Ted McMinn Football Genius Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 8 minutes ago, Rich84 said: As much as I want to see him stay, if the 2 Yr restrictions we have prevent that as he wants more money then he has to go, and it isn't a punishment too far, there are a lot of businesses that have lost money, it would be obscene if we were allowed to pay £750k/1m salaries so soon after screwing them, then there's the tax man! I am surprised the salary limit is as high as being reported at £12k, it really should be less imo, feels wrong. Absolutely no grounds for this, however it is my guess that because we are limited to Free transfers and loan options only we are able to offer better wages than others on our division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich84 Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 6 hours ago, Ted McMinn Football Genius said: Absolutely no grounds for this, however it is my guess that because we are limited to Free transfers and loan options only we are able to offer better wages than others on our division. So it's OK to rip people off and potentially ruin businesses and not pay taxes, then spend big on new contracts! It just doesn't sit right with me, so I'm all for financial restrictions for 2 years as I think it is a reasonable penalty to pay to allow rhe club to exist. Carnero and Comrade 86 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Srg Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 14 minutes ago, Rich84 said: So it's OK to rip people off and potentially ruin businesses and not pay taxes, then spend big on new contracts! It just doesn't sit right with me, so I'm all for financial restrictions for 2 years as I think it is a reasonable penalty to pay to allow rhe club to exist. Did you miss the part where we got a new owner who’s nothing to do with the previous ownership and had already been punished to the tune of 21 points and the majority of the players we had leaving? Where have you been? Ted McMinn Football Genius, Wolfie20, Zag zig and 14 others 6 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuitYourJibbaJivin Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 16 minutes ago, Rich84 said: So it's OK to rip people off and potentially ruin businesses and not pay taxes, then spend big on new contracts! It just doesn't sit right with me, so I'm all for financial restrictions for 2 years as I think it is a reasonable penalty to pay to allow rhe club to exist. Must be cold up there on that moral high ground. jono, Ted McMinn Football Genius and nogbad van 50 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crewton Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 1 hour ago, Rich84 said: So it's OK to rip people off and potentially ruin businesses and not pay taxes, then spend big on new contracts! It just doesn't sit right with me, so I'm all for financial restrictions for 2 years as I think it is a reasonable penalty to pay to allow rhe club to exist. This sounds familiar.... ? MaltRam and Rev 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 1 hour ago, Rich84 said: So it's OK to rip people off and potentially ruin businesses and not pay taxes, then spend big on new contracts! It just doesn't sit right with me, so I'm all for financial restrictions for 2 years as I think it is a reasonable penalty to pay to allow rhe club to exist. Doesn't seem fair to me to sell the Club to a new owner with the intention of making that owner struggle to keep the Club competitive. Should the business have just liquidated then? Chester40 and jono 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Srg Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 4 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said: Doesn't seem fair to me to sell the Club to a new owner with the intention of making that owner struggle to keep the Club competitive. Should the business have just liquidated then? Maybe we should not be allowed players at all because of the Three Amigos 2 decades ago. jono 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimmu Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 I can see him leaving as we most likely can't offer good enough contract at the moment. To be honest, he doesn't belong to League 1 so hopefully someone comes with a reasonable offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 1 minute ago, Dimmu said: I can see him leaving as we most likely can't offer good enough contract at the moment. To be honest, he doesn't belong to League 1 so hopefully someone comes with a reasonable offer. To be honest Derby don't belong in League 1 - a points deduction took us down not the quality of our team. Hope Knighty stays he's a tremendous asset for us. therealhantsram, Magicman, jono and 1 other 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 29 minutes ago, Crewton said: This sounds familiar.... ? He's on the wrong forum. Crewton 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldben Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 12 hours ago, TuffLuff said: I know this isn’t a good excuse, but I wrote this in January! A problem for derby, is selling the future. We have done a lot of that lately, which is understandable. We have brought in older players who have little resale value. Younger players take longer to grow to the level the team is playing at. I'm happy with Saturdays result, but Collins continued his lack of goals. 23 games last season and he scored 3 times. This league has some high scoring players. Two to three years before we have rebuilt the academy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistoldPete Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 2 hours ago, Rich84 said: So it's OK to rip people off and potentially ruin businesses and not pay taxes, then spend big on new contracts! It just doesn't sit right with me, so I'm all for financial restrictions for 2 years as I think it is a reasonable penalty to pay to allow rhe club to exist. Which is it? A financial restriction to allow the club to exist or a penalty? Because a financial restriction that stops us from protecting the value of an asset we already own is a penalty. Far from allowing us to exist, it damages the finances of the club. sage 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 9 hours ago, Rich84 said: As much as I want to see him stay, if the 2 Yr restrictions we have prevent that as he wants more money then he has to go, and it isn't a punishment too far, there are a lot of businesses that have lost money, it would be obscene if we were allowed to pay £750k/1m salaries so soon after screwing them, then there's the tax man! I am surprised the salary limit is as high as being reported at £12k, it really should be less imo, feels wrong. I'm talking about an extension of existing terms. It's not fair on the club or the player to have such a short contract CBRammette and Rich84 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wignall12 Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 2 hours ago, Srg said: Did you miss the part where we got a new owner who’s nothing to do with the previous ownership and had already been punished to the tune of 21 points and the majority of the players we had leaving? Where have you been? In Ripley ? Comrade 86 and MaltRam 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBRammette Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 55 minutes ago, PistoldPete said: Which is it? A financial restriction to allow the club to exist or a penalty? Because a financial restriction that stops us from protecting the value of an asset we already own is a penalty. Far from allowing us to exist, it damages the finances of the club. Agreed with Rich sentiment esp after all comments we have made re Leeds and Leicester and other posters just shot him down without any sensible comment but your point is perfectly put. The restrictions on contracts still for our existing players especially the youngsters are an ongoing unfair penalty Srg and Rich84 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich84 Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 4 hours ago, sage said: I'm talking about an extension of existing terms. It's not fair on the club or the player to have such a short contract I agree with that position, allowing an extension on current terms should be allowed especially as they aren't likely to be ridiculous, but I think his agent will be telling him he should get more, although I don't buy in to speculating what their salaries are, none of us will likely to know for certain. Really good point about short contracts not being fair on a player also, everyone usually just focuses on the club not having security and forget these are generally young lads, if they get injured then potential zero income at the end of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hintonsboots Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 (edited) 5 hours ago, Oldben said: A problem for derby, is selling the future. We have done a lot of that lately, which is understandable. We have brought in older players who have little resale value. Younger players take longer to grow to the level the team is playing at. I'm happy with Saturdays result, but Collins continued his lack of goals. 23 games last season and he scored 3 times. This league has some high scoring players. Two to three years before we have rebuilt the academy. This post looks like it was written on a teleprinter, was expecting East Fife 4 Forfar 5 next. That said, I do enjoy @Oldben‘s posts though. Edited August 1, 2022 by hintonsboots Ramarena, ThePrisoner and Hans Datdo-Dishes 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich84 Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 (edited) 4 hours ago, CBRammette said: Agreed with Rich sentiment esp after all comments we have made re Leeds and Leicester and other posters just shot him down without any sensible comment but your point is perfectly put. The restrictions on contracts still for our existing players especially the youngsters are an ongoing unfair penalty Most Rams fans call Leicester out with how they screwed local businesses over then became the fairytale champions. I also had a beef with Portsmouth doing it twice in quick succession around when we were after Yakubu. Never said we shouldn't be allowed to have contracts longer than 2 years, or allowed to have a valid squad, but we proved last year you don't need to pay obscene wages to build a team. Moral high ground one response says.... having a thought for people that have provided services to our club, irrespective of ownership, and not been paid for it, is that taking the moral high grd? How different is it to someone buying your car and then once they get the paperwork the cheque bounces and you are left woth just the 25% deposit, how would you feel? What would each and everyone of us think if we were told that you will only get 1/4 of your salary for the service you provided to your employer at the end of the month? Anyway, as I replied to @sageand as @CBRammettehas said above, the restrictions on contracts lengths is unfair, or not being able to offer a contract, but not necessarily the size of the wages. Edited August 1, 2022 by Rich84 Typo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfie20 Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 11 minutes ago, hintonsboots said: This post looks like it was written on a teleprinter, was expecting East Fife 4 Forfar 5 next. That said, I do enjoy @Oldben‘s posts though. Really? Even though they're nearly always the same? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich84 Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 (edited) 5 hours ago, PistoldPete said: Which is it? A financial restriction to allow the club to exist or a penalty? Because a financial restriction that stops us from protecting the value of an asset we already own is a penalty. Far from allowing us to exist, it damages the finances of the club. I agree there has to be a balance, only being able to offer Ebosele and Plange 1 Yr contracts last summer is counter intuitive to a club that is in debt when they would have meant a bigger income when we sold them. It's just the size of the wages and in Knights case it's a tough one as I would expect his agent to suggest that he ought to be on £20k/wk (speculation i know, but to give it context, a number bigger than we are allowed to pay currently) as a full international and the number of games under his belt, but should we be allowed to pay that much? Maybe the wage cap should be relaxed for players that are homegrown and are on an upward trajectory in their careers, as opposed to signing a new player and paying them the same even though they have more experience, that way it would allow the protection of the club's asset, but that is likely to be way too complicated for our friends at the EFL Edited August 1, 2022 by Rich84 Added comment... Magicman 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now