They would have avoided the winding-up order and all the bad publicity it brings, which surely has a knock on effect on sponsorship.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinobohs
They would have avoided the winding-up order and all the bad publicity it brings, which surely has a knock on effect on sponsorship.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinobohs
Without overall agreement with players (as I understand it) we will not be in a position to apply for a licence to play in prem or First Division next season. Sponsorship/bad publicity was not high on list of considerations to be honest.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
But they're not mutually exclusive. Pay the two lads what they're owed and the winding-up order goes away, and work on the overall settlement at the same time.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinobohs
why in gods name should the players wish to carry on a contact that they had no hope of getting paid for. there is only one party at fault in this dispute and thats the one who failed to meet its obligations. I wish more players would go down this route and finally stop this mismanagement madness.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinobohs
if i get p1ssy, it is because i despair at the lack of objectivity from otherwise rational thinking posters on this thread. To have to read a lot of unsubstantiated rubbish presented as fact tends to do my nut in as people hop on to these "facts" and believe nothing else in the same manner as they accuse the Bohs members of having done in the past. To have to try and put these factusations (i like it) constantly into context or clarification (as much as i can) is frustrating and upsetting and angering. As is the fine mess that we have got ourselves into as a club which is 100% our fault.Quote:
Originally Posted by micls
Anyway, ill try and remove the p1ssiness and sarcasm from my posts in future. By the way, the real questions that i am asking myself this morning are not about the intent and merits of winding up orders but instead are very much along the lines of those asked by Orielabu.
They ARE hoping to get paid in respect of 2011 (as part of overall deal) - that is the core issue, and please explain how they could honour tyerms of 2011 contract IF they are in Australia ?Quote:
Originally Posted by passerrby
As have said before on several occassions nobody denies Bohs reponsibility but the two players concerned are not quite innocent either.
Their employers have made it clear that there's no work for them in their current job. They're entirely within their rights to find work elsewhere. There's no guilt attached in doing that.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinobohs
Is this the best argument you have? You realise that if they were going to be paid the 2011 salary in full, they wouldn't be moving?Quote:
Originally Posted by marinobohs
pathetic stuff to try and make the fact they're looking to get a new job as a reason not to pay them.
I think the point is that Shelley is looking to be included in the settlement for not having his contract next season, even though he's already found another job (which, according to Bohs fans, he's tried to hush up). I have no idea how his having a new job would affect the settlement he's looking for / entitled to. I can empathise to a certain extent, but I don't think they've much option but to cough up the money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oz Student
Eh, it's quite clear that Bohs couldn't employ them next year. Bohs are trying to rip up their deals for next year. And you want to begrudge the guys looking in to emigration to the other side of the world. I'm sure they'd be quite happy to stay and play with Bohs next year instead of the Wallawalla Dingoes if all the promises made to them on signing of their deal with their Bohs could be enforced. I really don't understand this idea of criticising the players for looking for new employment at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinobohs
firstly them players would not be looking to go if bohs was not looking to rip up its original contract. and any player looking for some financial stability for their family would not be seeking it is in dalyier. so to attempt to tar them as bad guys is unfairQuote:
Originally Posted by marinobohs
It's a shame we just can't fold the club and start afresh the next day with the promise of a council built stadium. Then we wouldn't have to worry about creditors. On Shelley - If my job is under threat and I find a new job before the other one ends and my employer finds out, then I am not entitled to redundancy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jicked
A bit of an understatement?Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
Shamrock Rovers never "folded", great points all the same though.Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
No but their holding company did if IIRC.New company set up to take the club foreward >Sure whats in a name anyway as cork have shown us.Jicked i would expect your not one of the new breed of rovers fans who rolled up 2 years ago and have yet to be told about your great shafting of numerous creditors and the 4% deal.
Anyhow im glad its getting sorted and the players are getting some money from the mess and hopefully we will see the back of year round contracts at bohs that we cant afford and show some business sense in the future.
Shelley's not lookig for redundancy as he was a contract worker. he's looking for the terms of his contract to be fulfilled by Bohs.Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
I see STU has his own thread on the go over on the bohs forum....
Ooh, I killed the NLSA! Cool. Add that one to my CV.
Morons.
This one?Quote:
Originally Posted by superjohnny
Typical Bohs fans. Five posts in, and they're already plotting murder. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by thischarmingman
Tis this one, BTW.