Jump to content

Has the transfer embargo been lifted?


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, DCFC1388 said:

Buchanan would be the more likely even though Forsyth would be the one wanted to be sold by most fans.

As in Buchanan would be more likely to attract offers or Rooney would rather keep Forsyth? Agree with the former but I'm fairly sure Buchanan is Rooney's first choice now, evident on sunday that he was playing really high up in a change of system from last year. Forsyth doesn't have the capacity for that (or much else to be honest).

I think we'd quite easily shift Fozzy. If we were selling him to open another space on the squad, we'd surely accept a dramatically reduced fee. I'm sure a league one, SPL or even league two team may pick him up. 

Edited by RamsFan10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Is the Mengi really a deal breaker? Surely they could just renew it in January. Or is it only loans where no loan fee is involved are allowed?

I think we'd only be able to renew if the embargo was fully lifted by Jan. Not sure I trust Mel to have sorted it by then...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EFL statement: Derby County - News - EFL Official Website

Quote

Further to a request from Derby County, the EFL Board has now considered the circumstances regarding appearances made by a number of academy players in the FA Cup tie against Chorley earlier this year.

Upon review, the Board has determined that the appearance in that fixture by those players will not be considered as part of any assessment of whether they are players of ‘professional standing’ in line with the League’s embargo policy, due to the exceptional circumstances that applied at the time of the fixture. 

However, the Board rejected a further request to relax an enhanced embargo that remains in place in respect of other regulation breaches. The Club will therefore continue to be under wage restrictions on player recruitment and limited to a squad size up to 23 players of ‘professional standing’.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tamworthram said:

I guess we’ll see when the final accounts for the year in question if the sale proceeds caused us to make a profit.

In any event, corporation tax won’t have been accrued yet if the accounts/tax returns haven’t been submitted. So, the HMRC debt can’t be to do with the stadium sale (I believe).

Failing to finalise accounts is one thing. Failing to file a tax return is another. I’d guess they have done the latter albeit in the knowledge that it may need to be revised 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

Excuse my ignorance BUT if we now fill the freed up 5 places bringing our squad to the allowed limit of 25 can we not still sell or loan out fringe players from the 23 and try and replace with more positionally suited options?

 

EFL: 'The Club will therefore continue to be under wage restrictions on player recruitment and limited to a squad size up to 23 players of ‘professional standing’.  

Loaning out doesn't count they're on our books. We'll get first dibs on the better free agents that we want/can afford and still time for us to deal with the other stuff before the window shuts.

Edited by RoyMac5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

Excuse my ignorance BUT if we now fill the freed up 5 places bringing our squad to the allowed limit of 25 can we not still sell or loan out fringe players from the 23 and try and replace with more positionally suited options?

On a one out, one in basis for sales.

Not sure how loans out affect things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

 

EFL: 'The Club will therefore continue to be under wage restrictions on player recruitment and limited to a squad size up to 23 players of ‘professional standing’.  

Loaning out doesn't count they're on our books. We'll get first dibs on the better free agents that we want/can afford and still time for us to deal with the other stuff before the window shuts.

Will we get first dibs if our salary offer is capped? What does EFL consider to be a salary cap and would that apply to other clubs who can simply offer more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ravabeerbelly said:

How do you suggest we fulfill the u23 and U18s fixtures for a season then?

I can say with almost certainty that no ones contracts will be terminated. 

That’s the point. If forced to, the club would have to prioritise the first team as relegation would mean loss of income and a knock on affect to various levels of the community.

If the EFL didn’t allow it, so many people would be punished for issues they had zero involvement in. There really is only going to one outcome if they are insistent on maintaining the “integrity” of the competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Rev said:

On a one out, one in basis for sales.

Not sure how loans out affect things.

I think (have been looking at these regulations in way too much detail) that loans are registered in a separate way - So loans out are still registered at the parent club but ALSO registered at the loaning club

https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules--regulations/section-6---players/

However - I am more and more convinced that Wisdom and Davies must still be registered with us - And therefore the 5 which people keep talking about shouldn't include them (should they decide to accept the 1 year, limited terms contracts)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, so if we can bring in 5 players, I think it makes sense that 2 would be Wisdom and Davies. They both know the club well and have performed in the past. Wisdom gives us versatility and Davies leadership.

Then we’d need another CB - Mengi or Jagielka, personally I’d pick Mengi as I see him as a better partner for Davies whose pace can make a huge difference - plus space for 2 more outfield players. I wouldn’t take the risk on Morrison in this scenario - if he goes off the boil again we’ve wasted that slot - so would go for Aluko & Baldock instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, cheron85 said:

I think (have been looking at these regulations in way too much detail) that loans are registered in a separate way - So loans out are still registered at the parent club but ALSO registered at the loaning club

https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules--regulations/section-6---players/

However - I am more and more convinced that Wisdom and Davies must still be registered with us - And therefore the 5 which people keep talking about shouldn't include them (should they decide to accept the 1 year, limited terms contracts)

Another quirky little football rule to add to the mix.

Players reaching the end of a contract, and not offered a deal elsewhere are entitled to a further month's pay, almost like a redundancy payment. 

It's likely Andre and Curtis are still on this month's payroll, so still registered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Rev said:

Another quirky little football rule to add to the mix.

Players reaching the end of a contract, and not offered a deal elsewhere are entitled to a further month's pay, almost like a redundancy payment. 

It's likely Andre and Curtis are still on this month's payroll, so still registered.

Reading the rules I've as yet been unable to find the exact bit - But I don't think a player becomes unregistered unless the club specifically requests it - So you could have a player registered long after he's left the club (obviously there's little benefit to a club in doing that) - Registration doesn't seem to be linked to contract status

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kernow said:

That’s the point. If forced to, the club would have to prioritise the first team as relegation would mean loss of income and a knock on affect to various levels of the community.

If the EFL didn’t allow it, so many people would be punished for issues they had zero involvement in. There really is only going to one outcome if they are insistent on maintaining the “integrity” of the competition.

I don’t think you’re considering the implications of not fulfilling the academy commitments both financially and ethically and the knock on effect that would have on the club on the longer term .

Anyway it’s a moot point because there is no way on earth that any contracts will be betting terminated from those 8 players to allow for squad movement. 

A contract is binding and the PFA and the agents would have a field day if it wasn’t mutually agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.