All things Dundee FC

[Bigmouth Strikes Again]

1 hour ago, Dundee-FC92 said:

Likewise. It's not me who began to attack posters for sharing their opinion.

Thank you.

Yeah, don't have a different opinion from him, he doesn't like it.

Thank you.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Marshall is another player who isnt good enough. Got torn apart against any decent opposition. Particularly pathetic in the 6 2 defeat. Elliot looks a decent option however.

Thank you.

 

 

The 6-2 defeat was down to McPake's gung ho attack formation - midfield offered little or no protection to the defence.

 

When Marshall has been absent from games (through injury) we have missed him - not just defensively but the options he gives us up the left. 

 

 

 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Not while football is suspended by the SFA. Clause 12 allows for suspension of the contract in full.
They cant be forced to take a pay cut but they can potentially cancel the whole contract. 

There was an article on SFA Clause 12 and the legal minefield it might be.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/sport/18346070.amp/

[Skyline Drifter]

14 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

There was an article on SFA Clause 12 and the legal minefield it might be.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/sport/18346070.amp/

That article fundamentally offers nothing to suggest Clause 12 is a legal minefield. It says its unlikely you could use it to enforce wage cuts, which is true, but nobody ever said you could. The suggestion is that if players dont agree wage cuts then Clause 12 would be used to cancel contracts altogether. In those terms all the article is saying is this will generate bad PR. I think clubs are well aware of that which is why they want to avoid it.

I have little doubt the potential invoking of Clause 12 may well result in a legal dispute about its validity but that article offers no insight into it at all.

Edited to add : The clause is an SPFL one in their standard contracts, it has nothing to do with the SFA directly.

Edited July 11, 2020 by Skyline Drifter

[DeeTillEhDeh]

That article fundamentally offers nothing to suggest Clause 12 is a legal minefield. It says its unlikely you could use it to enforce wage cuts, which is true, but nobody ever said you could. The suggestion is that if players dont agree wage cuts then Clause 12 would be used to cancel contracts altogether. In those terms all the article is saying is this will generate bad PR. I think clubs are well aware of that which is why they want to avoid it.

I have little doubt the potential invoking of Clause 12 may well result in a legal dispute about its validity but that article offers no insight into it at all.

Edited to add : The clause is an SPFL one in their standard contracts, it has nothing to do with the SFA directly.

I didn't say it offered a great insight but that it did touch on it potentially being a legal minefield.

 

'Cradden, who anticipates that players could be free to leave and join other teams for nothing if clubs decide to suspend their contracts, believes invoking the clause could be a legal minefield.

 

“It is interesting that they (Hearts) are asking them (the players) to agree,” she said. “If you were very confident about your ability to enforce a variation clause then you wouldn’t look for agreement, you would just impose it."'

 

 

Also - agree with your edit - my error - it us the standard SPFL contract.

[Skyline Drifter]

8 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

I didn't say it offered a great insight but that it did touch on it potentially being a legal minefield.

 

'Cradden, who anticipates that players could be free to leave and join other teams for nothing if clubs decide to suspend their contracts, believes invoking the clause could be a legal minefield.

 

“It is interesting that they (Hearts) are asking them (the players) to agree,” she said. “If you were very confident about your ability to enforce a variation clause then you wouldn’t look for agreement, you would just impose it."'

 

 

Also - agree with your edit - my error - it us the standard SPFL contract.

I agree. But Cradden is talking about clubs trying to use Clause 12 to "enforce a variation". Thats missing the point entirely. Clubs were asking players to ACCEPT a variation or else they would invoke clause 12 and cancel altogether. Clubs were well aware doing so would result in the player walking away for nothing. That was made quite clear in the legal advice given to clubs so its not a road they were likely to go down in relation to any player with a significant resale value.

In short, I'm not an employment lawyer but Harper MacLeod are and they drew up the standard contract. Its quite conceivable there may be arguments about the enforcability of Clause 12 but that article is misdirected on an issue which wasnt being suggested. Nobody was saying agree a wage cut or we will impose one which is what it suggssts. They are saying agree a wage cut or we will cancel your contract altogether. Its awful PR but if the alternative is not being able to cover payroll it is where they will go.  But its a limited opportunity on a closing door. When the SFA lift the blanket suspension of Championship football, which is likely to be within this month, then the opportunity to invoke clause 12 will disappear.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

I agree. But Cradden is talking about clubs trying to use Clause 12 to "enforce a variation". Thats missing the point entirely. Clubs were asking players to ACCEPT a variation or else they would invoke clause 12 and cancel altogether. Clubs were well aware doing so would result in the player walking away for nothing. That was made quite clear in the legal advice given to clubs so its not a road they were likely to go down in relation to any player with a significant resale value.

In short, I'm not an employment lawyer but Harper MacLeod are and they drew up the standard contract. Its quite conceivable there may be arguments about the enforcability of Clause 12 but that article is misdirected on an issue which wasnt being suggested. Nobody was saying agree a wage cut or we will impose one which is what it suggssts. They are saying agree a wage cut or we will cancel your contract altogether. Its awful PR but if the alternative is not being able to cover payroll it is where they will go.  But its a limited opportunity on a closing door. When the SFA lift the blanket suspension of Championship football, which is likely to be within this month, then the opportunity to invoke clause 12 will disappear.

 

So the reporting as "suspended without pay" is in fact inaccurate?

 

What happens in terms of the player's registration in this situation?

 

[johnnydun]

Down to one player not taking a cut now. 

Wonder who?

[Skyline Drifter]

4 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

 

So the reporting as "suspended without pay" is in fact inaccurate?

 

What happens in terms of the player's registration in this situation?

 

I have no idea what Dundee are seeking to do obviously. I would have thought you could only suspend without pay while football itself is suspended so it would have a very limited benefit but as prev noted I am not a lawyer. Certainly the advice to clubs back when they were asking players to agree furlough contracts was that an alternative was cancellation under clause 12. 

[RossBFaeDundee]

3 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

I have no idea what Dundee are seeking to do obviously.

Get all the players to agree to wage cuts. Clearly they don't want to use the clause, as they would have used the clause on the two (now one) still holding out by now.

Edited July 11, 2020 by RossBFaeDundee

[Skyline Drifter]

1 minute ago, RossBFaeDundee said:

Get all the players to agree to wage cuts. Clearly they don't want to use the clause, as they would have used the clause on the two (now one) still holding out.

Well yes obviously. 

I meant I dont know what they are threatening them with otherwise, suspension or cancellation.

[This Charming Man]

9 minutes ago, johnnydun said:

Down to one player not taking a cut now. 

Wonder who?

Tell you what Johnny, let's just hope it's not Finlay Robertson or Kane Hemmings.

As for some of the others, oh dear, what a shame, never mind!

Best regards

[johnnydun]

1 minute ago, This Charming Man said:

Tell you what Johnny, let's just hope it's not Finlay Robertson or Kane Hemmings.

As for some of the others, oh dear, what a shame, never mind!

Best regards

I doubt it would be Finlay Robertson, might be Hemmings or Dorrans, although imo they would be the ones that wouldn't need the money as much.

I'm thinking Byrne, Ness or Forster.

[RossBFaeDundee]

Can't help but think it's Dorrans.

 

[Derry Alli]

3 minutes ago, johnnydun said:

I doubt it would be Finlay Robertson, might be Hemmings or Dorrans, although imo they would be the ones that wouldn't need the money as much.

I'm thinking Byrne, Ness or Forster.

I'm fairly certain it'll be Byrne. 

[Meeniedee]

i would like to think boys like robertson who are probably on a few hundred quid per week are immune to these cuts.

[This Charming Man]

12 hours ago, johnnydun said:

I'm thinking Byrne, Ness or Forster.

12 hours ago, RossBFaeDundee said:

Can't help but think it's Dorrans.

12 hours ago, Mr. Alli said:

I'm fairly certain it'll be Byrne. 

Fingers and toes crossed then regarding all the above, imho.     ( Edit;  to get rid of any or all of them that is, not retain them.)

Assume Jack has accepted a 70% deduction, lol. 

Regards

 

Edited July 12, 2020 by This Charming Man

[RossBFaeDundee]

38 minutes ago, Mr. Alli said:

I'm fairly certain it'll be Byrne. 

Where's this certainty coming from?

[RandomGuy.]

12 minutes ago, RossBFaeDundee said:

Where's this certainty coming from?

Logically he's the only at your club who joined specifically for the money.

Dorrans is friendly with McPake and was that not a large part of him joining? While Hemmings has an obvious connection to the club and fans.

[D'Jaffo]

I’d love Byrne at Ayr.

He’s clearly a decent player but only Livingston have managed to get the best out of him.