Supporters Groups Meeting with Administrators

[RamsfanJim]

Minutes are now up on the website:- https://ramstrust.org.uk/wp/supporters-group-meeting-with-quantuma-23-11-2021/

[Stive Pesley]

Quote

All bidders are very keen that the club and ground are brought back together – potentially under a single holding company

This is good

The absolute rats nest of companies set up by MM to run the club can't have helped the administration process one bit

[Philmycock]

Oooh don't chant against Stephen Pearce, that's naughty

[RoyMac5]

18 minutes ago, RamsfanJim said:

Minutes are now up on the website:- https://ramstrust.org.uk/wp/supporters-group-meeting-with-quantuma-23-11-2021/

Very positive answers from the administrators to some very pertinent questions.

 

Was very disappointed to read this in the final paragraph:

"Stephen Pearce has played a vital role in negotiations with the EFL and the appeal, and continues to have a role at the club. Some of those present suggested it would help SP to do a media interview, but the meeting understood reasons why he might not be able to. It was agreed chants which may threaten his family were out of order and should be spoken against where possible."

[Van der MoodHoover]

3 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Very positive answers from the administrators to some very pertinent questions.

 

Was very disappointed to read this in the final paragraph:

"Stephen Pearce has played a vital role in negotiations with the EFL and the appeal, and continues to have a role at the club. Some of those present suggested it would help SP to do a media interview, but the meeting understood reasons why he might not be able to. It was agreed chants which may threaten his family were out of order and should be spoken against where possible."

You're right on this one. No place for it at all. 

[Gaspode]

9 minutes ago, Philmycock said:

Oooh don't chant against Stephen Pearce, that's naughty

So you think threats to his family are acceptable then?

[Ramarena]

9 minutes ago, Philmycock said:

Oooh don't chant against Stephen Pearce, that's naughty

They’ll put the club into administration if you do……….oh errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

[angieram]

There were a few rubbish chants started on Sunday but they seemed to be quickly drowned out by more positive ones, presumably from supporters nearby. 

I think we have a small minority of noisy fans who are disrespectful of everything and everyone - they are just thugs really and hide behind being at a game to do this stuff. If they're not chanting, they are threatening opposition or their own supporters or generally abusing staff at grounds.  

I wish we could weed them out but it appears very difficult. But I don't think they are representative of most Derby fans.

I love the positivity of the vast majority of our supporters and think the South Stand have been brilliant this season. 

[Foreveram]

And the east stand ?

[Ramarena]

Hmmmm reading between the lines, this confirms that the EFL were blocking progress until we took the penalties. 

Also interesting to note that we’ve turned down bids for players. The vultures are circling, but it looks like we have enough funds to beat them off for now/till Jan.

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

Just now, Ramarena said:

Hmmmm reading between the lines, this confirms that the EFL were blocking progress until we took the penalties. 

Also interesting to note that we’ve turned down bids for players. The vultures are circling, but it looks like we have enough funds to beat them off for now/till Jan.

That's a certainty really.  Once we went into admin a hammering was inevitable.  Like allowing them to pick there own hand at poker.  Without the admin I think we be in 6 point deduction and limited wage bill territory.  We'd probably be Reading in other words.  

[AndyinLiverpool]

10 minutes ago, Ramarena said:

Hmmmm reading between the lines, this confirms that the EFL were blocking progress until we took the penalties. 

Also interesting to note that we’ve turned down bids for players. The vultures are circling, but it looks like we have enough funds to beat them off for now/till Jan.

Hehehe... beat them off

[oldtimeram]

37 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Very positive answers from the administrators to some very pertinent questions.

 

Was very disappointed to read this in the final paragraph:

"Stephen Pearce has played a vital role in negotiations with the EFL and the appeal, and continues to have a role at the club. Some of those present suggested it would help SP to do a media interview, but the meeting understood reasons why he might not be able to. It was agreed chants which may threaten his family were out of order and should be spoken against where possible."

It's certainly not acceptable for chants of that nature aimed at him 

With saying that I don't think the guy should still be involved with the club.  He must have known about the dodgy dealings Morris was up to?

[Ramarena]

6 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

Hehehe... beat them off

Well it’s one way to get Boro Gibson off our backs!

[Ramarena]

13 minutes ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

That's a certainty really.  Once we went into admin a hammering was inevitable.  Like allowing them to pick there own hand at poker.  Without the admin I think we be in 6 point deduction and limited wage bill territory.  We'd probably be Reading in other words.  

Yeah I’d agree with half of that. 

The other problem was Mel. The EFL wanted to hammer him and the club was the vehicle to do that.

So I’m not sure how things would have been had he not put us into admin.

[Bald Eagle's Barmy Army]

We'd be seen as a much better club if we didn't chant negativity towards any DCFC staff member, especially when we don't even know the role these members of staff played in the demise of the club. 

Stephen Pearce seems to have stuck by this club through thick and thin during the last few years so he still has my support. We'll let the new owners make the final decision who stays at DCFC. 

I'm starting to feel a lot more confident about us right now. Just imagine 3 points tonight ? Can't wait for KO 

[Ellafella]

1 hour ago, angieram said:

There were a few rubbish chants started on Sunday but they seemed to be quickly drowned out by more positive ones, presumably from supporters nearby. 

I think we have a small minority of noisy fans who are disrespectful of everything and everyone - they are just thugs really and hide behind being at a game to do this stuff. If they're not chanting, they are threatening opposition or their own supporters or generally abusing staff at grounds.  

I wish we could weed them out but it appears very difficult. But I don't think they are representative of most Derby fans.

I love the positivity of the vast majority of our supporters and think the South Stand have been brilliant this season. 

Absolutely no room for division. All Clubs have a small number of nihilists but the positive vibe needs to be uppermost. 

[Leeds Ram]

I think chants against Stephen Pearce are fair game if they stick within the bounds of good taste. Obviously chants threatening him or his family go beyond the line of acceptability but merely calling for his removal seems fair enough to me. 

[Mucker1884]

59 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

Hehehe... beat them off

 

52 minutes ago, Ramarena said:

Well it’s one way to get Boro Gibson off our backs!

 

[metalsheep02]

Can anyone help clarify the apparent conflict between what the EFL agreed decision and the administrators appear to be saying about how many permitted players we can have?

From the agreed decision:

3.1 the Club will be permitted to have registered at any one time no more than 25 Permitted Players

1.1 “Permitted Player” means any Player who:

i) has at any point during their career, started in 3 League Matches (as defined in the EFL Regulations) in the same or higher division that the Club is participating in at the time of their registration; or

ii) is registered with the Club after the date of this Agreement.

The key bit here is at the time of registration which I am interpreting as the date at which they signed their current contract

Admin response to Ramstrust question:

Q - Whether an existing player, who isn’t a permitted player because he hasn’t made 3 league starts at the point of his last registration, can play for the first team? Under the agreement, academy players can play for the 1st team. We currently have 20 players who are considered ‘permitted players’. When a player makes their 3rd appearance, will they then be considered a ‘permitted player’ and then take one of the 25 squad slots?

Yes. This restriction only applies for League games (not the FA Cup).

 

So if we take Liam Thompson – zero appearances when registered so according to agreed decision will not count as a permitted player (at any point). Admin response indicates that he would from 3rd start for first team.

Can anyone clarify?