Jump to content

Who will be our first signing?


RoyMac5

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, one_chop said:

My gut feeling is Mel is struggling for money, liquid money to pay the wages. 

Supporting that theory is the fact he (or his company) is allegedly paying MSD interest at 9% pa. Not something you’d do if you have easy access to large dollops of cash 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, r_wilcockson said:

Must be confident of the signings if they're specifically showing photos of the trialists on the latest training photos. 

You are applying too much logic there......1 and 1 rarely add up to 2 in debt/Derby county!

It also means that they have no where else to go as it stands and we are their best hope of playing any football at all this season.

Edited by kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

It’s a strange thing isn’t it - Sheffield Wednesday in financial mess given a points deduction get relegated then can sign stacks of players unhindered 

Derby county - not yet relegated but can sign next to nothing - it can’t be about protecting clubs can it ? 

Sheffield Wednesday’s case seems to be different. Their issue appeared to be the sale of their stadium and putting the profits in the wrong yearly account to get away with FFP. They got caught out and received their pubishment via a points deduction. Case closed and they could then go about their business.

Derby, on the other hand, have been stringing the ordeal along with several other issues at play. In hindsight, we may have been better off accepting the initial charge and working to recover from it. By fighting tooth and nail, we won the initial battle but we’re looking likely to lose the war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bris Vegas said:

Sheffield Wednesday’s case seems to be different. Their issue appeared to be the sale of their stadium and putting the profits in the wrong yearly account to get away with FFP. They got caught out and received their pubishment via a points deduction. Case closed and they could then go about their business.

Derby, on the other hand, have been stringing the ordeal along with several other issues at play. In hindsight, we may have been better off accepting the initial charge and working to recover from it. By fighting tooth and nail, we won the initial battle but we’re looking likely to lose the war.

You forgetting there was 4(?) months of unpaid wages which they have points deductions hanging over them as we do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

You forgetting there was 4(?) months of unpaid wages which they have points deductions hanging over them as we do?

The suspended points deduction for failing to pay players doesn’t, or at least didn’t, restrict a club from buying players.

Besides, I think Wednesday signed a few in July before any talk of suspended points deductions came into play.

I don’t think it’s a case of one rule for one, and another rule for another. Ours and Wednesday’s situations are quite different.

With the impending issues, and I’m just speculating here, it wouldn’t surprise me if any current delays were down to one party refusing to admit guilt and take responsibility for their actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, angieram said:

I wouldn't sign Stearman or Baldock. Carroll marginal. Allsop only if Marshall is going.

Totally agree.

Need to get 2 CH's in pref before Saturday,  so Jags and Davies for me, the rest can wait, although Morrison would be a good addition, despite the fact I like Sibley and he may get game time if RM doesn't sign.

If get Mengi in and having Cashin, with Forsyth as cover I don't see us needing Steerman.

Need better than Baldock

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said:

The suspended points deduction for failing to pay players doesn’t, or at least didn’t, restrict a club from buying players.

Besides, I think Wednesday signed a few in July before any talk of suspended points deductions came into play.

I don’t think it’s a case of one rule for one, and another rule for another. Ours and Wednesday’s situations are quite different.

With the impending issues, and I’m just speculating here, it wouldn’t surprise me if any current delays were down to one party refusing to admit guilt and take responsibility for their actions.

Except the EFL seem to be making the embargo conditions up as they go along, where did the wage limit come from when everyone was originally quoting £11.5k/week?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone explain to me the apparent contradiction … A contract has run out -  yet he is allowed to play in friendlies that have official yellow cards that can be marked to his name in future games. That says to me an out of contract player is by definition allowed to play in any official match … So are we allowed to play players who are willing, on a none contract, match by match basis ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, jono said:

Can someone explain to me the apparent contradiction … A contract has run out -  yet he is allowed to play in friendlies that have official yellow cards that can be marked to his name in future games. That says to me an out of contract player is by definition allowed to play in any official match … So are we allowed to play players who are willing, on a none contract, match by match basis ? 

Cos the efl make the rules up as they go along to duck us over as much as they can 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, jono said:

Can someone explain to me the apparent contradiction … A contract has run out -  yet he is allowed to play in friendlies that have official yellow cards that can be marked to his name in future games. That says to me an out of contract player is by definition allowed to play in any official match … So are we allowed to play players who are willing, on a none contract, match by match basis ? 

I think Sir Humphrey summed it up the clearest:

Unfortunately, although the answer is indeed clear, simple, and straightforward, there is some difficulty in justifiably assigning to it the fourth of the epithets you applied to the statement, inasmuch as the precise correlation between the information you communicated and the facts, insofar as they can be determined and demonstrated, is such as to cause epistemological problems, of sufficient magnitude as to lay upon the logical and semantic resources of the English language a heavier burden than they can reasonably be expected to bear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NottsRam77 said:

Cos the efl make the rules up as they go along to duck us over as much as they can 

The thing is … none contract / free agent.  and can play for a club, can be penalised in an individual professional capacity for in game transgressions .. QED he can play “officially” 

logically and legally he can play where he wants for who he wants. .. He isn’t allowed to according to the rules because DCFC are under sanction  ? .. urrrm he’s already played for DCFC when that status was present under rules your rules, you accepted that .. precedent gentlemen 

Any lawyers out there ? Test case ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though the deadline is midday tomorrow I wouldnt expect the announcements to be before then, the club could easily come out later in the day and say a player has signed & was registered in time to play vs Huddersfield

So bare that in mind before everyone lose their heads when nothing is announced at 12

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...