What would you ask?

[Day]

Not sure which side requested this interview, Pearce or Radio Derby, or even the reasons behind it.

It does not take an hour to say I'm legally bound to not discuss anything that the fans would like to know, and that could be with a number of parties be it Mel Morris, the EFL, David Clowes, Quantuma etc. This will be completely normal within businesses. Frustrating from our side, yet you have to understand that we will never be privy to the "real inside story".

It will, I imagine, be a repeat from the fans forum which will only reignite the debate of whether or not he should be at the club, is that really necessary at this stage of the season?

Forgive me if this discussion is still taking place on other platforms and Pearce/Radio Derby felt it was important to respond, attempt again to draw a line and move on. Which on this forum regardless of which side of the fence you sit on over his current employment status, would appear many have as I haven't seen his name popping up at all. 

Even the transfer window the focus was more if anything on David Clowes, not the CEO that will have been doing the deals.

With regards to the apology for that period which some are looking for, you could put a case forward that either he feels the club did nothing wrong, retrospective rule changes show this and does not want to reopen a war with the EFL when we now have a positive relationship. Or an apology would show weakness, and fuel the theory that he was nothing more than a yes man to Mel Morris.

I guess it will be something we all pick which to believe and roll with it as it's unlikely any, anytime soon at least, we will have any definitive answers or apologies.

Saying this, I will still watch as when the CEO of your club talks, I think we has fans should be respectful and listen to what he has to say even if he says nothing at all. 

For the record, it's no secret I had semi regular conversations with Mel Morris, some may think I'm sat on some juicy inside information and knew this was all coming, which I can hand on heart say I'm not and that famous "NDA meeting" was not full of the details people think were shared. 

Some of you will remember the shitshow I started on Twitter, that was a genuine belief that the NDA was there simply to cover any comments like Michael Jackson is a nonce for example which would obviously make the headlines once the press got hold of it.

Concerns over signing one were raised prior to the meeting and was subsequently told, would never happen again. At the time little did I know where the club was heading! 

To this day the meeting minutes which were to be signed off by the club have not been sent, if I'm honest I would have to go through old emails to try and locate them, which even if I could the NDA would still be in place between myself and the club and can't imagine a scenario where they will be signed off now, especially when it would appear Stephen Pearce is looking to draw that line in the sand.

I personally think from my own conversations that there was a genuine honest belief that the club had done no wrong, we just found a different method of accounting which the EFL rules did not at the time forbid. We were being targeted by the EFL due the public criticism over TV deals and other outside interference which was a personal battle rather than the club itself. Which you could look at the way other clubs have been punished recently and possibly say, yeah, we were a little hard done by compared to others right.

That was just the impression I got for what it's worth.

Any conversations I had were nothing more than how are you and thoughts on the EFL, which you can probably guess.

IF and I say IF as I have only spoken to Stephen Pearce once with regards to advertising on the forum and have no idea where he stands on this, IF he also shares that genuine belief with his financial background, I can understand why he would not want to publicly reopen the wounds and create a new war between Pearce and EFL. 

I wasn't going to go down this path when creating a reply, I guess I was maybe predicting potential replies given my position and "relationship" at the time, probably should have just stayed out of it, came this far now to waste this post.

Like Pearce truth be told, I feel that drawing the line is probably the right thing to do and focus on the here and now which when you look at the table is a fantastic position with the opportunity today to strengthen.

[Oldben]

I didn't write these questions, that said, I'd like an answer to each of these:

Could you share your long-term vision for Derby County, particularly how you plan to balance immediate competitive success with sustainable growth and development of the club?

How important is the youth academy to the club's strategy, and what steps are being taken to ensure Derby County continues to develop and integrate local talents into the first team?

In what ways do you believe Derby County can enhance its engagement with the local community and fans to build a stronger, more inclusive club culture?

With players like Louie Sibley, Joe Wildsmith, and others set to leave as free agents this summer, how is the club planning to manage this transition? What strategies are in place for retaining key talents or finding suitable replacements to ensure the team remains competitive?

Can you discuss the club's current efforts and future plans to support and develop the women's football team at Derby County? How does the club envision promoting gender equality within the sport and leveraging the growing interest in women's football?

Edited February 10 by Oldben
Changed content

[Ghost of Clough]

9 minutes ago, David said:

Not sure which side requested this interview, Pearce or Radio Derby, or even the reasons behind it.

It does not take an hour to say I'm legally bound to not discuss anything that the fans would like to know, and that could be with a number of parties be it Mel Morris, the EFL, David Clowes, Quantuma etc. This will be completely normal within businesses. Frustrating from our side, yet you have to understand that we will never be privy to the "real inside story".

It will, I imagine, be a repeat from the fans forum which will only reignite the debate of whether or not he should be at the club, is that really necessary at this stage of the season?

Forgive me if this discussion is still taking place on other platforms and Pearce/Radio Derby felt it was important to respond, attempt again to draw a line and move on. Which on this forum regardless of which side of the fence you sit on over his current employment status, would appear many have as I haven't seen his name popping up at all. 

Even the transfer window the focus was more if anything on David Clowes, not the CEO that will have been doing the deals.

With regards to the apology for that period which some are looking for, you could put a case forward that either he feels the club did nothing wrong, retrospective rule changes show this and does not want to reopen a war with the EFL when we now have a positive relationship. Or an apology would show weakness, and fuel the theory that he was nothing more than a yes man to Mel Morris.

I guess it will be something we all pick which to believe and roll with it as it's unlikely any, anytime soon at least, we will have any definitive answers or apologies.

Saying this, I will still watch as when the CEO of your club talks, I think we has fans should be respectful and listen to what he has to say even if he says nothing at all. 

For the record, it's no secret I had semi regular conversations with Mel Morris, some may think I'm sat on some juicy inside information and knew this was all coming, which I can hand on heart say I'm not and that famous "NDA meeting" was not full of the details people think were shared. 

Some of you will remember the shitshow I started on Twitter, that was a genuine belief that the NDA was there simply to cover any comments like Michael Jackson is a nonce for example which would obviously make the headlines once the press got hold of it.

Concerns over signing one were raised prior to the meeting and was subsequently told, would never happen again. At the time little did I know where the club was heading! 

To this day the meeting minutes which were to be signed off by the club have not been sent, if I'm honest I would have to go through old emails to try and locate them, which even if I could the NDA would still be in place between myself and the club and can't imagine a scenario where they will be signed off now, especially when it would appear Stephen Pearce is looking to draw that line in the sand.

I personally think from my own conversations that there was a genuine honest belief that the club had done no wrong, we just found a different method of accounting which the EFL rules did not at the time forbid. We were being targeted by the EFL due the public criticism over TV deals and other outside interference which was a personal battle rather than the club itself. Which you could look at the way other clubs have been punished recently and possibly say, yeah, we were a little hard done by compared to others right.

That was just the impression I got for what it's worth.

Any conversations I had were nothing more than how are you and thoughts on the EFL, which you can probably guess.

IF and I say IF as I have only spoken to Stephen Pearce once with regards to advertising on the forum and have no idea where he stands on this, IF he also shares that genuine belief with his financial background, I can understand why he would not want to publicly reopen the wounds and create a new war between Pearce and EFL. 

I wasn't going to go down this path when creating a reply, I guess I was maybe predicting potential replies given my position and "relationship" at the time, probably should have just stayed out of it, came this far now to waste this post.

Like Pearce truth be told, I feel that drawing the line is probably the right thing to do and focus on the here and now which when you look at the table is a fantastic position with the opportunity today to strengthen.

I wonder if it stemmed from this...

 

 

[Day]

5 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

I wonder if it stemmed from this...

 

 

Just shows how out the loop I am, not seen this. Given their position now on the Supporters Charter Group and popularity on Twitter/X, I can see why Radio Derby would have invited Stephen Pearce on.

Fair questions or not, I can also see now what would fill the other 58 minutes of the interview.

[Day]

Just gone to look, would appear they have held their hands up and got the timing wrong, which yeah, it is let's be honest. Fair play though. No doubt they will still get stick for it, something they will have to handle, with any supporters group and I'm sure Angie over at RamsTrust will tell you, it's something you will get regardless of what you do or don't do. There will never be a singular supporters group that fans will all feel are suitable to represent them. 

 

[angieram]

I think there are legitimate questions to be asked around various things, and there is a right way to do that. The next Supporters Charter Group meeting is in March and we've already asked RamsTrust members for questions to put forward, as we do every meeting,  and you always did too @David when you and @Boycie were there.

I don't think the kickback on every club decision is as strong on here as on X, which does seem to attract knee-jerk reactions. We debate both sides on here and you can usually see the middle ground winning out.

My take in recent months is that Stephen Pearce is open and approachable to questions, except on areas where his hands are tied due to legal restrictions. 

Many forum members were at the last Fans Forum, and he quickly closed down discussion on those areas, whilst answering all other questions.

Radio Derby haven't had the same access to date as we, the supporters, so I'm not surprised they've asked him for an interview.

Not in the know at all, but I'd expect the transfer window and finances to feature. Our detailed accounts are due out at the end of March, so maybe a heads up on how things are looking.

[Day]

3 minutes ago, angieram said:

I think there are legitimate questions to be asked around various things, and there is a right way to do that. The next Supporters Charter Group meeting is in March and we've already asked RamsTrust members for questions to put forward, as we do every meeting,  and you always did too @David when you and @Boycie were there.

I don't think the kickback on every club decision is as strong on here as on X, which does seem to attract knee-jerk reactions. We debate both sides on here and you can usually see the middle ground winning out.

My take in recent months is that Stephen Pearce is open and approachable to questions, except on areas where his hands are tied due to legal restrictions. 

Many forum members were at the last Fans Forum, and he quickly closed down discussion on those areas, whilst answering all other questions.

Radio Derby haven't had the same access to date as we, the supporters, so I'm not surprised they've asked him for an interview.

Not in the know at all, but I'd expect the transfer window and finances to feature. Our detailed accounts are due out at the end of March, so maybe a heads up on how things are looking.

They would have been better off saying look, the next SCG meeting is in March and these are the questions we are submitting and the reason for these is that.

Might have seen the same reaction, what do I know, no PR firm would hire me after my performance following the last meeting I attended!

It's just writing an Open Letter, from a prominent supporters group puts the club in a position where they need to respond at a time where they may not feel ready to communicate. 

Ultimately it looks like it worked as yeah, the transfer window, budgets and why no striker will probably be the basis of the interview. Transfer windows usually conclude with some kind of letter from the CEO/Owner when things may not have gone to plan which clearly they haven't.

Just don't really understand though why not wait, wait for the SCG which is intended to be the arena for the club to answer fans concerns. Had the next one been say summer on wards or not even scheduled, would get it.

Anyhow, as I say earlier, fair play to them for holding their hands up.

Reading the replies would suggest it's not just the timing but the sentiment, getting hammered for not representing individuals, which you will always get regardless.

There will be fans out there that would appreciate answers to their questions and the reason for so many fan groups is to capture the wider opinion. Which they are entitled to have one, as we all are.

 

[richinspain]

17 minutes ago, David said:

They would have been better off saying look, the next SCG meeting is in March and these are the questions we are submitting and the reason for these is that.

Might have seen the same reaction, what do I know, no PR firm would hire me after my performance following the last meeting I attended!

It's just writing an Open Letter, from a prominent supporters group puts the club in a position where they need to respond at a time where they may not feel ready to communicate. 

Ultimately it looks like it worked as yeah, the transfer window, budgets and why no striker will probably be the basis of the interview. Transfer windows usually conclude with some kind of letter from the CEO/Owner when things may not have gone to plan which clearly they haven't.

Just don't really understand though why not wait, wait for the SCG which is intended to be the arena for the club to answer fans concerns. Had the next one been say summer on wards or not even scheduled, would get it.

Anyhow, as I say earlier, fair play to them for holding their hands up.

Reading the replies would suggest it's not just the timing but the sentiment, getting hammered for not representing individuals, which you will always get regardless.

There will be fans out there that would appreciate answers to their questions and the reason for so many fan groups is to capture the wider opinion. Which they are entitled to have one, as we all are.

 

My guess (and it's probably rubbish) is that the club is perhaps trying to allay fans fears etc. before the SCG meeting so that the atmosphere is a little better at the start. If some go there with an agenda then it could all be a little heated at the start. Let everyone know beforehand that there are certain questions that can't be answered for legal reasons. Perhaps explain beforehand also what was achieved and what wasn't, and why, during the transfer window. Was it felt more important to retain certain players already on the books? Why was Bird's transfer handled as it was? Why didn't we bring in the striker that so many (all) felt was of upmost importance?

[Day]

3 minutes ago, richinspain said:

My guess (and it's probably rubbish) is that the club is perhaps trying to allay fans fears etc. before the SCG meeting so that the atmosphere is a little better at the start. If some go there with an agenda then it could all be a little heated at the start. Let everyone know beforehand that there are certain questions that can't be answered for legal reasons. Perhaps explain beforehand also what was achieved and what wasn't, and why, during the transfer window. Was it felt more important to retain certain players already on the books? Why was Bird's transfer handled as it was? Why didn't we bring in the striker that so many (all) felt was of upmost importance?

Possibly, although the answers to a couple of those or plainly obvious.

It was reported that Max Bird informed the club he was not going to sign a new contract at the club, expiring in the summer either way he was leaving in the summer. They opted to take the money now with a loan back as oppose to going through a tribunal. Makes sense. 

The striker, you can almost guarantee it will be a case of look, there was none available with the budget we had that Warne wanted. Clubs like to wait until the end of the window and that's where movements take place. 

We made offers for a couple (which we know to be Smith and Gregory) which we thought was more than fair, and won't be held to ransom, or we agreed a deal but was later pulled by the other club too late for us to do anything else.

It's not going to be a oh god, we did want a striker didn't we, we completely forgot to even look for one, silly us.

This can't be a oh my, didn't even think of that, we've all been fans of this club long enough and we're aware clubs don't even announce transfer fee figures anymore, so what kind of information can anyone seriously expect to get, the figures of wages offered, a list of names we tried for, telephone conversations why it never happened. 

Whatever happened happened, it's done, we can't change anything now, just got to get on with it and pray Collins stays fit.

[BathRam72]

5 hours ago, Blondest Goat said:

It's not what it takes to get out of this league.  Plymouth and Ipswich played decent football last season. 

At some point we're going to have to play decent football to achieve our long terms goals.  What's wrong with having a desire to see that football now?

I love how you only highlighted the bit you wanted which took my quote out of context. 

[Owen87ITK]

On 09/02/2024 at 23:37, ilkleyram said:

I think, but may be wrong, that this is the first time we’ve heard publicly from SP to any significant degree since September 2023 and the fans forum.  @Owen87ITK’s advice back then was to watch the whole forum on ramstv before commenting (he referred to twitter comments more specifically) but it’s probably relevant now given that Radio Derby are most interested in gaining a sizeable listening audience on Tuesday night. This will be well trailed.

But this clip does suggest that there were/are legal agreements in place as part of the sales process that limit what SP can say. If that is so - and we have no reason to disbelieve SP now even though @Owen87ITK said back in September that he had no knowledge of any NDAs in place - then we are never going to get any comment from SP about his time with Mel, and certainly nothing that amounts to an apology or description of his side of the story. Every answer he gives on the topic will be evasive. Perhaps he was at fault; perhaps he wasn’t. We’ll never truly know. 

SP is our CEO. We can like it or not individually or collectively but Clowes is the only one that can change it. 

The thing about some NDA’s is that you’re not allowed to even acknowledge they exist. So just because I’m not aware of them, doesn’t mean they aren’t there.

[bimmerman]

On 10/02/2024 at 12:39, David said:

a genuine belief that the NDA was there simply to cover any comments like Michael Jackson is a nonce

Well colour me surprised, you learn something new every day

I thought he was just a monkey f*****

[Tyler Durden]

4 hours ago, Owen87ITK said:

The thing about some NDA’s is that you’re not allowed to even acknowledge they exist. So just because I’m not aware of them, doesn’t mean they aren’t there.

Sounds very similar to forum members I have on ignore 

[Simmo’s left foot]

I would ask how competitive is a club living within its cashflow means can be, and is it possible to be both sustainable and top 6 competitive both in league one and the championship. Also his thoughts on player pay levels etc.

[Ghost of Clough]

39 minutes ago, Simmo’s left foot said:

I would ask how competitive is a club living within its cashflow means can be, and is it possible to be both sustainable and top 6 competitive both in league one and the championship. Also his thoughts on player pay levels etc.

Without making player sales, we would have to pretty much half our wage bill or make sacrifices elsewhere - academy, maintenance, etc.

Going sustainable in L1 without player sales would still give us a top half playing budget (just), but it would likely still be about £2m short of top 6.

Burton won promotion in 15/16 on a £3.6m wage bill (total club). Rotherham had wage bills ranging from £5.8m to £6.5m in Warne's promotion seasons.