Gambling with our financial future

[Tombo]

 

I agree if prefer to do it the right way, the fair way. And I do have some concerns, always told myself I'd never act like a Portsmouth fan.

And also reputation is important - I loved it how a few billed the playoff final as the good guys vs the bad guys so I take your point about cheating.

But then I think it's many of the other clubs who've opted to relax the FFP rules. I was seething about that at the time, we were successfully working towards a long term plan within the agreed guidelines and had endured a fair bit of mediocrity as a result. Then a load of clubs who weren't operating as well and who would have potentially faced embargoes decided to club together and do a U-Turn? How's that fair? As I've said before it wouldn't surprise me if there was an argument for legal action on our part there. So for me there's a part of me that wants Derby to say "well **** you then!"

That poster you were referring to was a Wolves fan. This is the same wolves who were paying Roger Johnson a fortune while they were in the third tier. I wonder which way Wolves voted when deciding whether or not to relax the rules considering they would have likely faced sanctions if the majority of clubs did not vote in favour of allowing greater losses.

Well I remember John Vicars, back when he was on Twitter, saying that he believed totally in FFP but the rules needed reviewing. But nonetheless, other clubs voted for the rules to be relaxed which have allowed us to splash the cash more. So they allowed this to happen, no use getting mardy about it now.

I have a good feeling about the board and I don't have any reason to doubt them. But the fans have to cast a cynical eye on the club at all times. Fans are the only stakeholders in a football club that only have good intentions. We want the best for the club no matter what because we have nothing else to gain. I'm sure players, staff, directors etc do want the best for the club too but they have other motives. A less responsible ownership group could make a quick buck by being irresponsible. Players are stakeholders but they have career ambitions and other such motives. Fans have no such ulterior motives.

A football clubs fans are its guardians. I trust those running the club but as you say, we can't act like Portsmouth fans. We are the only stakeholders with totally 100% pure intentions for the club. Even a guy like Mel Morris who is Derby through and through has some monetary motive. It doesn't mean he loves the club less, but it means he has a personal gain from the club, that regular fans just don't have.

But as I say, I have no reason to distrust them so far.

[StringerBell]

Well I remember John Vicars, back when he was on Twitter, saying that he believed totally in FFP but the rules needed reviewing. But nonetheless, other clubs voted for the rules to be relaxed which have allowed us to splash the cash more. So they allowed this to happen, no use getting mardy about it now.

I have a good feeling about the board and I don't have any reason to doubt them. But the fans have to cast a cynical eye on the club at all times. Fans are the only stakeholders in a football club that only have good intentions. We want the best for the club no matter what because we have nothing else to gain. I'm sure players, staff, directors etc do want the best for the club too but they have other motives. A less responsible ownership group could make a quick buck by being irresponsible. Players are stakeholders but they have career ambitions and other such motives. Fans have no such ulterior motives.

A football clubs fans are its guardians. I trust those running the club but as you say, we can't act like Portsmouth fans. We are the only stakeholders with totally 100% pure intentions for the club. Even a guy like Mel Morris who is Derby through and through has some monetary motive. It doesn't mean he loves the club less, but it means he has a personal gain from the club, that regular fans just don't have.

But as I say, I have no reason to distrust them so far.

I'm not getting mardy about it. It's just that when you talk about doing things fairly, then for clubs to agree to a specific set of rules in which losses reduce year upon year and then do a U-turn on that for the benefit of the clubs who have not succeeded in meeting these requirements and therefore, by definition, to the detriment of clubs who have operated within those requirements then I can see why Derby might review what they consider to be 'fair'. 

[Tombo]

I'm not getting mardy about it. It's just that when you talk about doing things fairly, then for clubs to agree to a specific set of rules in which losses reduce year upon year and then do a U-turn on that for the benefit of the clubs who have not succeeded in meeting these requirements and therefore, by definition, to the detriment of clubs who have operated within those requirements then I can see why Derby might review what they consider to be 'fair'. 

I meant other clubs getting mardy about us now being able to spend more, not you getting mardy. They wanted to relax the rules so they made this happen.

[StringerBell]

I meant other clubs getting mardy about us now being able to spend more, not you getting mardy. They wanted to relax the rules so they made this happen.

ah! 

Sorry, yep agreed