Derry Alli Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 7 minutes ago, Socks said: I'm pulled both ways by what the 'least wrong' thing to do is. It'll be interesting to find out this week what the other clubs decide to do. The 'least wrong' thing to do is tick a box and - at worst - cover the players' wages for a month then get the money back. The only reason that I can see not to keep players on furlough is that the club simply does not have enough money to cover the wages (if it come to that) until the claim was then paid out. Which in itself, must be worrying. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribzanelli Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 8 minutes ago, Mr. Alli said: The 'least wrong' thing to do is tick a box and - at worst - cover the players' wages for a month then get the money back. The only reason that I can see not to keep players on furlough is that the club simply does not have enough money to cover the wages (if it come to that) until the claim was then paid out. Which in itself, must be worrying. Furlough money can be claimed in advance of payday 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chubbychops Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 2 hours ago, rb123! said: Paul Paton and Amy MacDonald love the Ayr Will be interesting to see what the Government makes of this. It's abuse of tax payers money. Not sure how folk can take the moral high ground on this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Jaffo Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 Will be interesting to see what the Government makes of this. It's abuse of tax payers money. Not sure how folk can take the moral high ground on this.How is it an abuse of tax payers money?The whole point of the furlough scheme is to ensure employees continue to get paid. Ayr are ensuring that our players don’t become unemployed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chubbychops Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 Just now, D'Jaffo said: How is it an abuse of tax payers money? The whole point of the furlough scheme is to ensure employees continue to get paid. Ayr are ensuring that our players don’t become unemployed. If Ayr really want o keep these guys, why not give them a 1-2 year contract and continue furlough? Giving a 1 month deal reeks of ''we don't really want you but will just give you a wage out of tax payers money anyway''. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Distant Doonhamer Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 Rather than clubs all taking individual advice, it would make sense for the SPFL to contact HMRC for clarification. Exactly this and if the SPFL were a coherent organisation they’d have done that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 As a taxpayer I'm absolutely fine with folk getting a short contract extension in order to be furloughed. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eibbod nehpets Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 2 minutes ago, DA Baracus said: As a taxpayer I'm absolutely fine with folk getting a short contract extension in order to be furloughed. As a non taxpayer. I'm absolutely not. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 4 minutes ago, Chubbychops said: If Ayr really want o keep these guys, why not give them a 1-2 year contract and continue furlough? Giving a 1 month deal reeks of ''we don't really want you but will just give you a wage out of tax payers money anyway''. Thats exactly what it is and if thats allowed within the scheme, whats wrong with it? Reading between the lines, it seems like someone within Scottish football has questioned whether or not extending temporary contracts is ok, given the players would normally be released. HMRC havent, or wont, confirm one way or another and so anyone giving legal advice is going to hedge their bets and say dont do it. Some clubs have then decided that its too risky to extend contracts and let players go. I still dont agree but Im beginning to understand the clubs point of view more. It would be have been good if Dunfermline had said some of this in their statement. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derry Alli Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 24 minutes ago, Chubbychops said: Will be interesting to see what the Government makes of this. It's abuse of tax payers money. Not sure how folk can take the moral high ground on this. Dunfermline fans. Whit the like. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Jaffo Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 If Ayr really want o keep these guys, why not give them a 1-2 year contract and continue furlough? Giving a 1 month deal reeks of ''we don't really want you but will just give you a wage out of tax payers money anyway''. If you want to interpret it that way then you do that. A better interpretation is that Ayr can’t afford to hand out 3 year deals at the best of time but we’re going to look after our players as best we can. Cameron admitted himself that if Ayr can be seen as a club that looks after its players then it may make them more attractive to potential signings. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chubbychops Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 1 minute ago, Mr. Alli said: Dunfermline fans. Whit the like. Too thick to have an opinion 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derry Alli Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 3 minutes ago, Mr. Alli said: Dunfermline fans. Whit the like. Just now, Chubbychops said: Too thick to have an opinion You said it, mate. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chubbychops Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 1 minute ago, Mr. Alli said: You said it, mate. Coming from the man that thought furlough meant everybody got 80% of £2500. I think you will find I have some pertinent points, if you grew a brain you fuckwit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derry Alli Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 6 minutes ago, Chubbychops said: Coming from the man that thought furlough meant everybody got 80% of £2500. I think you will find I have some pertinent points, if you grew a brain you fuckwit. You'll need to point out where I said that, Chubs. I genuinely have no idea what you're on about. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finlay21 Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 (edited) 48 minutes ago, Chubbychops said: Will be interesting to see what the Government makes of this. It's abuse of tax payers money. Not sure how folk can take the moral high ground on this. Nothing wrong with it legally as Ayr have not announced that any of them have been or are going to be released yet , along with the point that we are still speaking to a number of them about returning next season , hopefully by end of this furlough we will have a better idea of start time thus helping with offering a player a solid contract Edited May 23, 2020 by Robbo63 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chubbychops Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Robbo63 said: Nothing wrong with it legally as Ayr have not announced that any of them have been or are going to be released yet Not talking about legally. I'm taking about folk thinking that they have the moral high ground on this, when I personally think that's questionable. Time will tell if Ayr did this with the intention to protect long term employment or just give a wage to deadwood and use up tax payers money. Edited May 23, 2020 by Chubbychops -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thereisalight.. Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 I was re-reading the Scottish lockdown exit strategies again. “mass gatherings” to be permitted in the Autumn. Yet your man Raman is saying no crowds at football until Feb 2021. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Jaffo Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 Not talking about legally. I'm taking about folk thinking that they have the moral high ground on this, when I personally think that's questionable. Time will tell if Ayr did this with the intention to protect long term employment or just give a wage to deadwood and use up tax payers money. Why would it be the latter? There would be nothing for Ayr to gain from that. The only questionable thing here is what Dunfermline have done. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No_Problemo Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 Not talking about legally. I'm taking about folk thinking that they have the moral high ground on this, when I personally think that's questionable. Time will tell if Ayr did this with the intention to protect long term employment or just give a wage to deadwood and use up tax payers money. I think it’s incredibly clear what’s right morally tbh. Leave several people severely disadvantaged, due to the current situation, with no income for six weeks until their UC credit claim comes in or ensure they are provided with their normal pay for as long as possible... That people think it’s morally the right option to leave footballers with no money to pay bills or feed their families is bizarre. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.