How many more points required?

[Spanish]

12 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

It just needs Bird, Watson, Morrison (or even Fozzie) to thread nice balls through to the likes of Baldock, Joz, Lawrence, Sibley, Ebosele for us to score. The guys up front have little chance to score if their supply line is Roos, or Shinnie and Knight 

sounds so simple, why the hell aren't we doing this, I demand an answer from the club

[Spanish]

34 minutes ago, brady1993 said:

I think it's something along the lines of with the change to ammortisation we would have perhaps gone over a few years ago but the EFL signed off on at the time and so the club were acting under the impression they were ok. If the club thought they were going to fall foul of it at the time they would have time and options to react to it and bring us back in line. Perhaps mixed in with the club proposing a different ammortisation policy than the one we've used previously and the EFL insisting on straight line.

the EFL don't sign off on accounts or summaries, read DC2

[brady1993]

13 minutes ago, Spanish said:

the EFL don't sign off on accounts or summaries, read DC2

Ok change what I said to something along the lines of "We had reasonable cause to believe that what we were doing with ammortisation was acceptable"

[MuespachRam]

Have they taken any points off us officially yet then.? 

[kevinhectoring]

24 minutes ago, brady1993 said:

Ok change what I said to something along the lines of "We had reasonable cause to believe that what we were doing with ammortisation was acceptable"

Even though the evidence indicates we misdescribed it in the notes to our accounts and in our meetings with the EFl ? Said this numerous times, but the reason the first hearing was such a shambles is that the EFL didn’t actually understand how we were amortising until days before the hearing 

Edited September 16, 2021 by kevinhectoring

[Yani P]

On 15/09/2021 at 07:58, CornwallRam said:

Was released in the spring. Decent keeper, good at saves apparently but often static on crosses. Could save the club a fortune on catering though.

Available on a pay as you pray deal

[Leeds Ram]

6 hours ago, Rich84 said:

I keep seeing this comment of 4 in bottom 6, I'm sure when I look at the table 4 of the 7 teams are in the top half.....

You can't use a reference for us after 7 games without using the same reference for the teams we've played!

WBA, Brum, Boro and Huddersfield are all top half after 7 games.

The only real blip IMO is the Peterborough game, which the vast majority believe we should have won or at least a draw, Forest was a local Derby so any results are likely and we beat Hull.

Middlesborough won their last match last night but before that they were 16th so when I made the comment it was accurate. Huddersfield is also a difficult one as half their team were out with corona when they played us too so that's not exactly a full strength huddersfield team we were playing. 

 

If picking up 4 points from 3 of the bottom 4 makes you happy that's fine, tbh for me it's not really that great and an indicator that this year is going to be a tooth and nail fight to stay up. I'm not convinced with both how we've played and with who we've played so far we can beat those odds. 

[Rich84]

31 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

Middlesborough won their last match last night but before that they were 16th so when I made the comment it was accurate. Huddersfield is also a difficult one as half their team were out with corona when they played us too so that's not exactly a full strength huddersfield team we were playing. 

 

If picking up 4 points from 3 of the bottom 4 makes you happy that's fine, tbh for me it's not really that great and an indicator that this year is going to be a tooth and nail fight to stay up. I'm not convinced with both how we've played and with who we've played so far we can beat those odds. 

16th isn't bottom 6.....

And the point is they had a game in hand so a false position, now they have played that game it is more representative. 

I agree about Huddersfield,  we didn't have all our players available......

As I said, the bottom 3 happens to include our local Derby game, which we know from experience that form is irrelevant, even needing a full 11 on the pitch for 90 minutes after going 1 down isn't always required!

2 shocking errors against Peterborough is the only issue, but I'd counter that with a point away from home against a top 2 team that everyone expects to finish in the top 3

Of course we could have more points, the fact we believe we deserve more points is a positive for me. 

WRT how we play, I'm not a fan of pointless passing across the backline, but other than having some confidence in the final 3rd we've played better than the vast majority would have expected.

Replace Byrne with more physicality, (Ebosele or Mcdonald for me) Shinnie with someone who can control and pass the ball (Bielik but Knight possibly before) and make better decisions around the opposition box and we'll be fine.

[Leeds Ram]

19 minutes ago, Rich84 said:

16th isn't bottom 6.....

And the point is they had a game in hand so a false position, now they have played that game it is more representative. 

I agree about Huddersfield,  we didn't have all our players available......

As I said, the bottom 3 happens to include our local Derby game, which we know from experience that form is irrelevant, even needing a full 11 on the pitch for 90 minutes after going 1 down isn't always required!

2 shocking errors against Peterborough is the only issue, but I'd counter that with a point away from home against a top 2 team that everyone expects to finish in the top 3

Of course we could have more points, the fact we believe we deserve more points is a positive for me. 

WRT how we play, I'm not a fan of pointless passing across the backline, but other than having some confidence in the final 3rd we've played better than the vast majority would have expected.

Replace Byrne with more physicality, (Ebosele or Mcdonald for me) Shinnie with someone who can control and pass the ball (Bielik but Knight possibly before) and make better decisions around the opposition box and we'll be fine.

Sorry bottom 1/3rd I should have said. 

what players were missing for us against Huddersfield? we played what was pretty much a full strength team from memory as only Morrison and Jagielka were unavailable as they hadn't signed yet. Huddersfield had several first teamers out.  

I don't think we do deserve more points than we've got. Against both Huddersfield and Boro we could easily have lost and how we got a draw against west brom I'll never know. A point against Peterborough would have been fair as there was nothing in the game and forest could have gone either way. I think the points total we've acquired is about right for what we've done. It could be a point or two more it could also be 2 or 3 points less. 

Disagree about your analysis on Byrne (especially ebosele or mcdonald being replacements)  and making 'better decisions around the box' is an extremely difficult thing to drill into a team. The big issue for me is that we do lack chance creation. I think what is also a concern is the role that Roos is playing in our defensive stability as currently he's got the highest save to shot ratio in the league, if his form starts tailing off the defensive solidity could start to come under question (and the ageing cb pairing combined with a lack of cover).  

I think if we accept a 12 or 9 point penalty we'll be relegated as I can't see us really breaking the 50-55 points barrier. I imagine we'll likely keep on around 1 point per game unless injuries and suspensions hit in which case we'll slip a little below that. But I'm still in favour of accepting the penalty as it might allow us to strengthen in January if the stars align and if we don't I'm not confident about our chances of survival anyway. 

[Oldben]

If Mel accepts 9 or 12 point penalty, Derbys relegated.

He can't then sell the club for more than 20 million if it's relegated.

If relegated Derby could easily go into administration, Mel walks away with nothing if the club goes into administration.

Rather than lose out on millions, why would Mel accept a 9 to 12 point penalty, stalemate and hence the negotiations continue.

[Gringo]

1 hour ago, Oldben said:

If Mel accepts 9 or 12 point penalty, Derbys relegated.

He can't then sell the club for more than 20 million if it's relegated.

If relegated Derby could easily go into administration, Mel walks away with nothing if the club goes into administration.

Rather than lose out on millions, why would Mel accept a 9 to 12 point penalty, stalemate and hence the negotiations continue.

For the 999th time Mel will not put the club into administration, he has personal guarantees on the debts to MSD (this is a fact as this is confirmed on the documents lodged at companies house), he will soldier on running on a skeleton playing staff until the club is sold and he is released from those undertakings, ALSO MSD have to approve any change in ownership unless their loans are paid as well as the EFL. 

At the moment the club is covering its running costs, as the loans from Barclays have been paid in full (which Mel will have paid),HMRC have not issued any winding up orders a sure sign there is a payment plan in place I therefore anticipate a sale within the next month or so.  

Edited September 16, 2021 by Charlotte Ram
there, their

[Carl Sagan]

It's clear the EFL is trying its best to hit us really hard, so I think 60 points on the field is the target to be absolutely safe this season. That's 39 games to accrue 53 points or 1.36 points a game. I don't see that we will manage that. Simplifying, it's practically 13 wins, 13 draws, 13 defeats, meaning win one draw one lose one every three games from now on is pretty much what we need to be getting.

[Rampage]

Wayne is one of only a few managers who would have stayed and/or failed to be sacked. Fair play to Wayne who is now building a half decent side on the very cheap.

[Rampage]

1 hour ago, Carl Sagan said:

It's clear the EFL is trying its best to hit us really hard, so I think 60 points on the field is the target to be absolutely safe this season. That's 39 games to accrue 53 points or 1.36 points a game. I don't see that we will manage that. Simplifying, it's practically 13 wins, 13 draws, 13 defeats, meaning win one draw one lose one every three games from now on is pretty much what we need to be getting.

I think that unless we agree to -9 we can dispute the -9 and get three more suspended. So -6 this season and next. Reasonable compromise.

[WNC Ram]

1 hour ago, Carl Sagan said:

It's clear the EFL is trying its best to hit us really hard, so I think 60 points on the field is the target to be absolutely safe this season. That's 39 games to accrue 53 points or 1.36 points a game. I don't see that we will manage that. Simplifying, it's practically 13 wins, 13 draws, 13 defeats, meaning win one draw one lose one every three games from now on is pretty much what we need to be getting.

That's why the 9-point deduction agreement has a ring of truth to it: the leverage must be immediate removal of all transfer limitations so that Derby can go out and sign a number of free agents. Mel may be gambling that we're more likely to reach 60 points with this squad plus half-a-dozen than to reach 50 with this squad as it is.

It's a crappy bet--Hobson's choice, really--but given the choice, I think I'd take 9 points now and see what an improved squad can do. 23 mostly junior players are going down, point deduction or no.

[Rampage]

Cooper in talks with Florist according to Sky

[Dean (hick) Saunders]

2 minutes ago, Rampage said:

Cooper in talks with Florist according to Sky

[Rampage]

1 minute ago, Dean (hick) Saunders said:

Not Henry Cooper.

[Dean (hick) Saunders]

1 minute ago, Rampage said:

Not Henry Cooper.

Gary

[Rampage]

If -9 then we would be 7 points adrift with 39 games left and two promoted teams in bottom three. Better goal difference. It is possible if we keep improving and start scoring.