Fans Forum @ Nunsfield House in Alvaston 27/3/19

[Ghost of Clough]

3 minutes ago, AdamRam said:

There is no mention of SR benefiting financially as the result of the giving contracts or anything else that the club wasn’t aware of.

That’s a pretty big allegation to level at him to be honest, as all intense and purposes you are accusing him of frauding the club, having studied a degree in this very subject, there are certain responsibilities as a Director that if you don’t abide to can’t land you in hot water, and I don’t mean just with civil law suits.

Was he tasked with bringing players in and overpaid to get that done given the budgets that were available to him, then that’s a different question, but to say he did it for his own financial gain is not as I believe an allegation that has come out of the club...if it has I stand corrected and apologies in advance.

At no point did @NottsRam77 say SR benefited financially. However, he did say SR didn't have the club's best interest in mind (£600k to Ince's mum for 'scouting services' as an obvious example)

[Ghost of Clough]

1 minute ago, AdamRam said:

I think that’s where people are struggling to draw the line in what SR was originally accused of doing and what they think he actually did.

Do we now sack who ever was responsible for bringing Waghorn and Flo Jo in, if they flop next season because it cost a combined 7 million between them. 

A 10 second google search came up with this...

"In the statement issued by the club, Derby say the claim by their parent company Sevco 5112 Limited relates to 'certain contracts entered into by the club', including:

Scouting and consultancy agreements not authorised by Derby's board of directors.

Transfer fees for players above the figure agreed by the board.

Wages in excess of what was agreed by the board.

Excessive fees to agents unauthorised by the board."

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43571578

[Inverurie Ram]

11 hours ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

full video is up, although the writhing stare I received when I responded to "what shall we watch with dinner" suggests it's one for the internet derby fan to appreciate on his own

Get the buckfast tinnies in, the bottles of mad dog 20/20 in, get the glasgae boys and girls round with taps off as the sun is oot, stick the full video on the TV in the back garden and have a sing a long......get our new song Ramtastico going as you fire up the barbie (who's Barbie?.....best do it away from the wife!) who needs to steal songs from Sheff Wed when Leyton Orient will do. Then get the Gerry Cinnamon songs on the getoblaster and sing "Franko's a Belter" and leave the religious chat well indoors.

Party, Party, Party......Positivity......Tell all the weedgies the Rams are off to Wembley again to have a Ramtastico time!

Franko's a Belter

 

[AdamRam]

6 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

At no point did @NottsRam77 say SR benefited financially. However, he did say SR didn't have the club's best interest in mind (£600k to Ince's mum for 'scouting services' as an obvious example)

He mentioned a drink to certain friends and chums at a group he used to work with, would fall under ABC, however I must admit to missing reading it so I take your point.

[G STAR RAM]

9 minutes ago, AdamRam said:

I think that’s where people are struggling to draw the line in what SR was originally accused of doing and what they think he actually did.

Do we now sack who ever was responsible for bringing Waghorn and Flo Jo in, if they flop next season because it cost a combined 7 million between them. 

Wasn't the issue with the SR signings more about incentives and add ons rather than transfer fees?

[AdamRam]

8 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

A 10 second google search came up with this...

"In the statement issued by the club, Derby say the claim by their parent company Sevco 5112 Limited relates to 'certain contracts entered into by the club', including:

Scouting and consultancy agreements not authorised by Derby's board of directors.

Transfer fees for players above the figure agreed by the board.

Wages in excess of what was agreed by the board.

Excessive fees to agents unauthorised by the board."

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43571578

Not arguing that those allegations were levelled at him, and if he was found to have been doing such actions then I’d totally agree he didn’t carry out his job correctly, there would be no argument, none. In fact if it was my company and someone did that to me, I’d be straight to authorities and ensure it was dealt with through the courts so that a counter civil claim would be so much easier.

Two sides to every story though...not that Wed ever get to find anything out though due to all these NDAs in place ?

[NottsRam77]

28 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

But someone making signings shouldn't be judged retrospectively, because how a player performs is beyond their control.

At the time the signings were made it was gushing praise of 'Sam always gets his man'.

Regarding the information that came to light, it will be interesting to see what the accounts say when they are released in the next few days. Regardless of whether it was an outstanding of court settlement or not, the financial impact (if any) of the settlement will be in the accounts somewhere.

I’m talking about the information that came to light not the signings , although on the signings I think the post was “low fees” they weren’t low fees

One would assume if there was no truth in the information Mel wouldn’t have wasted his time and money in counter suing mr rush 

still cant wait to hear the Mrs ince scouting services justification if that ever comes to light 

[Srg]

28 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

But someone making signings shouldn't be judged retrospectively, because how a player performs is beyond their control.

At the time the signings were made it was gushing praise of 'Sam always gets his man'.

Regarding the information that came to light, it will be interesting to see what the accounts say when they are released in the next few days. Regardless of whether it was an outstanding of court settlement or not, the financial impact (if any) of the settlement will be in the accounts somewhere.

That doesn't make sense.

If he had signed Neymar for a reported £3m everyone would have thought that was amazing, but then when you eventually realise money has gone all over the place to family members and other corporate groups, he's on £500k a week in the championship and on a 5 year contract we can't do anything about of course you can question what the hell kind of signing it was in hindsight.

The only way anyone would have not is if we had gone up, at which point, none of this stuff would have even come out i'd guess - but if it had, damn right we would still be right to look at it puzzled.

Some of the deals handed around reminds me of Ravanelli back in the day where we were paying far more than our means, and even after he had long gone we were still paying it. We weren't to know that at the time, we just thought we had signed good players so i'm not sure how it's unfair to use hindsight here.

[Papahet]

90 mintue forum, 60 of that was harping on about FFP ?

Nothing really mentioned regarding potential investment/buyer, why Huddlestone was renewed if we are cost cutting, no real hindsight into the scouting other than Macs son is still here (and failing). What's the crack with Anya, why buy Waghorn for 5m rather than a top loanee if FFP is THAT close ? 

Same old recycled stuff bigging up all the FFP side they have to work with, but not actual on pitch issues. 

[AdamRam]

5 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Wasn't the issue with the SR signings more about incentives and add ons rather than transfer fees?

The original claims yes, however every signing has add ins and transfer fees. The club believed he acted outside his remit in getting the signings across, as per my previous post if he was guilty of this then I’m surprised Derby didn’t go down the prosecution route in the first instance.

I have no argument that he was involved in paying high fees for getting players in, i have my own personal thoughts around why civil court cases were presented by both parties, and I have to admit they are probably influenced by things that I have been told that may or may not be true. 

I believe he is partly to blame for where the club is now in terms of the finances, however I don’t think he is alone on that respect “biggest mistake MM has made is giving Sam his money” I think was one quote.....

[Van der MoodHoover]

20 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

A 10 second google search came up with this...

"In the statement issued by the club, Derby say the claim by their parent company Sevco 5112 Limited relates to 'certain contracts entered into by the club', including:

Scouting and consultancy agreements not authorised by Derby's board of directors.

Transfer fees for players above the figure agreed by the board.

Wages in excess of what was agreed by the board.

Excessive fees to agents unauthorised by the board."

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43571578

That all looks like an internal controls issue for the company rather than a matter of legality. 

I thought that the original accusation was of a "breach of fiduciary duty " which is incredibly difficult to prove in the absence of a clear fraud. SR could argue that the best interests of dcfc were served by gaining promotion and so his actions were consistent with achieving that objective. 

Presumably now, mel has tightened the controls eg contracts need 2 directors of the club to sign.

[Norman]

8 hours ago, NottsRam77 said:

Low fees ?

not really ...

and I’m sure I read right mrs Ince got a good drink out of it as well as well as his chums and fellow directors at the Wasserman group?

wasnt it 600k In scouting fees to Toms mum ?

yer he did a great job ...

i mean Blackman on a 3 years no expenses spared contract was a stroke of genuis for his other interests 

He knew exactly what he was doing and he shafted us 

hence the counter lawsuit ... what was it financial fidiciaries ?

Which is why i put dum dum derrr.

Even @Srg missed my point. 

[Wolfie]

20 minutes ago, Papahet said:

90 mintue forum, 60 of that was harping on about FFP ?

Nothing really mentioned regarding potential investment/buyer, why Huddlestone was renewed if we are cost cutting, no real hindsight into the scouting other than Macs son is still here (and failing). What's the crack with Anya, why buy Waghorn for 5m rather than a top loanee if FFP is THAT close ? 

Same old recycled stuff bigging up all the FFP side they have to work with, but not actual on pitch issues. 

Until something is agreed, it'll all be under confidentiality agreements, so there isn't anything that can be said.

You don't really expect them to sit there in a filmed public forum and go into specifics about individual players (who are still employed by the club), do you?

[LazloW]

30 minutes ago, Papahet said:

90 mintue forum, 60 of that was harping on about FFP ?

Nothing really mentioned regarding potential investment/buyer, why Huddlestone was renewed if we are cost cutting, no real hindsight into the scouting other than Macs son is still here (and failing). What's the crack with Anya, why buy Waghorn for 5m rather than a top loanee if FFP is THAT close ? 

Same old recycled stuff bigging up all the FFP side they have to work with, but not actual on pitch issues. 

Can't answer any of the other questions, but I think the one in bold was answered at the time.  It was part of his contract that when he'd played a certain number of games, the one year option automatically kicked in (like Bent).  I suppose we could have binned him to the reserves so it didn't kick in, but then that would have just added to the mind boggling sum we seem to be spending on people not really contributing so pointless really.

Fair point about Anya - good question.  Waghorn is seemingly going to be one of those 'in hindsight' type affairs where we might look back and think it was a bad buy, but there is time for him to be a success (big difference between being close to FFP and failing FFP I should think, so why not spend the cash you have got if you think it makes you better... however, I agree that we ought to be looking for the best value options and Waghorn doesn't necessarily seem like that).  

I think the forum was bound to be focussing on off the pitch issues seeing as they have been at the forefront of press coverage lately. 

[Mucker1884]

22 minutes ago, Papahet said:

90 mintue forum, 60 of that was harping on about FFP ?

Nothing really mentioned regarding potential investment/buyer, why Huddlestone was renewed if we are cost cutting, no real hindsight into the scouting other than Macs son is still here (and failing). What's the crack with Anya, why buy Waghorn for 5m rather than a top loanee if FFP is THAT close ? 

Same old recycled stuff bigging up all the FFP side they have to work with, but not actual on pitch issues. 

Yes, there was certainly more not discussed than was.

But that's what you get with a 90min timescale.  I achieve a lot more in a week than I do in just 90mins... as I'm sure do you.

Here's to you getting an invite to the next one, so absolutely nothing gets missed.

[Comrade 86]

Jeez. Thank god there's a game on tomorrow.

[Ewe Ram]

26 minutes ago, Papahet said:

90 mintue forum, 60 of that was harping on about FFP ?

Nothing really mentioned regarding potential investment/buyer, why Huddlestone was renewed if we are cost cutting, no real hindsight into the scouting other than Macs son is still here (and failing). What's the crack with Anya, why buy Waghorn for 5m rather than a top loanee if FFP is THAT close ? 

Same old recycled stuff bigging up all the FFP side they have to work with, but not actual on pitch issues. 

They can only answer what was asked, the questions weren’t vetted beforehand. Potential investors were mentioned but there was never going to be specific details revealed no matter how many people asked. 

Huddlestone had a clause in his contract, nothing more than that. 

Whats the issue with Mac’s son? Because of who his dad is? Not his fault what his dad did.  Failing? Obviously Frank doesn’t think so, or he’d be gone. 

Anya was covered in the 40% of wages on players not playing. Also it was said that you can’t predict that a player doesn’t work out. I don’t think anyone would ask ‘why did you spend money on Waghorn and get a specific detailed answer anyway, even though some stuff was thinly veiled (George Thorne for instance) no negative stuff was said about any player, only when it was positive was a name mentioned. That’s how it should be. 

[AdamRam]

8 minutes ago, 86 points said:

Jeez. Thank god there's a game on tomorrow.

International breaks are boring for club football, we manage to make it Interesting with takeover talk, Dubai trips etc....

Come Saturday until end of season hopefully the board will be dominated by our on field performances and scramble for Wembley tickets.

[Ghost of Clough]

59 minutes ago, Papahet said:

90 mintue forum, 60 of that was harping on about FFP ?

Kind of expected given the stories in the media recently

Quote

Nothing really mentioned regarding potential investment/buyer,

How much can they say other than they've been in talks with people?

Quote

why Huddlestone was renewed if we are cost cutting

Probably due to him being a good player and would cost us more to find someone better (it was an automatic extension as well)

Quote

no real hindsight into the scouting other than Macs son is still here (and failing)

In your opinion. How do you know who he scouts?

Quote

What's the crack with Anya,

We want to sell him. If we can't he'll leave on a free next summer.

Quote

why buy Waghorn for 5m rather than a top loanee if FFP is THAT close ? 

Transfer fees are spread out throughout the duration of a player's contract - loan fees aren't. We could theoretically buy a player for £20m and stay within FFP, whereas loaning a player for £1m instead would tip us over the edge.

Quote

Same old recycled stuff bigging up all the FFP side they have to work with, but not actual on pitch issues. 

 

[G STAR RAM]

1 hour ago, Papahet said:

90 mintue forum, 60 of that was harping on about FFP ?

Nothing really mentioned regarding potential investment/buyer,

Was talked about by MM. Ongoing talks with a few interested parties. I'd imagine confidentiality agreements have been signed.

why Huddlestone was renewed if we are cost cutting

Just because we are cost cutting does not mean you get rid of all.of your players. With 25% being removed from our wage bill in the summer, there should be more leeway.

no real hindsight into the scouting other than Macs son is still here (and failing).

The scouting process was discussed by FL. Why are we still failing?

What's the crack with Anya,

Obviously not part of FLs plans, does that really need saying?

why buy Waghorn for 5m rather than a top loanee if FFP is THAT close ?

Perhaps because FL wants some permanent members of the squad rather than a team of loanees?

 

1 hour ago, Papahet said:

Same old recycled stuff bigging up all the FFP side they have to work with, but not actual on pitch issues.

Plenty of on pitch issues were discussed, I'm guessing you'd decided to say this before even watching the forum?