Compensation

[CharlesThompson]

Following on from the very interesting views posted on the "Fenlon to Dundee Utd" thread, I thought I'd canvas for the views regarding what is fair compensation for Irish (LoI) players and managers moving across the water while in contract to LoI clubs.

From reading the other thread it would seem that there are a fair few posters on this board that would be happy for our clubs to take it up the arsé as it were and that in the instance of that 'deal' Bohs should have acceded to the 'bigger club' in Scotland and let Fenlon move for a fee which was reported to be half of what the request was for.

That however this is not my view at all. Down through the years a huge amount of players have moved across the Irish Sea for little or sweet f.a. leaving clubs over here without reasonable transfers. Not only that but recently enough a sell on clause for Kevin Doyle was 'bought out' for pittance just months before Doyle was sold on for €7m.

I think that Bohs were right to stick by there guns, notwithstanding Fenlons ambitions and that if Dundee United or any other clubs from the UK want our people in future then they can pay us what they're worth.

[Mark]

Someone said to me that there is more chance of Fenlon being a success at Dundee Utd than there is of the guy he was to replace has of success with Scotland. Dundee Utd know that and Bohs know that. So I agree with you that Bohs were right to stick by there guns.

[weecountyman]

The standard is, and should at least, be: value of contract (so if a manager is on €2,000 a month and has 8 months left it's €16,000). This should be the minimum. However a club should be allowed to factor in the cost of hiring a new manager and leave clauses in related to the managers performances (if he gets his new club into Europe then the club should get a proportion of the initial payment - say €20,000). Bohs were right to ask for a bigger amount, and many clubs want cash up front, but sometimes it's better to add in clauses that end up making more.

For players it's way more complicated, but a minimum must again be his contract, plus time served with club and a sell on clause.

[**FrOsTy**]

I agree with Charles Thompson. People are always going on about the league not improving at whatnot. The reason its not improving is because too many times our LOI clubs have been taking to the cleaners on players. Even in our instance with Daryl Murphy. He was sold as a player with big potential at what is pittence to Sunderland (100k) ok granted a nice sum for us but he's gone crap, hasn't played a lot yet now he's suddenly worth 1.5m?? Wheres the logic.

We should be aiming to keep these players in this country. All this fudge of ahh he's only playing in the LOI so he'll get spotted in England is dreadful. Clubs should take a stand and not let the players go anywhere. It's these massive egos that we have playing in our league that are ruining the league. Larger then life most of them seem to think they are who take our clubs for a ride.

The LOI clubs need to take a stand against the player and managers for that fact and offer them basic wages. I can gaurentee they won't be long about accepting them if all the clubs do it. And then when English/Scottish clubs come knocking set an asking price based on wages, years on contract, term at club, club importance. I mean Kevin Doyle cost 250K from Cork City and had one good season with Reading in the premiership. Now he's worth 10M? Wheres the justice in that?

To sum up this rant. Weldone Bohs and weldone Gerry Conway about time somebody stood up to these "BIGGER" club.

[Greenforever]

Weldone Bohs and weldone Gerry Conway about time somebody stood up to these "BIGGER" club.


And for Bohs sake I hope they dont end up with nothing, ie no compensation and no manager.


Personally I feel they should have taken the offer as they are not gong to get more and surely Fenlons postition at Bohs is untenable after he has made it so clear he doesnt want to be there,

Going back to the original question is there a standard method of calculating compensation and if so can anyone post a link or examples please.

[wexfordned]

And for Bohs sake I hope they dont end up with nothing, ie no compensation and no manager.


Personally I feel they should have taken the offer as they are not gong to get more and surely Fenlons postition at Bohs is untenable after he has made it so clear he doesnt want to be there,

Going back to the original question is there a standard method of calculating compensation and if so can anyone post a link or examples please.

Michael O'Neill should do his old club a favour & give them a call. Let them know its okay not to pay full amount on Nutsy's contract. Tell them Bohs should greatful to get an offer of 4%

[GM11]

should have taken the arm of them - he'll have as much success as he did with derry !

but i agree that clubs here r disrespected by UK clubs when it comes to transfers etc

PAT THE RAT !

[John83]

... Clubs should take a stand and not let the players go anywhere...
We had that once. It was called "slavery".

[osarusan]

but i agree that clubs here r disrespected by UK clubs when it comes to transfers etc

We're not disrespected by UK clubs at all. They, like any business, want to get a commodity for the best price possible. It's not their fault that the selling LOI club is generally in a financial black hole and has to sell to pay the bills / players. If the LOI club is financially healthy and doesn't need desperately cash in 5 minutes time, then they'll be able to get a better price. Either that or the LOI club are so inept at negotiation or putting a value on their own player that he leaves on the cheap.

[CSFShels]

Someone said to me that there is more chance of Fenlon being a success at Dundee Utd than there is of the guy he was to replace has of success with Scotland. Dundee Utd know that and Bohs know that. So I agree with you that Bohs were right to stick by there guns.
That has got to be the worst thought out logic I have ever seen.

[**FrOsTy**]

We had that once. It was called "slavery".

Now you just sound like Sept Blatter:D

[weecountyman]

Going back to the original question is there a standard method of calculating compensation and if so can anyone post a link or examples please.

There is no hard and fast rule outside of using the remaining contract as a guideline. However one thing always comes into play - how much you value the commodity. A good friend and former colleague of mine was working with a club in Germany. He told me that each time they had a bad run and goals weren't coming, he'd field a bunch of calls offering sure fire strikers without a contract. They never jumped at it but occasionally took a guy on trial and gave him a once over.

I do know that under tribunal rules, for a senior player who hasn't been developed by a certain club, there are a number of quantifiables brought in, including previous injuries, number of appearances per season, salary (new and old) and international status. The international status (if they've won caps etc - over the age of 21) is graded according to nations ranking, so that caps for Spain mean more than Bermuda and so on.

[Greenforever]

There is no hard and fast rule outside of using the remaining contract as a guideline. However one thing always comes into play - how much you value the commodity. A good friend and former colleague of mine was working with a club in Germany. He told me that each time they had a bad run and goals weren't coming, he'd field a bunch of calls offering sure fire strikers without a contract. They never jumped at it but occasionally took a guy on trial and gave him a once over.

I do know that under tribunal rules, for a senior player who hasn't been developed by a certain club, there are a number of quantifiables brought in, including previous injuries, number of appearances per season, salary (new and old) and international status. The international status (if they've won caps etc - over the age of 21) is graded according to nations ranking, so that caps for Spain mean more than Bermuda and so on.


There are guidlines for players all right, its for Managers I was enquiring about as per the thread.

[weecountyman]

There are guidlines for players all right, its for Managers I was enquiring about as per the thread.

Sorry :o

For managers it's normally length of contract and the possibility of prizemoney loss. Also the cost of having to search and hire a new man in. The money Bohs were looking for was par for the course. He was leaving a full-time contract on (I guess) good wages with a number of years left and with the prospect of European money. Bohs could at least look for his remaining salary, plus the guaranteed payment from UEFA (€80,000 I think) plus a performance related bonus for Pat in Scotland, or a friendly where they'd keep the receipts or a free training camp in Dundee. It'd all add up to around €300,000, on a paper estimate.

[Fr Damo]

Not sure it's a simple formula. I have no firm information but lets look at Owen Coyle going to Bolton. Think he had a year and a half to run so at 500k a year that works out at about 750K left on the contract. Survival in the EPL is estimated to be worth about 10m yet Bolton paid Burnley £2m in compo, from press reports.

Personally I think one years salary for the manger plus the lead in time for settling as a manager (difficult to quantify) is sufficeint and if Fenlon was on 100k I would say 100 - 150k was a fair amount or put simply about 1.5 times salary inc potental bonuses.

[marinobohs]

We're not disrespected by UK clubs at all. They, like any business, want to get a commodity for the best price possible. It's not their fault that the selling LOI club is generally in a financial black hole and has to sell to pay the bills / players. If the LOI club is financially healthy and doesn't need desperately cash in 5 minutes time, then they'll be able to get a better price. Either that or the LOI club are so inept at negotiation or putting a value on their own player that he leaves on the cheap.
Very good assessment and pretty much what happened, Dundee Utd sought to get Fenlon at as low a cost as possible (simple business practice) and Bohs valued him higher than DU were willing to pay. Hence no agreement and a breakdown in talks.
Personally I think Bohs handled themselves well (unless it comes back to bite them on the ass). And apart from a few deluded shams I think most LOI fans will be glad to see Bohs stand their ground as some of the DU behaviour was less than professional.
The attitude of some in the media here was disappointing, almost encouraging Nutsey to break contract to go to DU - would love to see them suggesting an English Prem manager should "walk" if wanted by Madrid/ Barca or some similar "bigger club". Rubbish article by Eamon Dummy in the STAR pretty much sums this approach up.
Incidentially I would hope that if DU end up approaching MON that Shams would show similar steel in getting as much as possible for his services.

[WoodquayBoy]

I agree, about time a club stood up for itself and, by extension, the League and said 'no, offer us a decent package or go away'

[bluewhitearmy]

There is a difference between 'standing your ground' and what Bohs did though. Long and short of it, Dundee United decided they couldn't even negotiate with the representitives of Bohs who had played hardball with a manager who at the time was out of contract. Only a stroke in paying Fenlon in full on the sly kept him there (for now). So you are now stuck with a manager who doesn't want to be there at a cost of €100,000 and questions at just the wrong time about where this amount owed was in the accounts.

Right approach, comically executed.

I can assure you that if DU approach Rovers for MON, it will be dealt with in the exact opposite manner to Gerry Conway's insistance on having it out in the press.

So you have spoken to representatives of Dundee and to Pat Fenlon to find this out? Bohs didn't get offered what they wanted so turned it down fair play to them why should they accept what they don't find acceptable.

[Acornvilla]

Because the amount they held out for here was entirely at odds with the situation they found themselves in and has left Nutsy clearly fuming about their approcach.

Like I say, Bohs were right to try and get the best deal for their club, but if they wanted to keep Fenlon they should have simply said 'not for sale' rather than string DU and Fenlon along with a pointless negotiation. That was amateur night from Comical Gerry.
tere is no player or manager in the world that is 'not for sale' every man has their price bohs simply stated as much.

[Bohs11]

Yes, and then asked for more for an out of contract manager than Scotland paid for Levine.

If Nutsy was such an asset, why did they only decide to pay him what he was owed in bonuses when they realised he was leaving?

I repeat, right stance, comical execution.

Nutsy verbally agreed to a deferal, thus the essential terms of his contract were changed and a new contract came into being.

Nutsy sought legal advise and was told the same thing.

But dont let the facts get in the way of you attacking Bohs :rolleyes:

[osarusan]

My understanding of this is that Bohs owed Fenlon money, and he could have considered this breach of contract.

In order to be in a position to negotiate compensation with Dundee United, Bohs paid or agreed to pay Fenlon, or came to some mutually satisfactory deal. The outcome of this was that Bohs were now in a position to negotiate with Dundee without fear of Fenlon just walking away.

If this is what happened, I think Bohs did well out of the situation, regardless of how it played out in the press.

[gufct]

All the pontifacting by some bohs fan about the Fenlon situation is laughable when they let one of the best young players in the league leave for €100k just a couple of weeks beforehand.

[marinobohs]

All the pontifacting by some bohs fan about the Fenlon situation is laughable when they let one of the best young players in the league leave for €100k just a couple of weeks beforehand.

Who ? if it is Deegan you are talking about then I suggest you read the view of a certain sham contributor who insisted we got nothing for him ;) The fact is it is very difficult to stop anyone, player or manager going if they wish to. Dundee Utd don't appear to have been all that interested in Nutsey given the negotiating "style" they adopted. Fortunately for all parties concerned Coventry operated differently.

[marinobohs]

There is a difference between 'standing your ground' and what Bohs did though. Long and short of it, Dundee United decided they couldn't even negotiate with the representitives of Bohs who had played hardball with a manager who at the time was out of contract. Only a stroke in paying Fenlon in full on the sly kept him there (for now). So you are now stuck with a manager who doesn't want to be there at a cost of €100,000 and questions at just the wrong time about where this amount owed was in the accounts.

Right approach, comically executed.

I can assure you that if DU approach Rovers for MON, it will be dealt with in the exact opposite manner to Gerry Conway's insistance on having it out in the press.

Yep, because MON will have his cases already packed ! By the way Nutsey took legal advice which confirmed he was not out of contract but keep saying it anyway if it helps get over your embarassment at the rubbish you posted last week :D By the way still laughing ???????

[CharlesThompson]

Because the amount they held out for here was entirely at odds with the situation they found themselves in and has left Nutsy clearly fuming about their approcach.

Like I say, Bohs were right to try and get the best deal for their club, but if they wanted to keep Fenlon they should have simply said 'not for sale' rather than string DU and Fenlon along with a pointless negotiation. That was amateur night from Comical Gerry.

What are you talking about?! Are those blinkers hardwired onto your head? Why would Bohs say 'not for sale' when we would have released him for his worth figure? Not only did we state this from the outset, but we even told them (and everybody else stupidly!!!) how much we would let him go for!

Your blinkered, anti-Bohs position is actually comical at this stage.

[marinobohs]

LOL.

Serious question. Are you happy with how Gerry Conway handled this?
The only issue I would have with what happened is that Bohs did not insist on agereeing a fee before allowing Nutsey talk to Dundee Utd. This may have arisen as some at the club believed (true or not) that he already had talked to DU prior to the request for permission arriving in Dalymount. other than that happy with the way it was handled (incidentially most of the negotiating was not done by Gerry Conway)

[Acornvilla]

But the point I'm making is that if Bohs had this money lying around, why not just pay the man. It shouldn't require a club sniffing around Fenlon for them to do what they should have in the first place, or put another way, they should have protected their asset properly.

Same old Bohs, doing things half arsed. See also property dealings. Or their accounts.
the money could have come from the deegan sale

[marinobohs]

the money could have come from the deegan sale

The fee we didn't get ? :D:D:D

[OneRedArmy]

Its pointless looking only at what the "other" side can afford to pay. Any transaction involves a seller and a buyer, and the financial position of the seller is as important, if not more so, than that of the buyer.

Asking clubs to stand their ground is no different to appealing for them to be run better. Its the same core problem. If most clubs cashflow management wasn't akin to that of a junkie searching for enough cash for the next hit, then they wouldn't be "forced" into accepting sums that seem low by comparison. The other side of the transaction knows how desperate LoI clubs are for cash, ergo the price will never be what it could be if clubs had year on year financial security.

So, until LoI clubs are run better, we'll continue to be shafted.

[Acornvilla]

Yeah, Bohs paid him in full at that precise time just for the craic.....
give it a rest for christ sake.....

[marinobohs]

Yeah, Bohs paid him in full at that precise time just for the craic.....

Answered on other thread :D

[Quadruple1928]

All the pontifacting by some bohs fan about the Fenlon situation is laughable when they let one of the best young players in the league leave for €100k just a couple of weeks beforehand.


100k for an out of contract player,:rolleyes:tell me again, how much did Galway get for Greene?? Now that's laughable.

[CharlesThompson]

Its a legitimate point. If Bohs are so adament that their verbal contract with Nutsy to defer monies owed was airtight, why pay him in full at that point?

Because he asked? You're trawling the bottom BYCtwd.

[osarusan]

Because you don't want to answer the question?
Whether or not it is legitimate, I think it's unimportant.

I'm assuming that any deal done regarding money owed would have needed his consent - as in Bohs couldn't just dump the money in his account and tell him that there is no longer a breach of contract.

If Fenlon had been in a position to walk away from Bohs, and had really wanted to do so, why didn't he? Why did he allow Bohs to wreck his move to a bigger club?

Fenlon obviously wanted to leave, and many posters on here were of the opinion he would leave for nothing. If this were true, then Bohs have managed to move from that situation to a situation where they either keep Fenlon or get what they consider a good price for him (personally I don't think any club is going to offer 200 grand for him).

[marinobohs]

I'm assuming that any deal done regarding money owed would have needed his consent - as in Bohs couldn't just dump the money in his account and tell him that there is no longer a breach of contract.

If Fenlon had been in a position to walk away from Bohs, and had really wanted to do so, why didn't he? Why did he allow Bohs to wreck his move to a bigger club?
.

I suspect that there was an element of appeasement in Bohs paying the outstanding bonuses, helping to mitigate blocking his move to DU. As you rightly pointed out IF (as some shams posted) he could leave on a free he presumably would have. All this is speculation without knowing the terms of his contract but evidence (as shown) was that there was no breach of contract. Don't expect shams to accept this and really pointless discussion at this stage. Show over, time to move on ;)

[pineapple stu]

If Fenlon had been in a position to walk away from Bohs, and had really wanted to do so, why didn't he? Why did he allow Bohs to wreck his move to a bigger club?
Presumably because Bohs paid up what he was owed, which meant that there then wasn't any breach of contract.

I don't think that Fenlon, legally, could refuse to accept the money he was owed in order to maintain the breach of contract. Just doesn't sound right.

[osarusan]

Presumably because Bohs paid up what he was owed, which meant that there then wasn't any breach of contract.

I don't think that Fenlon, legally, could refuse to accept the money he was owed in order to maintain the breach of contract. Just doesn't sound right.
You believe that if Fenlon was owed X (for an unknown amount of time), thus constituting a breach of contract, but Bohs put that X into his account, his contract is now valid again, as if no non-payments had never happened?

I doubt that myself. If somebody says they'll pay you 5,000 a week, but doesn't pay you at all for 20 weeks, then pays you 100,000, are you saying that after receiving the 100,000, an employee would have no grounds for saying contract had been breached?

[RoversHead]

thats exactly what I am saying.

now, where did Bohs get this money and how was the debt accounted for in their accounts?Meeting gets postponed and magic pencil gets sharpend, Id expect it all to rosey this time next week.Rob Peter to pay Paul I mean Pat.Simple really:D

[CharlesThompson]

Why don't you just come out and say it byctwd? That you hate Bohs so much that if you could, you'd relegate us yourself. Your posturing here is nothing short of judge and jury stuff. The FACT is that Bohs are not in breach of whatever the details of Fenlons contract says because of whatever is written in it and/or because of whatever verbal agreement was undertaken to the satisfaction of both Pat Fenlon and Bohemian FC. You are basically chipping away at a cast iron curtain with a toothpick. Secondly I don't know where Bohs got the money from in order to put it into Pat Fenlons account any more than you do. I choose to believe that it is accounted for and came from a legitimate source. You obviously don't - but I'd suggest that that is just wishful thinnking on your part.

osasarun- I don't know the details of Pat Fenlons contract or whatever verbal agreement took place between himself and the club, I'd guess the vast majority of Bohs members are in the same boat . I'd respectfully suggest you know no more than I or the other members do. But if somebody says they'll pay somebody else 5k per week and doesn't pay them for 20 weeks by their agreement, then pony's up with 100k, my guess is that with the agreed arrangement a contract has not been breached. I think the key word is 'agreement' here. Something which so many of you seem to want to choose to ignore or speculate otherwise.

[osarusan]

Something which so many of you seem to want to choose to ignore or speculate otherwise.If you're posting about me, you'd want to read my posts again.

I'm agreeing with you that without agreement (from Fenlon in this case) simply paying the money owed doesn't automatically mean there are no longer grounds for a breach in contract.

The logical conclusion of this assumption (and it may be wrong) is that Bohs could only have removed grounds for breach of contract with Fenlon's consent, and therefore claims that he was screwed by Bohs are wrong.

Either way, Bohs have ended up in a situation where they either keep their manager or get what they think he's worth. Apart from the embarrassment of ending up owing him money in the first place, I think the situation has been handled well enough.

[CharlesThompson]

If you're posting about me, you'd want to read my posts again.

I'm agreeing with you that without agreement (from Fenlon in this case) simply paying the money owed doesn't automatically mean there are no longer grounds for a breach in contract.

The logical conclusion of this assumption (and it may be wrong) is that Bohs could only have removed grounds for breach of contract with Fenlon's consent, and therefore claims that he was screwed by Bohs are wrong.

Either way, Bohs have ended up in a situation where they either keep their manager or get what they think he's worth. Apart from the embarrassment of ending up owing him money in the first place, I think the situation has been handled well enough.

No I didn't mean to come across that that comment was particularly aimed at you. As you've read there are quite a few here that are practically baying for blood and as far as Bohs are concerned (not really that concerned with them to be honest), we as a club are damned if we do and we're damned if we don't.

By the way, I would hazard a guess that there are a large amount of contracts that owe a certain amount to bonuses are in exactly the same boat where this principle is concerned. While it is not nice for it to be aired in public the way this has I would say that there are several other managers and possibly players that have similar agreements in place with their clubs - and I don't know this to be a fact, however it is not inconceivable that Bohs - were due to receive money (from the transfer of Gary Deegan to Coventry) and asked the contracted party (Pat Fenlon in this case) to hold on until this money came through. The money comes in and all's back to square one.

[shellshocked]

This thread had turned into a bit of a Bohs "bash".... Personally, I'm gutted to see players/managers leaving these shores and their Clubs not being rewarded... Bohs didnt get their valuation, then fair play to you for standing up for yourselves... Think you could have got more for Deegan tho'...? If Babel is valued at £9 Million, he had to be worth £20 Million

[marinobohs]

You believe that if Fenlon was owed X (for an unknown amount of time), thus constituting a breach of contract, but Bohs put that X into his account, his contract is now valid again, as if no non-payments had never happened?

I doubt that myself. If somebody says they'll pay you 5,000 a week, but doesn't pay you at all for 20 weeks, then pays you 100,000, are you saying that after receiving the 100,000, an employee would have no grounds for saying contract had been breached?

Would depend very much on how specific the contract was and did it contain "execution" dates (as in pay X on Y date etc). Nobody can determine this without access to the actual contract, (except Shams, because they know EVERYTHING about Bohs ;) ).
There is no proof that Nutsey even sought to exit his contract so even if such a possibility existed it might not have been activated.
Most of the posts on here was speculation by posters with an anti bohs agenda and nothing more.
In your example the "weekly" aspect/clause of the contract would probobly be the breach wheras if the contract said pay you 100,000 (5,000 X 20 weeks) it would probobly be OK to pay in a lump sum. Breach of contract cases require the claimant to identify the specific part(s) of the contract breached so without knowing the specific wording/terms it is all guess work.

[shantykelly]

yeah, but contracts are also usually very specific (unless its a derry contract, then thy're as open as a field). i'ld hazard the guess that bohs did technically breach the contract, but that agreement was reached with fenlon to alter the payment structure prior to dundee expressing an interest. the fact that he didn't try to walk away or contest it in court is indicative that agreement was reached.

and ye know what? fair play to bohs. bout time someone took the assets that this league has seriously and prevented an anal raping from other leagues.

[marinobohs]

yeah, but contracts are also usually very specific (unless its a derry contract, then thy're as open as a field). i'ld hazard the guess that bohs did technically breach the contract, but that agreement was reached with fenlon to alter the payment structure prior to dundee expressing an interest. the fact that he didn't try to walk away or contest it in court is indicative that agreement was reached.

and ye know what? fair play to bohs. bout time someone took the assets that this league has seriously and prevented an anal raping from other leagues.

Interestingly, enough someone on Bohs website posted about Dundee Utd turning down a 75 K bid from Blackpool for one of their players. The Chairman is quoted as saying "he won't be leaving on the cheap"

No doubt the media will be giving out about DU depriving him of his "dream" move :rolleyes: and suggesting he should seek ways to break his contract.

[SkStu]

But the media weren't suggesting Nutsy should break his contract. They were suggesting he should take advantage of the fact it had been broken by Bohs and move up a level.

would that have been a good thing in your opinion?

You talk like it would have been though i hope that thats just so you could have laughed at Bohs.

[marinobohs]

You are almost there.

But the media weren't suggesting Nutsy should break his contract. They were suggesting he should take advantage of the fact it had been broken by Bohs and move up a level.

If the defender in question was owed money, maybe he would have walked for nothing... Who knows?

Still spouting the same old distorted rubbish ? prove the "fact" or move on.

[SkStu]

For me, yes. I don't buy into this peace and love we are all in it together LoI nonsense. If Nutsy had, or still, leaves Bohs, it would have significantly weakened you for next season and given you a harsh lesson about your business model.

thanks. Its simply an anti-Bohs thing. Thought as much.

if you took those goggles off for a second, you'd see that this has turned out to be a positive for the league overall, Shamrock Rovers included.

You're so bitter. lol.

[marinobohs]

He was owed money. Not in dispute. FAI rules clearly state that money due voids contracts. Not in dispute.

He got paid that money in the middle of negotiations. Not in dispute. Bohs valuation was higher than DU were willing to pay. Not in dispute. He was unable to move for free as a result of that payment. Appears to be in dispute.

What other "FACTS!" do you wan't.

contract was void OR contract was not void ? Nice try, but there is a difference between money owed and breach of contract, as shown by "appears to be in dispute". If the first two "facts" were true there would be no dispute. Have I explained it clearly enough for you ?

[marinobohs]

Of course it is, when did I pretend otherwise?



I disagree. I don't follow a league. Bohs being even weaker than they were last year is a good thing for Rovers.



I'm actually not. I see my clubs main rivals in disarray as being a very, very good thing and actively encourage it. I'm actually quite happy you are stoically ignoring the imminent collapse of your club and doing nothing about it.

I think you just proved his point :D:D:D