poor wee skatchel will have to remain a "professional tourist" haw ****** haw
Printable View
poor wee skatchel will have to remain a "professional tourist" haw ****** haw
It hasnt been made clear but i am sure the the day after your club has failed to pay players wages then you are under a transfer embargo until a meeting takes place . Hence yams didnt pay wages in September and transfer embargo started until the meeting today - they have been reprimanded. Now in october they are late again so they are under a tranfer embargo again untill next meeting to discuss punishments, or lifting of tranfer embargo.
They wont be signing anyone and punishments will escalate .....:aok:
Reprimand means f*** all but it wont be the last time they pay their players late so alls well that ends well.
If i were a yam id be afraid, Very afraid..You just KNOW they will be late again next month.
Id rather be a Hibee than a Yam.
This is how I see it as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by steviehibsleith
I hate claiming it but I have a pal "ITK" .... Genuinely ... 'onest!.. Etc etc....
Bottom line is that failure to pay wages is deemed a footy debt so it's an automatic signing embargo which can only be rescinded ( part of new rules I suppose) after agreement at an SPL board meeting.
More ridiculous judgements by the football authorities. To be reprimanded for late payment of wages in Sept and 'warned' about future non payment when everybody knows they already have been late with Oct's wages:rolleyes: Honestly, no wonder our footballing authorites are a laughing stock.
No doubt punishment will move up a scale for next meeting and move from reprimand to censure or some other meaningless sanction. Vlad must hold them in even greater contempt than normal and must be pissing himself.
What are these authorities good for apart from picking balls out a pot in cup draws and they've even ****ed that up over the years.
They wot get away with another slap on wrists. I reckon they will get a suspended points deduction of token 3 points and a transfer ban until 3 months of wages paid on time have passed (so basically forever).Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
Oh....and....Skacel, get it right up you. Nae luck loser.
Now, now, Spike, it says that the October non-payment is 'alleged'. Are they not certain that it happened? :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
According to the story on the beeb site
"An SPL disciplinary sub-committee will examine the October breach of their regulations on Wednesday.
Hearts had a transfer embargo imposed for the September offence, which will run until the league is satisfied the problem has been resolved.
The ban on player registrations is not a specific punishment but is now an automatic trigger when a club is late with payments.
The sub-committee, which met on Monday morning before the SPL quarterly gathering at Hampden, consisted of chief executive Neil Doncaster, secretary Iain Blair and Dundee United chairman Steven Thompson.
Doncaster said: "I think it's important we don't prejudge anything and hear what Hearts have to say. We don't know whether the charge is being admitted yet."
"So, rather than prejudge the outcome of any hearing, I think it's important we sit down with a clear mind on Wednesday and judge any evidence on its merits."
So does this mean that if they come up with an explanation 'with merit' and a promise to be good employers, that the embargo will be lifted? I have a funny feeling in my gut that it will :fuming:
I share your funny feeling and it's not helped that Chick Young and supposed ITK Jambos have been saying for a few days now that the embargo will be lifted on Thursday to open the doors for Skacel to sign by Friday. If the Jambos manage to talk their way out of this, Scottish football will take yet another step towards oblivion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Hackett
What's that coming over the hill is it the taxman,is it the taxman,is it the taxman:na na:Lol:brokenyam: hearts are going bust, going bust, going, going bust NA NA NA NA NA NA NA.
Judging by the date of payment this month, it seems clear that they could only pay up after matchday receipts from the 'Well game were taken in. This suggests that they are living on a knife edge and a run of away games could be enough to tip them into the abyss.:wink:
Young rarely quotes a source, and just seems to take a punt on an outcome. Unfortunately, I think the signs that he may have guessed right this time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
How can you have a hearing about September's misdemeanour, three days before the one to decide sanctions for October's? It does not give the culprit a chance to put anything right, so surely the second hearing is to rubber stamp the outcome of the first.
" we don't know whether the charge is being admitted yet"
Is it just me and i've completely missed something with the above statement from the SPL?? :confused:
How can they say they don't know if the deluded ones will admit to the charge of the payments being late when they have already said they had been informed about the latest payments being late last week??...how weird unless i have missed something along the line..if so i'll just shut up now...:greengrin
The new rules don't just cover wage payments. Hearts have got to pay HMRC all sums as they fall due or they are in default.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Milne
I don't see any mention of this in SPL statements or Media ramblings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Milne
http://www.garudiostudiage.com/photo...e_tomoorow.jpg
I asked an ITKer about Skacel today. "Very very very impossible" was the reply.Quote:
Originally Posted by Filled Rolls
Given the issues with the Huns in the summer, don't you think that the necessity to follow process is more ciritical than a knee jerk reaction to what has been reported? I dont like Doncaster, but I don't see what other option the SPL has/have as the rules were put in by the clubs themselves to manage such an event.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
The reporting strongly suggests one thing - and lets face it as Hibbys we're going to be more than happy to believe the worst about what goes on over by - but if process isn't followed (painful procedural stuff though it may be), then the lack of following that self same process can be used by His Royal Madness to challenge any decision made. That would lay them open to accusations of incompetence.
I agree. Doncaster is a fud for sure and he loves to mangle the English language but he has to be seen to be open minded BEFORE the meeting, even if all the evidence in the public domain would suggest otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Twa Cairpets
Let the hearing happen on Wednesday and make our judgements then. Personally I think it will be a suspended points deduction and while that will surely be seen as soft on here I'm pretty certain that the Yams are effectively oot of cash and that any suspended sanction will have to be applied sooner rather than later....
Have to say I agre with you 100% on this Si. It is something of a 'get out' action from the SPL which will eventually keep everybody happy, excepting the Yams long term.Quote:
Originally Posted by SiMar
A suspended points deduction gives the Yams every chance to get their house in order, safe in the knowldege that they probably have no chance of ever achieving this. So it looks like the SPL are being fair to the Yams by suspending the deduction, then in a month or two, hit them with a deduction which accumulates every month thereafter that wages/bills go unpaid, which will leave them with no points at the end of the season :thumbsup:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MB62;3387860[B
Ok, but what about the signing embargo? Does that get lifted if they are given a suspended points deduction. I'd rather the embargo stayed before any suspended sentence.
I'm not sticking up for the Yams here, but more bemoaning the logic that our games administrators seem to work under. Where is the justice in hitting someone with a fine for a second offence when you haven't given them time to put their house in order. Surely the September hearing should have been held before the wages were due in October?Quote:
Originally Posted by MB62
Johnny Yam turns round and says - if we had been warned what the punishment was for a second offence we wouldn't have done it, in fact when we weren't able to pay the October wages, we hadn't been found guilty of anything.
I take it I am missing something, because it just seems like the SFA are making up the rules as they go along. I expect Vlad knows he can tell them to bolt by taking his case to a court of justice.
I don't understand why it took so long to meet and the sub-committee couldn't have got together when they were on their jolly to the Scotland games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Filled Rolls
I do understand why they (by the way SPL not SFA) are following procedure and it is to ensure that Mad Vlad can't tell them to stick it and go to court. A defence of I could have made the payment, but didn't, as I wanted to find out what you really meant by punishment wouldn't have much merit.
There were several occasions last season when their wages were late, so presumably someone must have pointed out that it was wrong to do so and not just the SPFA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Filled Rolls
Also, it's a matter of SPL procedure, and common knowledge amongst clubs, that transfers are embargoed when payments are missed.
Johnny Yam knows fine and well that what they did in September was against the rules.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Filled Rolls
The SPL are a bunch of fannies but in this case its all Hearts fault. They've had more than enough time to get their house in order and they knew at the beginning of the season that there would be sanctions for late wage payments because they agreed to the new rules. If they want to run the risk of finding out what these sanctions are then let them. 100% their problem. Even if it was hibs I would be saying this, but its not so :fenlon
Reprimand is a bit like a yellow card, it'll remain until another one is earned then see wht sanction is imposed.Quote:
Originally Posted by HibbyAndy
They should be better off now though as they will be getting money from home gates so wouldn't expect them to be late next month.
Surely the outcome tomorrow will be the transfer embargo extended until January and only stopped when they pay 3 months on the bounce on right date. There should also be a suspended points deduction for future non-payments.
Only home game before next pay is Ross County this week. After that the next is St Mirren the day after wages due. Given the huge amount of seasons they claim, walk-ups will be pretty thin on the ground. They have a LC quarter-final away to DU, but don't know when they'll get the cash for that, not that there will be a huge crowd for that anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by comfortablynumb
Unless Vlad has relented and promised funds in time and on time, it looks pretty ropey, and I'd be having a look in Cash Converters windows to see if there's anything resembling a Scottish Cup on display
There's so many other costs accrued by home games like stewarding, policing, ambulance (i assume they have to pay for them to be on site), utilities, printing for programmes, non footballing staff plus others i'm sure i'm missing out on i just can't see around 1500 paying punters covering all these costs and funding over paid footballers on thousands a week.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Hackett
IMO they have to still be getting funding from somewhere else or alternatively they're robbing peter to pay Paul which will surely come back to bite them even if it has taken longer than we all expected.
I think this is the problem the punishment should be automatic with no need for a hearing. The spl and the sfa love making things more difficult than they need to be. The only time there should be a meeting is if there's an appealQuote:
Originally Posted by JimBHibees
1500 paying punters at a home game at say on average £20 a head (that's being generous as there'll be concessions) is £30000 per match day and say there's on average 2 home games a month you're looking at roughly £60000 a month.
£60000 a month divided by their first team squad of 47 would work out on average first team weekly wage of about £1200 and that doesn't include management, coaches, youth teams and other outgoings i mentioned earlier.
In short there's basically no way there match day income even comes close to covering there staffing costs so i think it's irrelevant if they've got one home game or two coming up as they must be getting funding from elsewhere, i think vlad must still be supporting them but he's just not making it as easy as he used to for them.