Jump to content
IGNORED

Jack Marriott signs for Derby (Merged)

Charlie BCFC

By Charlie BCFC
in Football Chat

Recommended Posts

havanatopia

havanatopia

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, swanker said:

Looks like Peterborough ain’t getting what they thought they would. I hope Marriot is a flop and Derby get relegated!

While I would have no issue with that I have a feeling Marriott will step up seamlessly and have the Rams purring along nicely in fairly short fashion.

We all know one man does not make a team but signing JM may just tilt the balance for them into a top 2 spot. There will be some rivals out to crock him such is the desperation to reach the poisoned sorry i mean promised land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davefevs

Davefevs

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Port Said Red said:

I am not looking to get involved in this little  spat but I think you would have to admit that 49 in 216  in English leagues is far less impressive and although I am not as harsh on the Scots Prem as some, the first of those seasons he was with Rangers they were playing in League 1 which I don't think is very good at all. 

I looked at his minutes played, and it equates to 133 games worth of 90 minutes.  A lot of his early career was minutes off the bench.  The joys of reading to much into Wikipedia’s basic numbers / stats.

 

As for Marriott, i would like to think we were interested (he could be a very good player), but when MacAnthony thought he could lay his hands on Reid’s money, we strung them along whilst we worked the Eisa deal right under their noses.  It might mean Derby have got him cheaper than we hoped, but most if not all of us seem really happy with Eisa.  Marriott’s wage demands may also have been a factor, perhaps asking more and more.  Eisa’s wages are likely to be relatively low, and I hope if he does hit the ground running we reward him so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rudolf Hucker

Rudolf Hucker

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I looked at his minutes played, and it equates to 133 games worth of 90 minutes.  A lot of his early career was minutes off the bench.  The joys of reading to much into Wikipedia’s basic numbers / stats.

 

As for Marriott, i would like to think we were interested (he could be a very good player), but when MacAnthony thought he could lay his hands on Reid’s money, we strung them along whilst we worked the Eisa deal right under their noses.  It might mean Derby have got him cheaper than we hoped, but most if not all of us seem really happy with Eisa.  Marriott’s wage demands may also have been a factor, perhaps asking more and more.  Eisa’s wages are likely to be relatively low, and I hope if he does hit the ground running we reward him so.

It also means that there is a Mo Eisa shaped gap on the Peterborough conveyor belt, which is nice. Perhaps that gap will result in them having a poor season. Shame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Major Isewater

Major Isewater

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, Sniper said:

If true then keep everything crossed that Marriott proves to be a complete flop:fingerscrossed:, if he bags 25 and fires them to promotion we're going to be feeling a bit fed up. Maybe we met there valuation, but Marriott didn't want to move to us? Maybe we didn't meet there valuation and sort better value elsewhere in Eisa. Who knows :dunno:

Let's just hope he has the same impact as Matty Taylor has had in moving up a division.

Eisa, on the other hand , the next Ian Wright .

:yes:

 

( I like Matty Taylor but goals have been hard to come by . This year Matty , make it so . )

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesBCFC

JamesBCFC

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, downendcity said:

The financial rules in question are the EFL rules - not UEFA/FIFA - and the latest updated set of rules, that include points deductions as one of the penalties, were agreed by the premier league as well. On what basis would a club legally dispute a points deduction? They knew the rules when they started the season and where they sit within the financial parameters. The club submit their own set of projected accounts, so it's not as though the EFL foist their won, made if figures on the club at the eleventh hour. A breach of the rules will be a matter of fact - in the same way as fielding an illegible player ( A Scottish club has just been docked 2 points for doing just that). I'm making an educated guess, that the EFL will not make a 20 point deduction for a club breaching financial limited by £15, so the penalty applied will be commensurate with the level of overspend. That being the case, how would a club make a legal case for disputing whatever penal;ty is applied? 

Clubs might well club together and tell the EFL to do one , but which clubs would that be? I doubt it would be the clubs that failed to achieve promotion because one club "cheated" their way to the premier league and deprived that option to a club that was playing withins the rules. If Villa should breach the rules this season  which is a real possibility - do you think we will be on their side, if they are sitting in the last play off position and we are a couple of points behind?

A club, or clubs might go, to the EFL and argue that they don't agree with the financial rules and the EFL might then tell them to find another league to play in, if they are not prepared to accept the same set of rules as the other 91 clubs.

No one is deprived the gravy train by the application of these rules, as 3 teams will still be promoted from the championship to the premier league, exactly as happens every other season. It's just that there is no bloody point in 23 clubs competing for promotion on one basis, of the other club says "stuff that" we are going to knock them all into a cocked hat by ignoring those rules and doing it any way we want, even of that means over spending beyond what we can afford.

At the end of the day, the big clubs will just get richer and more powerful and trample the lesser clubs out of existence, unless there is some sort of financial framework to prevent it, but also to avoid what has almost happened at Villa, i.e. reckless spending causing a club to go bust. Many of us were around in '82 and know how close we came to not having a club and would not want it to happen to us again, or for the fans of any other club to go through the same experience.

If the rules mean any thing , then the EFL has to ensure they are enforced notwithstanding the comeback from a penalised club. If not then there is a real danger of what happened at AC Milan - this was UEFA financial rules. Having been penalised AC Milan demanded that UEFA release details of the accounts of PSG and other clubs to show how and why they had not fallen foul of the same penalties. UEFA were forced to drop the action against AC Milan. That is why the EFL must enforce the rules against any club breaching, otherwise it will create a precedent, which the lawyers of avery other club will look to exploit in future cases.

 

 

 

Presumably if a club told the EFL to do one, the would end up looking for a new league to play in.

Not sure a drop to the Conference is worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesBCFC

JamesBCFC

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, core321 said:

Didn't fancy working LJ clearly.

Yeah, Marriott obviously turned us down because Johnson is here, despite the fact we never matched Peterboroughs asking price.

It was definitely LJ, and us not matching Peterboroughs price has absolutely nothing to do with him not joining us.

 

I can also exclusively reveal that that is the same reason why Ronaldo joined Juventus instead of us, and Fred went to Manchester United instead of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Monkeh

Monkeh

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

I don't think anyone is particularly bothered? The general feeling seems to be that his value for money wasn't as good as Eisa and if he didn't really want to come here then so be it.

with a high transfer fee comes added pressure to perform, I'd prefer Mo myself because of his background and where he came from will drive him to succeed, much like Albert (although he wasn't from a war torn country)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
core321

core321

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

I don't think anyone is particularly bothered? The general feeling seems to be that his value for money wasn't as good as Eisa and if he didn't really want to come here then so be it.

Think he didn't want to come. simple. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ska Junkie

Ska Junkie

Posted
Posted

I've just watched his interview on joining Derby and to be fair to the lad, he comes across well, almost humble. It's not his fault that Peterborough play their games in public. He's now a Derby player and I wish the lad well, apart from against us obviously. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Leveller

Leveller

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Lord Northski said:

Forgive me but this is a bit random. But I’ve only been to Derby twice, both on business and I am yet to see anyone wearing a suit. 

I've never been to Derby at all. Is there any point, if you don't have to? Does it have any highlights?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr Popodopolous

Mr Popodopolous

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, downendcity said:

The financial rules in question are the EFL rules - not UEFA/FIFA - and the latest updated set of rules, that include points deductions as one of the penalties, were agreed by the premier league as well. On what basis would a club legally dispute a points deduction? They knew the rules when they started the season and where they sit within the financial parameters. The club submit their own set of projected accounts, so it's not as though the EFL foist their won, made if figures on the club at the eleventh hour. A breach of the rules will be a matter of fact - in the same way as fielding an illegible player ( A Scottish club has just been docked 2 points for doing just that). I'm making an educated guess, that the EFL will not make a 20 point deduction for a club breaching financial limited by £15, so the penalty applied will be commensurate with the level of overspend. That being the case, how would a club make a legal case for disputing whatever penal;ty is applied? 

Clubs might well club together and tell the EFL to do one , but which clubs would that be? I doubt it would be the clubs that failed to achieve promotion because one club "cheated" their way to the premier league and deprived that option to a club that was playing withins the rules. If Villa should breach the rules this season  which is a real possibility - do you think we will be on their side, if they are sitting in the last play off position and we are a couple of points behind?

A club, or clubs might go, to the EFL and argue that they don't agree with the financial rules and the EFL might then tell them to find another league to play in, if they are not prepared to accept the same set of rules as the other 91 clubs.

No one is deprived the gravy train by the application of these rules, as 3 teams will still be promoted from the championship to the premier league, exactly as happens every other season. It's just that there is no bloody point in 23 clubs competing for promotion on one basis, of the other club says "stuff that" we are going to knock them all into a cocked hat by ignoring those rules and doing it any way we want, even of that means over spending beyond what we can afford.

At the end of the day, the big clubs will just get richer and more powerful and trample the lesser clubs out of existence, unless there is some sort of financial framework to prevent it, but also to avoid what has almost happened at Villa, i.e. reckless spending causing a club to go bust. Many of us were around in '82 and know how close we came to not having a club and would not want it to happen to us again, or for the fans of any other club to go through the same experience.

If the rules mean any thing , then the EFL has to ensure they are enforced notwithstanding the comeback from a penalised club. If not then there is a real danger of what happened at AC Milan - this was UEFA financial rules. Having been penalised AC Milan demanded that UEFA release details of the accounts of PSG and other clubs to show how and why they had not fallen foul of the same penalties. UEFA were forced to drop the action against AC Milan. That is why the EFL must enforce the rules against any club breaching, otherwise it will create a precedent, which the lawyers of avery other club will look to exploit in future cases.

 

 

 

Excellent post.

FWIW, if Vydra is leaving will Marriott be able to replace him adequately- at least this season?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...