I know nuffin

4 hours ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

Tosh.

Butterfield, Johnson, Anya, Lawrence, Marriott and Waghorn were all, at the very least, solid players before coming to Derby.

And, to take inspiration from yourself, you 100% had never heard of Albentosa or Te Wierik before they arrived, so I don't see how you can comment on them.

If I recall Johnson started very well and was a wall Infront of our back four. But after a short time his role appeared to change and he got less and less effective. For some unknown reason endeared up on the left wing a position he was not suited for in any way. Regained some of his effectiveness when moved back into the middle then let go on a free. Totally puzzling career with the rams

2 examples. Butterfield I believe was Huddersfields fans player of the year. Came here and looked as if he hardly knew how to lace his boots up. Maybe trying too hard but never made it. After leaving here his career went down and down until he ended up briefly in Australia. 

Shinnie was bought by lampard. Cocu was questioned why shinnie wasn't even on the bench. Reply was along the lines of we have to get him playing our way. Butterfield was hero at Huddersfield rapidly via Derby to zero. Makes me wonder what happened here to change him. Appreciate managers changed but we had to change the way shinnie played to get him in the team. So who sanctioned his purchase, who specified the kind of midfielder we needed when we signed him and who though we would get the best out of him by changing his natural game. Can anyone think that Brian Clough or even Jim Smith would do that.

8 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

As I recall the LAP decision, it was found we used a method of amortisation that was not in accordance with the  FRS. I don’t think ‘illegal’ is the best word to use but the accounts were found to be non compliant with the standard. 

As for their ‘trump card’, I’m not sure you’re right. I think we could refuse their offer of -9 etc and say we’ll go another round in the disciplinary process. If we do that, then provided we’ve filed accounts and paid HMRC, we’re out of embargo aren’t we? The problem is, we don’t want another legal process so we are refusing their kind offer. Instead we are trying to get them to reduce it. And so far failing, it seems. 

In other words, the embargo is not their trump card, because it’s in our hands to have it lifted. Their trump card is further proceedings if we don’t agree their proposed sanction. And we want to avoid further proceedings for obvious reasons 

I think that’s what’s going on but tbh at this stage I can no longer be bothered to read the rules to check

Three layers found we were not compliant. The first time when there was an accountant on the panel we were found to be compliment

45 minutes ago, davenportram said:

I think the EFL are trying to save face - how can we be punished for doing something that at the time was accepted by the EFL as not breaking the rules but they retrospectively decide wasnt within the rules?

I would speculate this will all depend on what cards Mel holds. If he has one from the auditors governing body to say that our method of amortization is within their rules Mel will be fighting to use it but the EFL will be fighting to stop him. If Mel can use it no doubt he will want some form of compensation to cover his defence costs and things like losing Marriott on a free transfer. The EFL will be fighting to hang something on us to save face and stop the pressure they are getting from lower league clubs many of which cannot be happy that the EFl are wasting their money. Peterborough owner apparently has come out and said that. If it was an open and shut case it would be all over by now so common sense says we must have something that the EFL cannot bulldozer over without ending up in a court of law. Far fetched? Only time will tell but that old phrase might just ring true- In Mel we trust

5 hours ago, Yani P said:

I've heard it is based on the emperors new clothes theme..

Certainly not keep the customer satisfied

People who go to a programme seller for example and say can I get a programme. I want the seller so say yes I am out of elephants or I don't know can you get one?

6 hours ago, adamscybot said:

When things go wrong in a company, the best organisations avoid blame culture at all cost and look at things objectively. Too many people think its normal to associate events with attacks on character.

Mel's biggest mistake to me is the people that he listens to regarding transfers although I also think there is something basically wrong behind the scenes at the club which has been there for a long time. Pick one transfer, Butterfield. When he was signed I didn't hear anybody saying no to Huddersfields fans play of the year. He not only didn't show much for us when he was moved on he was in such a state that his career disappeared down the drain. There are many others Anya another example Scottish national player disappeared again. Don't know what it is but something at the club is not right when we sign so many players for so much and they never perform here. Saying that Rooney is getting quite a lot out of what he has

12 minutes ago, Foreveram said:

Why, what’s happening then??‍♂️

It's a party and no doubt we could we'll manage to give a silly goal as a present

What Sky say goes. Remember Johnson's biting offence. Sky called it biting. Johnson said he did not. His so called victim said he had not bit him. FA found Johnson guilty. Say no more Fozzie had to accept it.

For those on about the mascot. If you were a h&s officer in these covid days would you allow anybody to put there head into a confined space that others might have had their head in.