Bohs in financial trouble - FAI Licencing called into question again? [Archive] - Page 16

Charlie Darwin

13/01/2011, 6:06 PM

I'll try and take off my Rovers hat here because as much as at makes me happy to see our nearest rivals suffer, I don't particularly want to see them or any other clubs go under.

First, I think fans need to realise that footballers aren't like them. They don't buy into the club in the same way. Most of them grow up supporting English sides without much of a thought for the domestic league. They don't pay for matchday tickets and any loyalty to the club is mainly due to the players and coaches they know personally rather than any affiliation with the fans/badge. To expect them to act in the club's best interests when it's their own financial security at stake is frankly ridiculous - Bohs fans might make financial sacrifices to help save the club but you can't expect the players to make the same or deeper cuts.

Second, there is a huge issue of fairness here. Can anybody say whether this matter would have reached the courts were it not for the fact Paddy Madden (and perhaps others) is still being paid his full wage? This is pure common sense from the club - they need to keep paying him to get a necessary transfer fee - but it is naked self-interest and is putting the club's interests before its contracted employees. It's completely unethical, but it's business, and it's the environment that professional footballers have to operate in. To expect them to maintain some form of loyalty to a club that has shown none to them is frankly ridiculous.

As far as being self-employed goes, I think Pineapple Stu summed it up: footballers aren't contractors, they are fixed-term employees which entitles them by law to receive a set sum of money at regular intervals like any other employed person. Speaking as a self-employed person, I know how hard it can be to get money out of people (not getting paid at all is unfortunately part of the job), but in the players' case I can fully understand them going the legal route to get their due. They've upheld their end of the contract and the club is obliged to honour it in a timely fashion. Any other business that had gone 6 weeks without paying its employees would be the subject of some sort of action, especially a business that had decided to pick and choose which employees to pay based on how valuable they were to the company.

SkStu

13/01/2011, 6:07 PM

I dont blame them for not wanting their names in the public domain but the matter was open. .

Jaysis, of course the matter was in the open. But thats not what Spud was referring to.

As for the other players, maybe they have managed to secure other means of paying their bills and are not under so much pressure, or maybe they decided to let the other 2 pave the way. It was obviously a last resort for the 2 lads who chose this route coz they are unlikely to put themselves in this position, and possibly ruin their chances of playing in Ireland again, if they had no choice.

Yeah, speculate away. Sure we can all blindly speculate and come to any conclusion. It would appear neither player had any intention of playing in Ireland again anyway MagicMe. Did you look at the link in my post?

Magicme

13/01/2011, 6:16 PM

Sorry for not realising that you were refering specifically to Spuds comments.

Yes I did read that link and despite signing for 2 years and taking on the further roles in his new club, that is by no means a guarantee that he will not ever want to play in Ireland again. Ad as for me "blindly speculating" and coming "to any conclusion" are you not doing the same when you say that the other players didnt see it as a last resort. Alas, being a "discussion forum" this is the nature of the beast.

pineapple stu

13/01/2011, 6:16 PM

huh? maybe because they wouldnt allow their names to be released. That is not being open.
Were the players unknown to the club though? Did they just write an anonymous letter to the club demanding payment? How would the club know it was from the players and not a prank? How would they know who to pay? Or were they just to wire the money to a Cayman Islands account? I'd say the club knew who was sueing them. The fans and the media didn't, but again, that's irrelevant and doesn't mean the players weren't being open.

SkStu

13/01/2011, 6:23 PM

Stu - nice attempt but actively requesting to have your name withheld from the public domain is actively not being open.

MagicMe - i am not speculating on the other 8 players. It is fact that they have not used a winding up order to get paid.

CD - good post overall but heres one for you -
They've upheld their end of the contract
Shelley didnt show up for training yesterday or today. Has he now breached his contract? Should we fine him?

Does nobody else find Shelleys statement today coupled with the Australian media report seriously suspect?

pineapple stu

13/01/2011, 6:37 PM

As I said, not telling the fans is utterly irrelevant. They were probably open with the club; that's all that matters.

Shelley isn't being paid; his contract is void. And how do you think you'll fine him anyway?!

Do you actually think things through, or do you exist in some kind of cloud of self-righteous indignation?

Charlie Darwin

13/01/2011, 6:37 PM

Shelley didnt show up for training yesterday or today. Has he now breached his contract? Should we fine him?
Nope. The club breached his contract by not paying him so he has no obligation to show up. A fine is just a wage deduction so it would be a frankly ridiculous threat to make given the circumstances.

Shelley's Australian story is bizarre but reading back it does whack of something weird. I'm not sure how big the newspaper that reported it is but the fact they didn't seek confirmation from the club itself is very odd.

Dodge

13/01/2011, 6:40 PM

CD - good post overall but heres one for you -
Shelley didnt show up for training yesterday or today. Has he now breached his contract? Should we fine him?
He had an option of a year's contract, he wrote to Bohs seeking to exercise that option and Bohs haven't replied. if Bohs don't request him to turn up for trraining, and don't inform him of training venues/ties etc, then he's not the one breaking any thing

Does nobody else find Shelleys statement today coupled with the Australian media report seriously suspect?
Suspicious how? He has a deal lined up and doesn't want Bohs to use it as another excuse not ot pay him the money he's owed. Seems normal enough for me

SkStu

13/01/2011, 6:58 PM

As I said, not telling the fans is utterly irrelevant. They were probably open with the club; that's all that matters.

you need to put "to me" at the end of each of those sentences.

Shelley isn't being paid; his contract is void. And how do you think you'll fine him anyway?!

it was just a question i threw out there. Relax.

Do you actually think things through, or do you exist in some kind of cloud of self-righteous indignation?

as i said, it was just a question i was thowing around my head. Relax and stop taking everything so seriously. And, given that your comment was a bit OTT and aggro, we can consider that as your satisfactory retribution for me stating that you hadnt a shred of decency.

Suspicious how?

when you figure it out, get back to me.

danthesaint

13/01/2011, 7:04 PM

thing about bohs on newstalk shortly apparently.

White Horse

13/01/2011, 7:11 PM

Shelley and Gray named on Newstalk.

pineapple stu

13/01/2011, 7:13 PM

you need to put "to me" at the end of each of those sentences.
Sorry; I should have said it doesn't concern you. It's a matter purely between the players and the club. That you personally - or the fans as a group - weren't informed who was behind the action doesn't mean the players weren't open about things.

Dodge

13/01/2011, 7:50 PM

when you figure it out, get back to me.

Fine then, UI''ll be clearer. i see nothing suspicious in it at all. If you can't point out where you can see it, then thats fine too

placid casual

13/01/2011, 8:21 PM

havent read the full thread but kinda have the gist of it anyways..
If the courts case goes ahead , are we looking at 3/4 weeks before a decision is made , or does anyone know if it'll be resolved sooner ?

Question for bohs fans - i had a quick peek on your messageboard there and I'm a tiny bit surprised at the naivety of a good few of the posters there. You cant honestly blame all your current woes on the greedyness of players and the ar$e fallin outta the property market can you . can you?

Can only hope the members section has the clued up individuals.

SkStu

13/01/2011, 8:41 PM

havent read the full thread but kinda have the gist of it anyways..
If the courts case goes ahead , are we looking at 3/4 weeks before a decision is made , or does anyone know if it'll be resolved sooner ?

it could very well be resolved sooner, if a settlement with the players is reached. At most it will be 3ish weeks.

Question for bohs fans - i had a quick peek on your messageboard there and I'm a tiny bit surprised at the naivety of a good few of the posters there. You cant honestly blame all your current woes on the greedyness of players and the ar$e fallin outta the property market can you . can you?

There are a fraction of posters, PC, that blame property market/players. The rest of us blame Rovers. ;)

But seriously, the vast majority blame the previous (mostly) and current board for letting the club get to this stage and lying to the members. In fairness, there are very few who blame the property market and fewer again that blame the players.

Spudulika

13/01/2011, 9:23 PM

but if more players did it, Spud, there wouldnt be many clubs left. And really it should only be done as a very last resort in my opinion. And these players werent open about it. How and ever, i dont want to keep repeating myself and i get that there is another argument on the side of the players.

However, as soon as this mess sorts itself out, and i believe it will, and if we survive the rest of the messes ahead i am really hopeful that we will become the standard bearers you talk about. There is no other viable option for any club.

I am sure the players and club knew, but for sake of professionalism it was kept private, for both sides sakes. The club and players were both proper and correct in that. However it again boils down to clubs not overstretching. I don't believe that if every club went under this year, that the renovated forms won't do the same next year.

I do believe Bohs can take a stride forward, they have the facilities and support, they have good young players (I'd seen their 20's play this year a couple of times) so there is hope. Though if the media make a circus out of it the whole situation is a loss.

sundance kid

13/01/2011, 9:35 PM

There are a fraction of posters, PC, that blame property market/players. The rest of us blame Rovers. ;)

But seriously, the vast majority blame the previous (mostly) and current board for letting the club get to this stage and lying to the members. In fairness, there are very few who blame the property market and fewer again that blame the players.

Don't forget the oracle of everything, mr2IC, who was 100% sure that shelley had a rovers contract in his hands, and that the rvers chairman was secretly pulling all the strings in his attempts to kill Bohs. Next time you're over there is there any chance you could find out what his next crackpot theory is and post it here.

legendz

13/01/2011, 9:43 PM

From the small pieces of news I've read, I can't see how Boh's or Drog's fans can give any money in full confidence to their respective clubs.
On Boh's, it's a terrible position for any club to be in but seems to be all of their own doing. No players given a contract should be put in a position where they are not being paid. The FAI should be tougher on clubs like this. Derry and Cork got off lightly last season being facilitated in Division One. I'm tempted to say clubs should be demoted, or in Cork's situation installed, in the A Championship but then the furture of that league is not even secure.

SkStu

13/01/2011, 11:12 PM

Don't forget the oracle of everything, mr2IC, who was 100% sure that shelley had a rovers contract in his hands, and that the rvers chairman was secretly pulling all the strings in his attempts to kill Bohs. Next time you're over there is there any chance you could find out what his next crackpot theory is and post it here.

2IC will be chuffed! :) He does love a good conspiracy theory - and not just Bohs ones!

Hairy Bowsie

14/01/2011, 12:16 AM

Ill leave my contributions to this thread at that.

Probably best, because it's hard to put into words how ridiculous you are coming across.

I can't remember a time before in which i've agreed with Pinapple Stu but he's been fairly spot on in everything he's said so far.

SkStu

14/01/2011, 12:24 AM

good man. The Hairy Bowsie seal of disapproval. It guarantees im right.

Hairy Bowsie

14/01/2011, 12:28 AM

good man. The Hairy Bowsie seal of disapproval. It guarantees im right.

Well you know what? Time will tell. Won't be long before i'm ****ing on what remains of your club :)

SkStu

14/01/2011, 12:36 AM

Alright. Fair enough. Whatever floats your boat.

If it was two players doing the same to your own club over a few grand (that they will get anyway) just so they can speed up their move to Oz i think you and most would have a different opinion on how much sympathy these guys deserve.

Hairy Bowsie

14/01/2011, 12:42 AM

The way i look at it is, i put myself in their position. If i done a months work for my current employers and they told me, i could only have a weeks pay, i'd be pretty ****ed off. You saying you'd be any different?

blue til i die

14/01/2011, 12:51 AM

Dodge

14/01/2011, 12:53 AM

If it was two players doing the same to your own club over a few grand (that they will get anyway) just so they can speed up their move to Oz i think you and most would have a different opinion on how much sympathy these guys deserve.

At least you admit you're being irrational.

Bohs fans are now complaining about a fellah they want off the payroll looking for a job?

SkStu

14/01/2011, 1:00 AM

Well thats not really the way it is. They were paid in full for the work they did. They are owed wages for the off season. And i think as part of the bigger picture they are looking for a settlement for the portion of their contract they havent yet fulfilled. We cant honour the contract for next season so are trying to buy them out. They have been assured they will receive their money when the club has it and has it for all.

Putting myself in their position - i 'd want my wages for work that i had done and if my employer told me that he couldnt fulfil the rest of my contract but could pay me some compensation, id focus on getting the maximum compensation i could. But yes, id definitely feel aggrieved.

Lookit, Shelley has said he wants to see out his contract with Bohs. Yet he has accepted a position with a club in Australia. But he has lied to the public through his solicitor and said that he didnt accept that job. Why? To squeeze as much out of Bohs as he can as quicly as he can in spite of the assurances he was given. As a Bohs fan, tell me why i have to like that or be silent about it? Its fckin shady.

My other issue is with McGuinness - the players rep. Instead of encouraging these actions he should have done his job and obtained a settlement for the group. By doing this either Shelly/Grey stand to gain more than the group or the group stands to gain more than the two. I dont think he encouraged any Cork or Drogheda players to issue winding up orders. Why stick the knife into Bohs? Anyway, im getting off track.

SkStu

14/01/2011, 1:03 AM

At least you admit you're being irrational.

Bohs fans are now complaining about a fellah they want off the payroll looking for a job?

Seriously Dodge. Start figuring this stuff out.

Complaining about him lying through his teeth so he can continue to fck over the club - not complaining about him looking for a job. FFS.

SkStu

14/01/2011, 1:06 AM

Red Devils confirm Shelley talks

"Extratime can confirm that the signing has not yet been completed, but that Shelley is in advanced talks with the Australians, and has been for about a month now."

http://www.extratime.ie/newsdesk/articles/4758/

LOL...

However the quotes used in the Australian media came from a press release issued from the Australian side, claiming that he had signed with the club.

The club has confirmed the quotes were correct, but that they should not have been released.

They have also told Extratime that the press release was issued prematurely and that it was a 'mistake' to say that Shelley had signed a two year deal.

yeah poor ol Brian.

Dodge

14/01/2011, 1:11 AM

Seriously Dodge. Start figuring this stuff out.

Complaining about him lying through his teeth so he can continue to fck over the club - not complaining about him looking for a job. FFS.

His new job is completely irrelevant to the money he is owed. The high court deals with facts, not "ah sure he doesn't really need it" rubbish

As I said before all the waffling from the PFAI and Bohs is just that. The facs are clear, Bohs owe him money, and he's looking to get it.

Bohs pay him, this ends now.

micls

14/01/2011, 3:34 AM

anyone got an answer on the Cork question? I genuinely dont know if the players who werent paid ever issued winding up notice..
None of the players with us did. They were incredibly loyal, more than anyone expected. In fact it got to the stage where the fans were behind the players and would have supported them fully in any action they took. In some people's eyes they let themselves take too much crap. But the loyalty shown is something I never imagined would happen and I wouldnt expect in most situations.

I seem to recall that Gareth Farrelly lobbed one in at some stage?
He did, but that was for his compensation. we had cancelled his contract and he got compensation in court. Coughlan never paid so Farrelly went to wind up. He wasn't a player at the time though.

huh? maybe because they wouldnt allow their names to be released. That is not being open. And that is what Spudulika seemed to be referring to.

Seriously? Have you read your messageboard? You wonder why they didn't go public and open themselves up to the threats and abuse in person? The club knew who they were, that was enough.

pineapple stu

14/01/2011, 8:56 AM

I can't remember a time before in which i've agreed with Pinapple Stu but he's been fairly spot on in everything he's said so far.
It's funny how people usually only disagree with me when I'm talking about their club. When I'm talking about another club, I get this. Reminds me of the post John83 had in which he had people decrying me as a witch for speaking ill of their clubs. :)

osarusan

14/01/2011, 8:58 AM

Dodge

14/01/2011, 9:07 AM

As people have said, once you pay these players, the story is over. You have the money to pay them - you admit that they'll eventually get it anyway. Why not just pay them now and save yourselves the hassle and bad publicity?

Not to mention legal fees. Thats why I think Bohs don't have the money.

Which probably throws up more worries (as in has all the findraising money gone already?)

AFAIK the money owed is on existing wages. Yet Bohs are still trying to negotiate a pay off for future wages? What confidence would any of the players hvae that the pay off will be paid on time when outstanding wages aren't being paid?

D.24saint

14/01/2011, 10:12 AM

I read yesterday that bohs have nearly reached their 300k fundraising target but most of the amount was in the form of pledges, if bohs seriously believe that all even half of that 300k will ever materialize into the form of real money then they are living in the land of OZ thats why maybe they are letting this go through the courts cause they dont have the money.It would be a huge risk to play around with the high court if they could actually afford to pay the players off.

marinobohs

14/01/2011, 12:10 PM

SkStu, I've a lot of time for you as a poster on here, but I have to say I can't see where you're coming from at all.

The players are owed money, they're legally entitled to that money. Bohs said they didn't have it, and asked the players to wait until a certain date. That date has passed, Bohs now have the money but are refusing to pay. I think 100% percent of the blame in this lies with Bohs, and the players in question feel like they have beeen left with no other option but to play hardball and go to court (It's not hard to understand why they might not put too much faith in Bohs' request that they just wait longer for the money).

As people have said, once you pay these players, the story is over. You have the money to pay them - you admit that they'll eventually get it anyway. Why not just pay them now and save yourselves the hassle and bad publicity?

All very well if it were remotely true
- The two players (Shelley and Gray) set the date not the club. the club indicated it hoped to be in a position to pay all players by the end of January (this, of course remains to be seen)
- the club currently does not have the money to pay off all the players involved - fact. unless you are suggesting they pay off these two to the exclusion of the others your point does not stack up.

- the players are not just seeking wages due but a buyout payment for next season. As they are likely to be unable to comply with the commitments of their contract they have no entitlement to any payoff.

other than that you are 100% correct :rolleyes:

pineapple stu

14/01/2011, 12:14 PM

- The two players (Shelley and Gray) set the date not the club. the club indicated it hoped to be in a position to pay all players by the end of January (this, of course remains to be seen)
The two players had to set the date because the club consistently didn't meet the agreed date (as in, no wages since 30 November)

- the club currently does not have the money to pay off all the players involved - fact. unless you are suggesting they pay off these two to the exclusion of the others your point does not stack up.
So how's Paddy Madden being paid? Or do you coincidentally have coming each week only an amount equal to his wages? What about the amount received from the FAI? Or the E300k the club say they've raised? (The possibility here is that what the club are reporting as moneys raised is actually only pledges promised, which as the US Government will tell you are two completely different things).

- the players are not just seeking wages due but a buyout payment for next season.
I would doubt you could sue for something like that.

Longfordian

14/01/2011, 12:28 PM

You can't sue for money you're not entitled to yet. Unless Bohs unilaterally terminated their contracts then in that case it would be compensation based on future earnings.

Dodge

14/01/2011, 12:34 PM

Spot on. They are suing only for WAGES owed, not for any mythical severance package.

Jicked

14/01/2011, 12:55 PM

also Stu, the players didn't really 'set the date'. Statute did, once it was clear they weren't getting paid and had to go down this route there's a statutory requirement for Bohs to have settled with the creditors within 21 days.

pineapple stu

14/01/2011, 1:07 PM

I suppose you could argue the players set the date by initiating proceedings, but yeah, statute chipped in as well alright.

So, ironically, marinobohs, it seems that "other than that you are 100% correct"

Charlie Darwin

14/01/2011, 1:15 PM

You can't sue for money you're not entitled to yet. Unless Bohs unilaterally terminated their contracts then in that case it would be compensation based on future earnings.
It depends on whether the option of an extension on Shelley's contract was triggerable by the player or the club. If it required Bohs' consent then Shelley wouldn't be entitled to a claim, but if it was him who could trigger the option then the club would need to make him a reasonable offer of settlement (and the fact the club didn't release him would be circumstantial evidence that they wanted him to stay another year).

pineapple stu

14/01/2011, 1:20 PM

Intro to a post on the Bohs forum about McGuinness -

Did anyone hear this ***** on the radio this morning.Now i know he is the players rep and has to do the best for them but he blatantly lied this morning stuck the boot into the club and basically encouraged bohs supporters to turn on the board.
Followed by a raft of agreement (not one post challenging this).

Imagine turning on the board. What a ridiculous concept. Sure what have they done to get the club into their current position? It's all the players' fault; everyone knows that.

D.24saint

14/01/2011, 1:31 PM

If the shoe was on the other foot and them jokers on the Bohs forum weren't paid by their jobs they would be whinging and moaning to uncle joe on liveline, Its sad to see fans of clubs being so naive , players want their money thats all they played for Bohs in the first place for they dont care about the clubs history they care about feeding their family's and paying their morgage shocking demands!!

Ezeikial

14/01/2011, 1:45 PM

All very well if it were remotely true
- The two players (Shelley and Gray) set the date not the club. the club indicated it hoped to be in a position to pay all players by the end of January (this, of course remains to be seen)

The Bohs position in December was

The Dalymount Park club said they have been in negotiation with players since last month on offers to buy-out existing contracts and added that players were told that it would likely be mid-January 2011 when funds would be in place to back the contract offers.
http://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/2010/1221/bohemians.html

The players were obviously sceptical about this mind-January 'promise', and apparently with good reason

btid1

14/01/2011, 1:48 PM

Intro to a post on the Bohs forum about McGuinness -

Followed by a raft of agreement (not one post challenging this).

Imagine turning on the board. What a ridiculous concept. Sure what have they done to get the club into their current position? It's all the players' fault; everyone knows that.

You enjoying yourself Stu?Trawling websites of other clubs looking for material to slag them off about.You must have a hell of a lot of time on your hands!

Get a girlfriend or something pal!

Dodge

14/01/2011, 1:56 PM

At least you've moved on from "Bohs are in the right"

btid1

14/01/2011, 2:02 PM

At least you've moved on from "Bohs are in the right"

Never claimed that.Just questioned the MO of the two boys as compared to the other 8.

Anyway sorry to interrupt your enjoyment of Bohs plight.

Carry on!

osarusan

14/01/2011, 2:14 PM

All very well if it were remotely true
- The two players (Shelley and Gray) set the date not the club. the club indicated it hoped to be in a position to pay all players by the end of January (this, of course remains to be seen)
- the club currently does not have the money to pay off all the players involved - fact. unless you are suggesting they pay off these two to the exclusion of the others your point does not stack up.

- the players are not just seeking wages due but a buyout payment for next season. As they are likely to be unable to comply with the commitments of their contract they have no entitlement to any payoff.

other than that you are 100% correct :rolleyes:

That's fair enough, I've been wrong in my post.

But as pointed out, the players can't sue over a buyout of their contract, only for wages owed. That, apparently, is around 4 grand (each, or altogether, I don't know). Are you really telling me Bohs don't have that much to pay these two players and make the winding-up order go away?