

    Clearing the debt and creditors not being paid in full are Two completely different things. Unless DC has paid 100% of the debt then it has not been cleared. It was enough to avoid a 15 point deduction.

  16. 1 hour ago, Crewton said:

    That's not what @The Baroninferred. He reckoned DC may have paid something between £60-65M for the club and stadium. That suggests £38-43M for the club, thus £30-38M to HMRC, unsecured creditors and MSD for the further loans.

    As you say, he may have paid, with having to work to a business plan agreed with the EFL i would say that was unlikely. Didn't we owe HMRC somewhere in the region of £30+ M alone. That does not imply the club is debt free.

  17. 1 hour ago, Bris Vegas said:

    The influx of signings remind me of the summer of 2008 when we came back down to the Championship and we signed over 10 players on free agents but with bigger wages than the competition.

    One difference here though is the length of contract. Offering one and two year deals is smart.

     

    Would have thought that with being on a business plan for Two years we couldn't offer longer.

  18. 3 hours ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

    If it's true that Boro wanted McGoldrick can we expect yet another lawsuit from Gibson if they miss out on the playoffs this season?

    No doubt he will be on to the EFL to make sure we don't go a penny over the agreed business plan, which, after the last couple of years upheaval i very much doubt that we would. We want the EFL off our back not under more scrutiny.

×
×
  • Create New...