Share Transfers Agreed/Cooling off period

[ScottB]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If anything, the TV draw of the New Huns vs Yams going for one promotion place would be bigger than the missing games in the top league.

Can't imagine any of the other bottom 6 teams would be up for going easy on the Yams?

Why would any team? They've robbed every team in the division in one way or another over recent years, why would any do them a favour?

[CyberSauzee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm told they put a message on their website asking their fans to refrain from damaging the stadium as they couldn't afford the repairs.
Looked like a lot of damaged seats as it emptied. Pleasing.

Indeed they did:

Supporters are reminded that any damage caused at the stadium will be charged to Hearts, and that is an expense that the club simply cannot afford.

[Gus Fring]

The point that should be made to Locke, Brown and co by the media is that their transfer embargo is essentially in 2 parts.

The first is immediately applied the moment a club is placed into administration by the court and stays in place until they are confirmed as being out of administration by a court.

The second is the punishment component. This applies until the 1st of February or in layman's terms, specifically to prevent Hearts from signing anyone during the January transfer window.

Even if the SPFL decided that, on reflection, the punishment component was perhaps too harsh, the first part would still apply because Hearts are still in administration, so they still would not be able to sign anyone. Only the second part is at the discretion of the SPFL, the first part is written in to the rules of the game of which (as has been pointed out) Hearts voted through.

Hearts have a total of 38 players eligible to play in premiership matches. The maximum match squad is 11 starting and 7 substitutes whereas the minimum match squad permissible is 7.

They are just going to have to suck it up and get on with it I'm afraid. You don't hear the club in last place bitching and complaining this much normally.

It'll be interesting to see if they finish the season more than 15 points behind Ross County because then they can't even use the points deduction as an excuse. If they are still in Admin at that stage then the transfer embargo will be irrelevant as well. They won't have been relegated because they were punished, they will have been relegated because they were the worst at football in the Scottish Premiership

[Hank Schrader]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There's no fear within the SPFL about Hearts being relegated. They have no bargaining power. They aren't a TV or sponsorship draw.

Big team right enough eh? Roasters.

[GloryGlory]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Would imagine they'd try and sell the likes of "DiveDiveDive" Walker and Holt and bring in some old school cluggers.

ISTR they could have got cash for Holt in the summer (Nottingham Forest?) but I doubt any buying club would now be prepared to offer anything more than a "nominal" fee for any player. I also doubt whether BDO would be in any position to turn down any cash offered. They are probably still looking desparately at making any savings they can, so a player or two off the payroll could be quite tempting.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The point that should be made to Locke, Brown and co by the media is that their transfer embargo is essentially in 2 parts.

The first is immediately applied the moment a club is placed into administration by the court and stays in place until they are confirmed as being out of administration by a court.

The second is the punishment component. This applies until the 1st of February or in layman's terms, specifically to prevent Hearts from signing anyone during the January transfer window.

Even if the SPFL decided that, on reflection, the punishment component was perhaps too harsh, the first part would still apply because Hearts are still in administration, so they still would not be able to sign anyone. Only the second part is at the discretion of the SPFL, the first part is written in to the rules of the game of which (as has been pointed out) Hearts voted through.

I don't understand.

If the SPFL decided that the punishment element is too harsh and rescinded or reduced it, then Hearts would be allowed to sign players, no?

The first element is the 15 point deduction.

Also, wasn't the signing embargo issued because of their failure to pay their players? I may have that wrong too.

[Gus Fring]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't understand.

If the SPFL decided that the punishment element is too harsh and rescinded or reduced it, then Hearts would be allowed to sign players, no?

The first element is the 15 point deduction.

Also, wasn't the signing embargo issued because of their failure to pay their players? I may have that wrong too.

Not whilst they are still in Administration. Even if the SPFL had not have put the 1st of february embargo in place, Hearts would still not be able to sign anyone.

A transfer embargo was put in place a few days before they went into admin because of their failure to pay players. This was then superseded by the new transfer embargo.

There's three things in play

1. Hearts can't sign anyone whilst in Admin

2. If/when Hearts exit administration, they can't sign anyone before the 1st of February.

3. Hearts were deducted 15 points as per the agreed rules of the SPFL.

I'm almost positive only #2 is something the SPFL can deliberate over, the rest are hard and fast sanctions and aren't optional.

[MurrayfieldHibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The point that should be made to Locke, Brown and co by the media is that their transfer embargo is essentially in 2 parts.

The first is immediately applied the moment a club is placed into administration by the court and stays in place until they are confirmed as being out of administration by a court.

The second is the punishment component. This applies until the 1st of February or in layman's terms, specifically to prevent Hearts from signing anyone during the January transfer window.

Even if the SPFL decided that, on reflection, the punishment component was perhaps too harsh, the first part would still apply because Hearts are still in administration, so they still would not be able to sign anyone. Only the second part is at the discretion of the SPFL, the first part is written in to the rules of the game of which (as has been pointed out) Hearts voted through.

Hearts have a total of 38 players eligible to play in premiership matches. The maximum match squad is 11 starting and 7 substitutes whereas the minimum match squad permissible is 7.

They are just going to have to suck it up and get on with it I'm afraid. You don't hear the club in last place bitching and complaining this much normally.

It'll be interesting to see if they finish the season more than 15 points behind Ross County because then they can't even use the points deduction as an excuse. If they are still in Admin at that stage then the transfer embargo will be irrelevant as well. They won't have been relegated because they were punished, they will have been relegated because they were the worst at football in the Scottish Premiership

The media seem to be falling over themselves to suck up to the cheats. Perhaps a weekly press statement from the SPFL would help get the message through to the spambos?

The loss yesterday is a huge blow to them. They are now in a death spiral with less and less money coming in and the DDs drying up. It is about time these cheating ****bags crawled into a corner and died.

[Onion]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If the transfer ban was lifted could they afford any additional players? I thought it was already touch and go whether the money will last till the end of the season.

Exactly. They've still to agree a CVA with their PAST creditors, many of whom (including the taxman) will get nothing. Yet they see spending MORE money that they don't have as their salvation ? What a surprise.

The Yams are so desperate they'll now resort to ANYTHING to try get them out of this hole. They won't not care who they shaft either. So what happens if they relax the embargo, the Yams spend money, and still get relegated ?

IMHO far from allowing these Chumps to spend more money, the SPFL need to council them. Accept that they are doomed to Div 1 football and to prepare for lower league football.

[ScottB]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't understand.

If the SPFL decided that the punishment element is too harsh and rescinded or reduced it, then Hearts would be allowed to sign players, no?

The first element is the 15 point deduction.

Also, wasn't the signing embargo issued because of their failure to pay their players? I may have that wrong too.

No, any club in admin cannot sign players until they exit admin.

Secondly, as punishment for not paying players, Hearts were given a transfer ban until 1st Feb. So if they had exited admin by now, they still would not have been allowed to sign players this month. Because they are still in admin, this actual punishment has turned out to be entirely irrelevant, but it is the only punishment they've gotten. The ongoing 'ban' is because they are in admin, and according to the rules of the game, it must remain as long as they are in admin. Presumably if the powers that be desired, they could end the ban to the 1st of February, but to take away the 'in admin you can't sign anyone' rule would be a lot harder, requiring the agreement of the board / all clubs etc.

[Onion]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No, any club in admin cannot sign players until they exit admin.

Secondly, as punishment for not paying players, Hearts were given a transfer ban until 1st Feb. So if they had exited admin by now, they still would not have been allowed to sign players this month. Because they are still in admin, this actual punishment has turned out to be entirely irrelevant, but it is the only punishment they've gotten. The ongoing 'ban' is because they are in admin, and according to the rules of the game, it must remain as long as they are in admin. Presumably if the powers that be desired, they could end the ban to the 1st of February, but to take away the 'in admin you can't sign anyone' rule would be a lot harder, requiring the agreement of the board / all clubs etc.

That makes perfect sense.

[Gus Fring]

Also just to clarify, BDO do not currently have a single penny of the FOH money available to them nor will they have under the current plans. That money is currently being saved up and will only be used once BDO step down and hand control over to the FOH. Cancelling Direct Debits doesn't affect the running of the club whilst it's in administration.

[ozzie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The point that should be made to Locke, Brown and co by the media is that their transfer embargo is essentially in 2 parts.

The first is immediately applied the moment a club is placed into administration by the court and stays in place until they are confirmed as being out of administration by a court.

The second is the punishment component. This applies until the 1st of February or in layman's terms, specifically to prevent Hearts from signing anyone during the January transfer window.

Even if the SPFL decided that, on reflection, the punishment component was perhaps too harsh, the first part would still apply because Hearts are still in administration, so they still would not be able to sign anyone. Only the second part is at the discretion of the SPFL, the first part is written in to the rules of the game of which (as has been pointed out) Hearts voted through.

Hearts have a total of 38 players eligible to play in premiership matches. The maximum match squad is 11 starting and 7 substitutes whereas the minimum match squad permissible is 7.

They are just going to have to suck it up and get on with it I'm afraid. You don't hear the club in last place bitching and complaining this much normally.

It'll be interesting to see if they finish the season more than 15 points behind Ross County because then they can't even use the points deduction as an excuse. If they are still in Admin at that stage then the transfer embargo will be irrelevant as well. They won't have been relegated because they were punished, they will have been relegated because they were the worst at football in the Scottish Premiership

where can i find a list of these 38 players? i want to prove a point

[jacomo]

If they damaged ER last night, Hibs should publicise how much we are charging Hearts to put it right. It will probably come out in the wash anyhow, but if they are liquidated in the next couple of months we'll be left whistling for this money. Embarrassment may shame them into paying up.

Alternative is demanding a hefty upfront deposit ahead of the semi final. Unacceptable if they get away with bursting seats at ER.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Of course as people are rightly pointing out on here if £2m is not on the table then the deal is off. The money is coming upfront from rich Yams who hope to be paid back through the direct debits. When will the rich fuds start withdrawing their pledges when they see the DDs falling off so sharply? This drop off must be accelerating after seeing their team stuck on -2 and getting stuffed by us and the prospect of years in the lower leagues. These fuds are not super rich and cannot afford to blow on a club that has no real financial prospects and will go from one financial crisis to another.

Who is saying there is not £2million on the table? You are the first to say it AFAIK. I am not in the know, but I can't imagine anyone pledging money up front to buy Hearts doing so without watertight legal documents (contracts) being prepared.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Also just to clarify, BDO do not currently have a single penny of the FOH money available to them nor will they have under the current plans. That money is currently being saved up and will only be used once BDO step down and hand control over to the FOH. Cancelling Direct Debits doesn't affect the running of the club whilst it's in administration.

So the FOH bank account must be getting fairly fat with all the Diddies money. Only once the club has been bought will that money start being used, so, if they get past the big L, they will surely be past the worst, assuming they don't overspend, again.

[ano hibby]

Regards player sales I'm sure BDO were of the opinion some months back that they would do all they could to reject any bids for the sellable players. Presumably this was in the hope of them having a credible chance of staying in the SPL. Now that relegation looks odds-on they may just decide from a playing AND financial viewpoint to sell whoever they can as the team can barely get any worse playing an 17/18 yo compared to a sellable 19 yo.
Interesting transfer window coming up for both EH teams methinks.

Be nice touch to buy a few of their first team regulars to boost the chances of our U-19/U20 team.

[Jack]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If they damaged ER last night, Hibs should publicise how much we are charging Hearts to put it right. It will probably come out in the wash anyhow, but if they are liquidated in the next couple of months we'll be left whistling for this money. Embarrassment may shame them into paying up.

Alternative is demanding a hefty upfront deposit ahead of the semi final. Unacceptable if they get away with bursting seats at ER.

I don't know for sure but;

It would be classed as a football debt.

It could be deducted from any prize monies they are due from the football authorities.

Likewise I would imagine any damage caused at the semi will be deducted from from their cut of the semi final income.

[21.05.2016]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The point that should be made to Locke, Brown and co by the media is that their transfer embargo is essentially in 2 parts.

The first is immediately applied the moment a club is placed into administration by the court and stays in place until they are confirmed as being out of administration by a court.

The second is the punishment component. This applies until the 1st of February or in layman's terms, specifically to prevent Hearts from signing anyone during the January transfer window.

Even if the SPFL decided that, on reflection, the punishment component was perhaps too harsh, the first part would still apply because Hearts are still in administration, so they still would not be able to sign anyone. Only the second part is at the discretion of the SPFL, the first part is written in to the rules of the game of which (as has been pointed out) Hearts voted through.

Hearts have a total of 38 players eligible to play in premiership matches. The maximum match squad is 11 starting and 7 substitutes whereas the minimum match squad permissible is 7.

They are just going to have to suck it up and get on with it I'm afraid. You don't hear the club in last place bitching and complaining this much normally.

It'll be interesting to see if they finish the season more than 15 points behind Ross County because then they can't even use the points deduction as an excuse. If they are still in Admin at that stage then the transfer embargo will be irrelevant as well. They won't have been relegated because they were punished, they will have been relegated because they were the worst at football in the Scottish Premiership

Sick of hearing them give it the whole "aww poor us, we've been punished enough, everyone is picking on us, everyone's out to get us blah blah blah" routine. For YEARS they have majorly cheated financially to get ahead and screw everyone else. They were quite happy to give it the big un then and reap the cheated glory so they can **** right off with their whole poor wee victim nonsense. They deserve everything they get and more! Cheating, arrogant, corrupt organisation, never seen a club more deserving of a slow painful death.

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

... if they are liquidated in the next couple of months we'll be left whistling for this money.

Don't think so - surely BDO will have to pay this? It would be really unfortunate if the bill for broken seats at ER was the debt which made them liquidate HMFC.

[whiskyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Don't think so - surely BDO will have to pay this? It would be really unfortunate if the bill for broken seats at ER was the debt which made them liquidate HMFC.

God point, get the lawyers revved up Petrie...... :-))

[Onion]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Sick of hearing them give it the whole "aww poor us, we've been punished enough, everyone is picking on us, everyone's out to get us blah blah blah" routine. For YEARS they have majorly cheated financially to get ahead and screw everyone else. They were quite happy to give it the big un then and reap the cheated glory so they can **** right off with their whole poor wee victim nonsense. They deserve everything they get and more! Cheating, arrogant, corrupt organisation, never seen a club more deserving of a slow painful death.

Lots more pain to come for those Cheating Chumps . We're nowhere near the end. Not even the beginning of the end. But we may be at the end of the beginning Seeing them squirm is just so much more entertaining that a quick death.

[ChooseLife]

[BH Hibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The point that should be made to Locke, Brown and co by the media is that their transfer embargo is essentially in 2 parts.

The first is immediately applied the moment a club is placed into administration by the court and stays in place until they are confirmed as being out of administration by a court.

The second is the punishment component. This applies until the 1st of February or in layman's terms, specifically to prevent Hearts from signing anyone during the January transfer window.

Even if the SPFL decided that, on reflection, the punishment component was perhaps too harsh, the first part would still apply because Hearts are still in administration, so they still would not be able to sign anyone. Only the second part is at the discretion of the SPFL, the first part is written in to the rules of the game of which (as has been pointed out) Hearts voted through.

Hearts have a total of 38 players eligible to play in premiership matches. The maximum match squad is 11 starting and 7 substitutes whereas the minimum match squad permissible is 7.

They are just going to have to suck it up and get on with it I'm afraid. You don't hear the club in last place bitching and complaining this much normally.

It'll be interesting to see if they finish the season more than 15 points behind Ross County because then they can't even use the points deduction as an excuse. If they are still in Admin at that stage then the transfer embargo will be irrelevant as well. They won't have been relegated because they were punished, they will have been relegated because they were the worst at football in the Scottish Premiership

You're right of course but it doesn't matter how many times it is explained to them they won't or choose not to listen as it doesn't suit their agenda of playing the poor hard done to victims. Just a shame the media choose to support that view as well.

[Oscar T Grouch]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't know for sure but;

It would be classed as a football debt.

It could be deducted from any prize monies they are due from the football authorities.

Likewise I would imagine any damage caused at the semi will be deducted from from their cut of the semi final income.

Pretty sure you're correct, the damage last night will be a footballing debt.

In the LC game, the SPFL are leasing the stadium from us and they will be responsible for the damage caused (let not pretend that they won't do it), the SPFL will take the cost of damages from the gate receipts so effectively the yams and ICT will pay the damage jointly, thats my take on it any ways.

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Just a shame the media choose to support that view as well.

There's a good example of Barry Anderson doublespeak in today's EEN - when describing the foul he says "The Hearts player put his body across his opponent and simultaneously lifted his leg to block Stevenson’s run, hoping to usher the ball out of play."

Or in other words, "tripped".

[Kaiser1962]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As we discussed a while back this seems to have been their strategy for a while, even the ridiculous ploy of not filling their bench. I can just see Ross C, Partick etc welcoming that approach. They're like guys who get caught robbing a bank, get 10 years in jail & after 6 months are saying come on let us out now, it isnae fair!! F them!

100%.

Pay their dues and they can sign whoever they want.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not whilst they are still in Administration. Even if the SPFL had not have put the 1st of february embargo in place, Hearts would still not be able to sign anyone.

A transfer embargo was put in place a few days before they went into admin because of their failure to pay players. This was then superseded by the new transfer embargo.

There's three things in play

1. Hearts can't sign anyone whilst in Admin

2. If/when Hearts exit administration, they can't sign anyone before the 1st of February.

3. Hearts were deducted 15 points as per the agreed rules of the SPFL.

I'm almost positive only #2 is something the SPFL can deliberate over, the rest are hard and fast sanctions and aren't optional.

Of course. Thanks.

[Mikeystewart]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

where can i find a list of these 38 players? i want to prove a point

Squads on wiki, also i did a count of squad players:

Hearts: 24
Hibs: 28

They cannot complain about quantity.

[Spike Mandela]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not whilst they are still in Administration. Even if the SPFL had not have put the 1st of february embargo in place, Hearts would still not be able to sign anyone.

A transfer embargo was put in place a few days before they went into admin because of their failure to pay players. This was then superseded by the new transfer embargo.

There's three things in play

1. Hearts can't sign anyone whilst in Admin

2. If/when Hearts exit administration, they can't sign anyone before the 1st of February.

3. Hearts were deducted 15 points as per the agreed rules of the SPFL.

I'm almost positive only #2 is something the SPFL can deliberate over, the rest are hard and fast sanctions and aren't optional.

The trasfer embargo to the 1st Feb over and above being unable to sign anyone whilst in admin was actually a sanction from the SFA not the SPFL.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Lots more pain to come for those Cheating Chumps . We're nowhere near the end. Not even the beginning of the end.

Why is that?

I mean, I think I have an idea, but I'm not really clear as to their current situation, particularly after their CVA proposals were accepted.