Player contracts and transfers


David123
 Share

Recommended Posts

If Saints had played Rangers & got a draw or less they would not have got 6th.

If we had played Hibs & got a draw or less we would not have got 6th.

£125 grand is a bonus so hopefully Saints will do what they can for those players being allowed to go & will no longer be furloughed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sixties saintee said:

You will be in fine company wae Hoodlum

That's what's wrong these days, Nae respect for your seniors. I'll have you know I went to the 4th best school in the country. Well,  it said it was List D. & approved.

I

 

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cagey said:

If Saints had played Rangers & got a draw or less they would not have got 6th.

If we had played Hibs & got a draw or less we would not have got 6th.

£125 grand is a bonus so hopefully Saints will do what they can for those players being allowed to go & will no longer be furloughed.

Cagey I think a large proportion of that money will go out on players and staff bonuses. Sure there was a post last season about the players being ona significant bonus to get into top 6.  

Saints business plan would be based on getting 2 or 3 good crowds at mcd including an of game. So they will not have gained that much by getting 6 the I don't think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Cagey said:

If Saints had played Rangers & got a draw or less they would not have got 6th.

If we had played Hibs & got a draw or less we would not have got 6th.

 

If we had played Hibs that Saturday and won and livi had got beat we would have been in 5th or if we had played and beaten Rangers we would have been level with Livi. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, mainstand said:

Cagey I think a large proportion of that money will go out on players and staff bonuses. Sure there was a post last season about the players being ona significant bonus to get into top 6.  

Saints business plan would be based on getting 2 or 3 good crowds at mcd including an of game. So they will not have gained that much by getting 6 the I don't think.

Yeah, forgot about top 6 bonus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Cagey said:

Typical Dundonions. Working the system & we the taxpayer pay for it.

Are you for real? I’d be very disappointed if we don’t do the same. 
 

Costs the club nothing. These guys can’t find a club just now. They pay their fair share of tax and many have young families. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good to see Craig,Booth & KANE signed even if just to January.

4 young guys signed as well but surprised to see O'Reilly & Struthers allowed to go but I suppose they don't have resources to pay them all.

Hopefully we can get Drey Wright signed but think his agent will be touting him about & we will not know anything until he signed for us or someone else. Would hope that we could put a timescale on it & not end up like the May cafuffle.

Edited by Cagey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cagey said:

Good to see Craig,Booth & KANE signed even if just to January.

4 young guys signed as well but surprised to see O'Reilly & Struthers allowed to go but I suppose they don't have resources to pay them all.

Hopefully we can get Drey Wright signed but think his agent will be touting him about & we will not know anything until he signed for us or someone else. Would hope that we could put a timescale on it & not end up like the May cafuffle.

Absolutely no rush with Drey. 
 

We had no chance of retaining him before COVID but this is going to be a weird year. Clubs will be running small squads, paying less and the balance of power will switch from player to club. There will be no shortage of out of work talent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/19/2020 at 12:01 PM, Pat McGroin said:

Are you for real? I’d be very disappointed if we don’t do the same. 
 

Costs the club nothing. These guys can’t find a club just now. They pay their fair share of tax and many have young families. 

According to some clubs it has been confirmed by legal advisers and HMRC that extending a  players contract in order to get furlough payments when there is no intention of retaining the services of that player is illegal. Did see that the players union have also now advised that this is the case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, mainstand said:

According to some clubs it has been confirmed by legal advisers and HMRC that extending a  players contract in order to get furlough payments when there is no intention of retaining the services of that player is illegal. Did see that the players union have also now advised that this is the case. 

Yeah, Roy McGregor of County took that advice.

Amy McDonald slagging him & Dunfermline off for not working the system.

I think County made up the difference from 80% to 100%.

Roy McGregor is an honourable man. Amy McDonald is a ????.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, mainstand said:

According to some clubs it has been confirmed by legal advisers and HMRC that extending a  players contract in order to get furlough payments when there is no intention of retaining the services of that player is illegal. Did see that the players union have also now advised that this is the case. 

I'm not sure how anyone could prove whether or not there's any intention of retaining the player's services? A club could easily want a player to stay right now, but no longer want them six months from now - it happens all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mainstand said:

According to some clubs it has been confirmed by legal advisers and HMRC that extending a  players contract in order to get furlough payments when there is no intention of retaining the services of that player is illegal. Did see that the players union have also now advised that this is the case. 

This is the same government that said it was possible for businesses to re-hire staff members that had left a company just before the furlough deadline purely so they could receive furlough payments?

Those 2 things don’t stack up.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blueheaven said:

I'm not sure how anyone could prove whether or not there's any intention of retaining the player's services? A club could easily want a player to stay right now, but no longer want them six months from now - it happens all the time.

I think it is the case where there is a serious doubt but not where the decision is made and using the scheme is simply a way round keeping the player getting a wage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pat McGroin said:

This is the same government that said it was possible for businesses to re-hire staff members that had left a company just before the furlough deadline purely so they could receive furlough payments?

Those 2 things don’t stack up.  

slightly different in that they were giving companies the option of rehiring staff who they were going to be laying off as a result of covid 19 in the hope that they will be able to recommence trading when the problem is over.  Different form keeping someone on your books that you don't want there and who's contract has expired. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, mainstand said:

slightly different in that they were giving companies the option of rehiring staff who they were going to be laying off as a result of covid 19 in the hope that they will be able to recommence trading when the problem is over.  Different form keeping someone on your books that you don't want there and who's contract has expired. 

No, they were allowing people that had left for new jobs but missed the furlough deadline, or left to start at business etc to rejoin their old company to ensure they had a wage. 
 

This was confirmed in interviews with Sunak at the time. It wasn’t just for companies that had laid staff off. 
 

your company can also claim furlough and allow you to work elsewhere while on furlough, so I’d be amazed if this was an issue. 

Edited by Pat McGroin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2020 at 8:19 PM, Cagey said:

Good to see Craig,Booth & KANE signed even if just to January.

4 young guys signed as well but surprised to see O'Reilly & Struthers allowed to go but I suppose they don't have resources to pay them all.

Hopefully we can get Drey Wright signed but think his agent will be touting him about & we will not know anything until he signed for us or someone else. Would hope that we could put a timescale on it & not end up like the May cafuffle.

Yes, glad to see 4 young guys  being retained who could make their mark in the future.

If Holt is not signed up, expect Ballantyne to be included in 1st team pool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share