Jump to content

them


MisterC

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, esquire8 said:

Wouldn't be the first time a star (was) felt at the tarriers.....

Then soppy for seconds. What a window...

 

Weir, Tebilly, Schidt. Was almost at thing in the 90s.

 

Starfelt, Soppy, Fanni. New CB partnership could be a lasting memory to thumbs final contribution.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NorthernLights said:

Hopefully not as good as our Swedish centre back that we spent a similar amount of money on at the age of 26

Difference is that these days we are much more professional than they are. Due diligence is done prior to any potential signing being targeted. They appear to have a scatter gun approach - which has not worked out well for them in the recent past.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GersInCanada said:

Difference is that these days we are much more professional than they are. Due diligence is done prior to any potential signing being targeted. They appear to have a scatter gun approach - which has not worked out well for them in the recent past.

I agree. They know that they need players but aren’t sure how many and everything got delayed after Howe turned them down so they’re panicking. Few of the signings could be good but it’s a big ask to get that team ready

Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, STEPPS BOY said:

PR machine in overdrive.

The Record and Sun has them spending about £12 million today.

Let's be honest, they are going to have to spend at least double that to try get anywhere near us this season. Barely enough 1st team players to make an 11 and 3/4/5 wanting out the door. Probably why they are still wanting £20m for Ajer and £30m for Eduoard. Laughable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine that scum deals are structured along the lines of so much per year of the contract. No way they are paying full whack up front but that is how it will be spun. Possibly explains why they have had so many knock backs.

Selling club - the price is 4M

scum - we will give you 1M per year

Selling club - hangs up the phone

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, stevemac said:

Stolen off twitter, so probably a load of shite but

Screenshot_20210714-105206_Twitter.jpg

At least part of this is rubbish. The '14 day cooling off period' doesn't apply to  employment contracts. Only goods and services purchased in specific circumstances.  He may well be getting sacked but, unless they can prove he breached his contract (which you imagine he'd challenge legally given the value of it), they're not getting out of it that easily/cheaply. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, rangersross said:

At least part of this is rubbish. The '14 day cooling off period' doesn't apply to  employment contracts. Only goods and services purchased in specific circumstances.  He may well be getting sacked but, unless they can prove he breached his contract (which you imagine he'd challenge legally given the value of it), they're not getting out of it that easily/cheaply. 

Aye i assumed as much, but surely bringing the club into disrepute is a sackable offence in itself? may not be enough evidence for a criminal conviction with his noncing but surely enough for the club to say he has abused his position of trust as a professional representative of the club?

Link to post
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, GersInCanada said:

I imagine that scum deals are structured along the lines of so much per year of the contract. No way they are paying full whack up front but that is how it will be spun. Possibly explains why they have had so many knock backs.

Selling club - the price is 4M

scum - we will give you 1M per year

Selling club - hangs up the phone

Think most deals are structured like that now, even our recent ones like Hagi, Roofe, Itten etc. 

Their issue is they'll offer well under the players valuation then end up paying the valuation in a desperate attempt to get players in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KingKirk said:

You asked do they need wingers no they don't. 

They've got a manager who is apparently big on wingers and the only two they have are Forrest who missed most of last season and Johnston who is a Dundee Utd level player. How do they not?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stevemac said:

Aye i assumed as much, but surely bringing the club into disrepute is a sackable offence in itself? may not be enough evidence for a criminal conviction with his noncing but surely enough for the club to say he has abused his position of trust as a professional representative of the club?

Could be, mate, but I'm always amazed by how hard it is to sack someone, especially someone with the resources to challenge the decision in court. Football contracts are obviously a unique category too (e.g. you can't cancel someone's contract because they've performed poorly - no matter for how long). 'Bringing the club into disrepute' is a bit slippy legally unless the player in question has been charged / found guilty of a crime. That's probably why Sunderland didn't sack Adam Johnson until he was found guilty in court and why Derby ultimately had to pay £2.3M to Keogh. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, rangersross said:

Could be, mate, but I'm always amazed by how hard it is to sack someone, especially someone with the resources to challenge the decision in court. Football contracts are obviously a unique category too (e.g. you can't cancel someone's contract because they've performed poorly - no matter for how long). 'Bringing the club into disrepute' is a bit slippy legally unless the player in question has been charged / found guilty of a crime. That's probably why Sunderland didn't sack Adam Johnson until he was found guilty in court and why Derby ultimately had to pay £2.3M to Keogh. 

 

Just had a look at the Adam Johnson Wiki - accused in March 2015, playing until being sacked when his court case came up in February 2016 and he pleaded guilty. Whilst it's a different offence (thus far), with the Thumb only being on a year-long deal and the apparent backlog of cases up here given Covid, they could be stuck with paying his wages for the remainder of his contract or paying him off (presumably still in full) to try to distance themselves from any court case further down the line.

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, rangersross said:

Could be, mate, but I'm always amazed by how hard it is to sack someone, especially someone with the resources to challenge the decision in court. Football contracts are obviously a unique category too (e.g. you can't cancel someone's contract because they've performed poorly - no matter for how long). 'Bringing the club into disrepute' is a bit slippy legally unless the player in question has been charged / found guilty of a crime. That's probably why Sunderland didn't sack Adam Johnson until he was found guilty in court and why Derby ultimately had to pay £2.3M to Keogh. 

 

Think some clubs have 'Morality Clauses' in contracts.

Did Chelsea not get shot of Mutu years back for being a mad wee coke head? Think they just ripped up his contract and even sued him for his transfer fee.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 6superbarry6 said:

Somebody must be away if they’re spending this kind of cash, Eduoard missed training yesterday with “a minor injury” so hopefully he’s away 

If even remotely true, I genuinely don't see how a club could think he's worth anything close to that (even ignoring the fact that he could sign a pre-contract in six months).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Upcoming Events

    • 30 March 2024 15:00 Until 17:00
      0  
      Rangers v Hibernian
      Ibrox Stadium
      Scottish Premiership
×
×
  • Create New...