Crawford Bridge Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 7 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said: A threat as empty as your head. Hearts fans throughout this: "DO THAT AND WE'LL TAKE YOU TO COURT! "DO THAT AND WE'LL BOYCOTT ALL YOUR GROUNDS" "DO THAT AND OUR INVESTOR WILL WALK AWAY" And not one person have given a single f**k. You've got no power here lads. SINK US AND WE'LL SINK YOU. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gannonball Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 13 minutes ago, bennett said: No one would have written off £150m, you know this, I know this, everyone knows this. But you do love playing up to your online persona... It could've been fitted in, the epl sides are managing but you already knew that. There would be every chance sky sports might have. They are losing money every month so it would have been an easy get out for them if we couldn’t provide what we said we would have. The Latter part regarding the €PL, its so obvious why we couldn’t do what they are doing right now and I don’t even think you are that thick to not understand this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pet Jeden Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, craigkillie said: We should have written off £150m over five years to avoid a penalty clause of as little as £1.5m? And are you proposing playing the 2019/20 Premiership season during the 2020/21 season, which is what they're planning to do with the Scottish Cup? Can you see any issue with that? Craig - I think worries about Killie's financial situation are clouding your otherwise logical thinking. The issue is not £1.5m versus £150m. That's a very deliberate misrepresentation you're making there. Year's 2 onwards of the SKY deal will either be for normal football, or the whole game is goosed anyway - the biggest clubs most of all. Celtic's wage bill is £1m per week. The issue is/was starting year 1 on August 1st or risk the first £30m being renegotiated (and any personal bonuses vanishing) versus losing £1.5m for SKY's lost games + £5-10m given away with 5 years free sponsorship + £5m (?) potentially lost from BT + any compo due to the shafted teams. Pushing the decision a certain way would be any Celtic supporters on the board because their overwhelming concern was that absolutely nothing should jeopardise them being ready for starting Euro competition and the £20m or whatever that brings them. And some 9 in a row thing you might have heard of. Hearts, Partick, Falkirk, Stranraer, Kelty/Bonnyrigg/Brora were barely a consideration. Edited June 3, 2020 by Pet Jeden -2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 20 minutes ago, bennett said: No one would have written off £150m, you know this, I know this, everyone knows this. But you do love playing up to your online persona... It could've been fitted in, the epl sides are managing but you already knew that. What is the point of hurtful comments like this, have you any idea how much damage they can do. You've left me in pieces here. I know it's not hurtful, I just think you should use less of a scatter gun approach and think your trolls through a bit more. It was impossible to fulfil both contracts (i.e. finish current season and start new contract in August) so there was also going to be a trade off in terms penalties incurred and getting income in. It makes sense to breach the smaller contract that is almost dead in order to preserve the much larger prospective contract and then try and minimise the penalty through negotiations. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 4 minutes ago, gannonball said: There would be every chance sky sports might have. They are losing money every month so it would have been an easy get out for them if we couldn’t provide what we said we would have. The Latter part regarding the €PL, its so obvious why we couldn’t do what they are doing right now and I don’t even think you are that thick to not understand this. No they wouldn't have written off the tv deal, that's pretty disingenuous from you and you know it. The games could have easily been played, broadcast on sky and the contract fulfilled without any loss of income. Then we could have started the following season but one team had to have their way and to hell with everyone else. You'll throw out more insults but we all know the truth, the rush to finish the league absolutely stinks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Day Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 1 minute ago, bennett said: The games could have easily been played How and when? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyMirren Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 1 minute ago, Dons_1988 said: I know it's not hurtful, I just think you should use less of a scatter gun approach and think your trolls through a bit more. It was impossible to fulfil both contracts (i.e. finish current season and start new contract in August) so there was also going to be a trade off in terms penalties incurred and getting income in. It makes sense to breach the smaller contract that is almost dead in order to preserve the much larger prospective contract and then try and minimise the penalty through negotiations. Agreed. Based on the fact it’s not the league choosing not to play matches but government stepping in and preventing them from doing so it may even be the case that Sky can’t claim for losses. If there’s a ‘Force Majeure’ clause in the current contract covering epidemics, pandemics, or government interventions then both parties could be relieved of their contractual obligations without penalty due to the circumstances being totally unforeseeable when the contract was drawn up. Even if not, the current circumstances could be seen as frustration, preventing one or both parties from fulfilling the obligations of the contract. I doubt a court would see the league failing to finish as entirely their fault and imposing financial penalties. It may be the case that Sky already know they’re be unlikely to enforce any penalties and for the sake of goodwill and continuation of the next contract they’ve agreed not to push for it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 5 minutes ago, Green Day said: How and when? Apparently every club should go 6 months without income, via matchdays or the final prize money amount, so we can play 8/10 games to end a season. Instead of handing out prize money that will see clubs survive until August when they can restart the new season and not impact the TV deal at all, while also allowing clubs to downsize their squads heavily in the period inbetween. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdinburghPar1975 Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 17 minutes ago, bennett said: It could've been fitted in, the epl sides are managing but you already knew that. No, I really don't think it could've. It wasn't to do about just fitting it in it was about the ability of the clubs in the league as a whole (not just Celtic and Rangers) to deal with the economics of taking players off furlough, extending/ rolling contracts and also having government permission to resume training weeks before playing (itself impacting the clubs ability to then pay full wages). I don't think you can even try to compare the situations North and South of the border as the economics are completely different. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 1 minute ago, EdinburghPar1975 said: No, I really don't think it could've. It wasn't to do about just fitting it in it was about the ability of the clubs in the league as a whole (not just Celtic and Rangers) to deal with the economics of taking players off furlough, extending/ rolling contracts and also having government permission to resume training weeks before playing (itself impacting the clubs ability to then pay full wages). I don't think you can even try to compare the situations North and South of the border as the economics are completely different. I think they're the exact opposite to us, in fact. For them, the penalty for not completing the season was too great a financial burden for them to take, hence the clamouring for it back. For us, we couldn't afford to not get prize money to teams by finishing the existing season and jeopardise the new season. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdinburghPar1975 Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 1 minute ago, Dons_1988 said: I think they're the exact opposite to us, in fact. For them, the penalty for not completing the season was too great a financial burden for them to take, hence the clamouring for it back. For us, we couldn't afford to not get prize money to teams by finishing the existing season and jeopardise the new season. Exactly, and whilst Bennet's assertion that; 17 minutes ago, bennett said: the rush to finish the league absolutely stinks ..is to me absolutely rubbish and based on nothing other than a ridiculous attempt to think 9 in a row could be stopped, I completely agree it could have been handled and dealt with a lot better than it was. As I've said before I have sympathy for all the teams relegated (but mostly Partick), but any reconstruction should be for the long term benefit of the game and not just Hearts and I just don't get that from the proposals. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aim Here Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 10 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said: Apparently every club should go 6 months without income, via matchdays or the final prize money amount, so we can play 8/10 games to end a season. Instead of handing out prize money that will see clubs survive until August when they can restart the new season and not impact the TV deal at all, while also allowing clubs to downsize their squads heavily in the period inbetween. Not to mention that the teams would need to hire players with the income they're not getting, since a pile of loan and contract expiries kicked in about 3 days ago. Either that or they could have 'easily' played football before the end of last month in defiance of government movement restrictions and the prevailing health advice. Some people may have died, but that's a chance that bennett was willing to take to resurrect Rangers' tiny chance of beating Celtic this year. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgie greatness Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 2 hours ago, Green Day said: Hearts fans wont be boycotting away grounds. They will see this as an opportunity to visit some grounds they have never seen not seen for decades not visited for a couple of seasons. Same ones you loved so much you visited for 3 seasons 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdinburghPar1975 Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 1 minute ago, Aim Here said: Not to mention that the teams would need to hire players with the income they're not getting, since a pile of loan and contract expiries kicked in about 3 days ago. Either that or they could have 'easily' played football before the end of last month in defiance of government movement restrictions and the prevailing health advice. Some people may have died, but that's a chance that bennett was willing to take to resurrect Rangers' tiny chance of beating Celtic this year. I might have misread (and apologies if I have), but haven't Rangers deferred salaries as opposed to using furlough? I thought i'd read that all salaries would need paid up to date before going back to training/ playing. Given the wedge that some of those guys would be on I wouldn't imagine the board at Ibrox would be too keen on going anywhere near a pitch for a few months yet....regardless of the stance taken in the media 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 54 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said: ..Partick, Falkirk, Stranraer, Kelty/Bonnyrigg/Brora were barely a consideration. Are we talking Hearts' approach to their failed attempts at keeping themselves in the top division? If so, I fully agree. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zing. Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 20 minutes ago, Gorgie greatness said: Same ones you loved so much you visited for 3 seasons Before returning to the top league and finishing above your mob every season since. Spoiler 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Judge Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 25 minutes ago, EdinburghPar1975 said: As I've said before I have sympathy for all the teams relegated (but mostly Partick), but any reconstruction should be for the long term benefit of the game and not just Hearts and I just don't get that from the proposals. When the call was made I had no beef with Celtic being crowned, they were comfortably ahead, but did think it was incredibly unfair on Partick, Hearts and Stranraer in that order as well as Brora/Kelty. I genuinely expected the majority of Scottish football fans to be incensed at this injustice BUT in actual fact the vast majority of feedback on P&B and Twitter has been "Ha Ha we fucking hate Hearts...get doon!!". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 46 minutes ago, bennett said: You'll throw out more insults but we all know the truth, the rush to finish the league absolutely stinks. 1) Have any games in the UK gone ahead so far? No. Which suggests getting them played before now is not a reasonable assumption. 2) Have most teams had to let go players (or players intentionally deciding to leave) due to their contracts expiring? Yes. Which suggests getting them played now is not a reasonable option. I hope that clears up any daft nonsense that we could have somehow finished the season. Calling it was the only option left, either null/void or promotion/relegation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wastecoatwilly Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, bennett said: Then we could have started the following season but one team had to have their way and to hell with everyone else. Are you suggesting Dundee got a brown envelop? Over 80% of clubs voted to end the season time to move on zippy. Plus your manager is still in a job because of the early finish to the season. Edited June 3, 2020 by wastecoatwilly 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgie greatness Posted June 3, 2020 Share Posted June 3, 2020 5 minutes ago, Zing. said: Before returning to the top league and finishing above your mob every season since. Hide contents you only got out after the big teams were promoted. Have we still got the record points in the hardest diddy league there is ever likely to be 0 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.