Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

4 games from winning title, last 32 of Europa, Patterson and Bassey decide to go to a party. If they weren’t caught they’d have came into training with rest of squad on Monday/ Tuesday and then if it

It was last night & the rest of the squad are fine 

That's the post of a man who's just been furloughed by AVON .

Posted Images

10 minutes ago, Dennis Reynolds said:

That spelling of significantly is outrageous BTW.

You have also thrown out a claim of "utter pish" based on little other than a want to win an argument on the internet, it's not a valid claim you have made AT ALL.... if you think football clubs would get away with selectively sacking some based on a criteria but not others you are moon howling here.  The first part of your post is a bit like me saying Rangers play in white and purple stripes just they do OK, I have said it so it's fucking true, despite actual things saying the complete opposite. 

The second part is pretty self explanatory TBH. 

Apologies for the fat fingers typo. 

Clubs own players, if you think that they are obliged to treat all the same for fear of constructive dismissal claims more fool you.

Wtf are you talking about colours of strips for? 😄😄😄

25 minutes ago, Dennis Reynolds said:

Well aye, that literally would happen if sacking started to be applied as punishment for breeches to some but not others. 

Clearly some  players should be treated less and more favorably than others, literally said that on the previous page but that applies by way of "look Nathan don't do that again" and "Jordan, we are looking for a new club for you, not the Covid thing, but just.. you know." - not Jordan you are fucking sacked because the club have draconian Covid measures in place but your no Nathan....because that literally would be a loophole to be exploited and lead to dismissal cases... that is the point the person you have quoted is making... its' a point as obvious as the blue in the sky. 

 

It's "breaches" mate🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Apologies for the fat fingers typo. 

Clubs own players, if you think that they are obliged to treat all the same for fear of constructive dismissal claims more fool you.

Wtf are you talking about colours of strips for? 😄😄😄

It's "breaches" mate🙂

Is what it is, thought it was funny TBH. 

They own them but they still have to stand by a form of employment law in terms of how they treat players, you are implying a club could in theory parade a player around the park with a broom up his arse "just because" they "own them" without any form of fallout which they patently can't.

I am talking about colors of strips to show how redundant saying "that's pure pish" is in relation to a point when evidence shows otherwise... 

Its @TamCoopz shitty breeches 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dennis Reynolds said:

Is what it is, thought it was funny TBH. 

They own them but they still have to stand by a form of employment law in terms of how they treat players, you are implying a club could in theory parade a player around the park with a broom up his arse "just because" they "own them" without any form of fallout which they patently can't.

I am talking about colors of strips to show how redundant saying "that's pure pish" is in relation to a point when evidence shows otherwise... 

Its @TamCoopz shitty breeches 

Don’t quote me again you freak 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, esquire8 said:

 

Maybe being picky (cause I hate the cunt) but Zungu just seems so disingenuous. Patterson makes his a bit personal talking about being a fan from birth and Bassey actually says the words "I'm sorry" as opposed to "I'd like to apologize".

Still, thank fuck we caught this before training. Lucky boys who hopefully realise now how lucky they are.

esquire8 likes this
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dennis Reynolds said:

Is what it is, thought it was funny TBH. 

They own them but they still have to stand by a form of employment law in terms of how they treat players, you are implying a club could in theory parade a player around the park with a broom up his arse "just because" they "own them" without any form of fallout which they patently can't.

I am talking about colors of strips to show how redundant saying "that's pure pish" is in relation to a point when evidence shows otherwise... 

Its @TamCoopz shitty breeches 

How the fuck am I implying anything of the sort as the bit in bold?

It's abundantly clear football differs from standard employment in that the contracts give clubs more ownership and possession rights than in a standard employee/er relationship. I'm in agreement there are still employment laws to be adhered to. But in decades of football how many cases of clubs being taken to court and losing for wrongful dismissal are there?  And of them how many are wom when the sacking is for gross misconduct? And is there any precedent whatsoever of a player suing and winning because they were rightly sacked but another player later wasn't in similar circumstances? Surely there will be precedents / examples..... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

How the fuck am I implying anything of the sort as the bit in bold?

It's abundantly clear football differs from standard employment in that the contracts give clubs more ownership and possession rights than in a standard employee/er relationship. I'm in agreement there are still employment laws to be adhered to. But in decades of football how many cases of clubs being taken to court and losing for wrongful dismissal are there?  And of them how many are wom when the sacking is for gross misconduct? And is there any precedent whatsoever of a player suing and winning because they were rightly sacked but another player later wasn't in similar circumstances? Surely there will be precedents / examples..... 

You have just said they own them though aye, so if they own them why the fuck not do that eh, bash on do what the fuck they want. 

Elements differ - parts, dismissal of one for one reason but not another isn't holding up when a player and his lawyer comes back.. talk of previous precedents is a bit redundant in the context of Covid and what is being spoken about here, the reason players aren't sacked often.... to square this all back is because teams tend to try and avoid sacking players as they are typically assets which was the original point made in all of this... 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Malkytfp1 said:

Maybe being picky (cause I hate the cunt) but Zungu just seems so disingenuous. Patterson makes his a bit personal talking about being a fan from birth and Bassey actually says the words "I'm sorry" as opposed to "I'd like to apologize".

Still, thank fuck we caught this before training. Lucky boys who hopefully realise now how lucky they are.

Zungu sounds like he knows he is gone. Patterson and Basseh sound very apologetic and gutted. Will make them or break them at their ages.

graeme_4, surfsup2 and Malkytfp1 like this
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, esquire8 said:

Zungu sounds like he knows he is gone. Patterson and Basseh sound very apologetic and gutted. Will make them or break them at their ages.

Aye that's what I'm taking from these too. Still think Patterson and Bassey especially if given the chance can learn something from this. They can spit the dummy and sulk or learn and put in twice the effort at the training ground etc. Probably a good kick up the arse for both them.

surfsup2 likes this
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dennis Reynolds said:

You have just said they own them though aye, so if they own them why the fuck not do that eh, bash on do what the fuck they want. 

Elements differ - parts, dismissal of one for one reason but not another isn't holding up when a player and his lawyer comes back.. talk of previous precedents is a bit redundant in the context of Covid and what is being spoken about here, the reason players aren't sacked often.... to square this all back is because teams tend to try and avoid sacking players as they are typically assets which was the original point made in all of this... 

 

I've never remotely implied sticking brushes up arses is OK. But they are as good as owned given they can't just jump ship to a new club the way employees can do with companies in the non football world.

Can you clarify exactly how this would work in terms of employment law. Which legislation, ie wrongful dismissal, constructive dismissal etc. And then direct me to the part which allows claims to be won because of how someone else was subsequently dealt with in similar circumstances. Please don't waffle, a link to the exact part of legislation or a quote from that legislation is fine. Thanks.

Malkytfp1 likes this
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nameless Ghoul said:

They shouldn't have bothered apologising if that's their effort. Sound like they have a gun to their head fs

I can see why people are saying that, and I'm sure some PR guys at the club have at the very least, looked over their statements and made amendments before airing them but in Patterson's case certainly, I think it's nerves. This wee guy woulda been online and read some of the backlash after the incidents. I'm no making excuses for them btw and I wouldn't be against no seeing them in our colours again but I do feel they will have a good degree of remorse.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

I've never remotely implied sticking brushes up arses is OK. But they are as good as owned given they can't just jump ship to a new club the way employees can do with companies in the non football world.

Can you clarify exactly how this would work in terms of employment law. Which legislation, ie wrongful dismissal, constructive dismissal etc. And then direct me to the part which allows claims to be won because of how someone else was subsequently dealt with in similar circumstances. Please don't waffle, a link to the exact part of legislation or a quote from that legislation is fine. Thanks.

But they could though eh, because they own them so apparently can just do what the fuck they want (they can’t) 

Im not sitting reading through legislation fuck sake..the well paid lawyer a player would find would do that. The notion you think wording couldn’t find to work around that precedent is brilliant patter. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Dennis Reynolds said:

But they could though eh, because they own them so apparently can just do what the fuck they want (they can’t) 

Im not sitting reading through legislation fuck sake..the well paid lawyer a player would find would do that. The notion you think wording couldn’t find to work around that precedent is brilliant patter. 

They retain their services ya daftie. You're the only one talking about abusive and illegal conduct towards them 😂

So that's precedents (not just covid related) and legislation I've asked for and you can't/ won't provide either. Really, it's not a valid or compelling  argument AT ALL 😂

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

They retain their services ya daftie. You're the only one talking about abusive and illegal conduct towards them 😂

So that's precedents (not just covid related) and legislation I've asked for and you can't/ won't provide either. Really, it's not a valid or compelling  argument AT ALL 😂

you did say “clubs own players” true story, it’s legit a few posts back..so you’re implying they can do as they wish (they can’t)
 

I can’t be fucked looking nah, it’s for geeks, got better things to do. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Dennis Reynolds said:

you did say “clubs own players” true story, it’s legit a few posts back..so you’re implying they can do as they wish (they can’t)
 

I can’t be fucked looking nah, it’s for geeks, got better things to do. 

In the context of clubs buying players they do own them. I'd have thought even the most stupid person is aware this relates to football, not getting them washing your motor, home schooling your weans, doing your weekly shop or even sweeping your driveway with a brush up their arse. I was clearly wrong as the most stupid person isn't aware.

You're talking shite. You don't know which employment legislation would cover it, you don't provide it because you can't not because you won't look, and you can't find any relevant precedents. You've not got better to do given you're still debating the point. Unfortunately for you it looks like you're bullshitting more than normal if you don't back up your argument when asked for defining proof. Especially if you can (😂😂😂😂 aye right).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Upcoming Events

    • 18 April 2021 14:00 Until 16:00
      0  
      Rangers v celtic
      Ibrox Stadium
      Scottish Cup

×
×
  • Create New...