Players striking

**A face** · 02/03/2009, 8:44 AM

I dont know if its true that players are talking about striking or not. I can understand completely why they are ticked off but isn't it in the interest not to strike and playing in Premier Div and as soon as the money comes in they will get paid. If the season doesn't start for away in Sligo then we could be in trouble. We/they have been through enough at this stage, whats one more week. I mean if the money isn't there then theres not alot you can do. Obviously its not an ideal situation, i'm not making excuses for anyone but it just seems the best thing.

I'm not fully up to date on all the goings on so i could have that wrong.

**tiktok** · 02/03/2009, 9:05 AM

The players and staff are dead right to strike if they haven't been paid.
How is it in the player's interest to sit quietly when the same problems keep resurfacing.

If the money isn't there, Stephen O'Donnell and Greg O'Halloran shouldn't have been signed last week. We all know there's no income in the club right now, but TC proved to the High Court he had the money to implement his business plan so you can only assume that when he decides to bring players in, it's because he can afford it. Once again the club seems to insist on waiting until the crisis is on top of us before they'll talk to anyone or react, it's like we're incapable of looking even a fortnight ahead at the moment.

It's ridiculous, the same patterns repeating again and again and again.

**A face** · 02/03/2009, 9:43 AM

Originally Posted by tiktok

The players and staff are dead right to strike if they haven't been paid.
How is it in the player's interest to sit quietly when the same problems keep resurfacing.

I'd agree with that alright, but with the league just four days away and first home gate 11 days away we are nearly there.

TC proved to the High Court he had the money to implement his business plan

I hope he does have that money, but you'd have to wonder. As you say its always the 11th hour before something is done which seems a mad policy to adopt if there is money there.

It's ridiculous, the same patterns repeating again and again and again.

Thats what has me worried about there actually being money there.

**pete** · 02/03/2009, 10:16 AM

I am sure the players are frustrated & I have no more idea what is happening than any one else but I can't see how striking will solve this. I know they are probably desparate but a strike could be the final nail in the coffin.

**Dodge** · 02/03/2009, 10:23 AM

Desperate times and all that pete.

If the players met with Coughlin during the Examinership and he told them he had money, they've every right to feel agrieved at not recieving their wages.

**A face** · 02/03/2009, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by Dodge

Desperate times and all that pete.

If the players met with Coughlin during the Examinership and he told them he had money, they've every right to feel agrieved at not recieving their wages.

But the thing is will striking change the situation? If i were a player i'd be losing the rag and probably be organising the strike but that still doesn't change anything. If the money isn't there then its not there.

If it was there then why are we in this situation.

**Dodge** · 02/03/2009, 10:33 AM

Originally Posted by A face

If it was there then why are we in this situation.

Thats what they're striking over I'd imagine. The threat of strike should be enough to scare Coughlin into loosening his grip on that 500k he lodged...

**tiktok** · 02/03/2009, 10:35 AM

Originally Posted by A face

If the money isn't there then its not there.

The money is there.

CCFC itself probably doesn't have a penny because it's off season, but Coughlan lodged �500k in a holding account for the examiner, who reported it to the High Court as evidence he could handle the scheme of arrangement with creditors and implement his business plan.

Even if it was a case that Coughlan misled the examiner and courts and lodged �500k he got as a loan, it still shows he's can raise that money if required. It's no longer Arkaga's wages he's paying, it's payment terms that he himself has agreed to.

No excuse.

**Sheridan** · 02/03/2009, 10:38 AM

The players have as much right to strike as any employee being exploited by his employer. In practice, though, footballers always back down.

**Macy** · 02/03/2009, 11:08 AM

Originally Posted by A face

But the thing is will striking change the situation?

I would've thought it was a fairly obvious point of principle?

**A face** · 02/03/2009, 11:54 AM

Originally Posted by Macy

I would've thought it was a fairly obvious point of principle?

I'm saying if its a means to an end then fair enough but if its not then theres no point. Read Tiktoks post above, if the money is there then maybe it will force his hand ..... but my initial point is; if the money is there then why isn't already paid, saving us going through all of this.

**razor** · 02/03/2009, 3:24 PM

Players have been paid according to todays Echo.

**pineapple stu** · 02/03/2009, 3:27 PM

Originally Posted by A face

I'd agree with that alright, but with the league just four days away and first home gate 11 days away we are nearly there.

Where's "there"? You're assuming that the gates will cover wages for the rest of the season. That's not necessarily the case.

**A face** · 02/03/2009, 4:17 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Where's "there"? You're assuming that the gates will cover wages for the rest of the season. That's not necessarily the case.

Well its income that will get us past this hurdle, if 'there' means living hand to mouth then obviously its not ideal but its better than players striking

Originally Posted by Evening Echo

There was some concern when money which was due into the players� accounts on Friday failed to materialise, but that was due to a hitch with the switch over to paying the players monthly and changing the method of payment to electronic transfers, whereas before they were paid by cheque.

Much a do about nothing so it seems. Everyone is a bit jumpy these days given the last year we've been through.

**Dodge** · 02/03/2009, 6:44 PM

Dan Murray's utburst was a good deal more than "much ado about nothing"

if your captain ain't happy, thats not good

**pete** · 02/03/2009, 10:32 PM

Originally Posted by razor

Players have been paid according to todays Echo.

That's it so.

**tiktok** · 04/03/2009, 8:39 PM

Originally Posted by Dodge

Dan Murray's utburst was a good deal more than "much ado about nothing"

if your captain ain't happy, thats not good

Just for the record, the article says Dan Murray was contacted by the papers but he's not named as the player who had the outburst [lest he be stripped of the captaincy]