GLESGABOY Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 8 minutes ago, BumbleBeeBlastie said: What pay them for 8 weeks without any income ffs. If necessary..yes. They only had 1 game left and unless I`ve missed my guess they weren`t going to be paying 8 weeks worth of wages to an entire squad from one single game. Unless they got agreement from all the players to terminate their contracts early then they are obliged to pay the contract up in full on the terms agreed at the time of signature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BumbleBeeBlastie Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 If necessary..yes. They only had 1 game left and unless I`ve missed my guess they weren`t going to be paying 8 weeks worth of wages to an entire squad from one single game. Unless they got agreement from all the players to terminate their contracts early then they are obliged to pay the contract up in full on the terms agreed at the time of signature. Ffs. How do you think clubs like largs get wages. Out there magic money tree. See in the winter if we go 3/4 weeks without a game we're struggling like f**k to cover wages. wages come from gate money . Defending Robertson [emoji23][emoji23]. Largs were paying guys wages in those 8 weeks without a penny coming in. Gate money. Shop money. Etc etc. Your away with the fairies man. Clubs can go bust in 8 weeks without income but meanwhile paying say 16 guys 40 to 100 a week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenmuir Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 4 minutes ago, BumbleBeeBlastie said: Ffs. How do you think clubs like largs get wages. Out there magic money tree. See in the winter if we go 3/4 weeks without a game we're struggling like f**k to cover wages. wages come from gate money . Defending Robertson . Largs were paying guys wages in those 8 weeks without a penny coming in. Gate money. Shop money. Etc etc. Your away with the fairies man. Clubs can go bust in 8 weeks without income but meanwhile paying say 16 guys 40 to 100 a week. Summer football then you wont go 8 weeks without income end off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BumbleBeeBlastie Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Summer football then you wont go 8 weeks without income end off Eh??? It was 8 weeks cause of fixture man. Largs play on Astro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smudger Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Ffs. How do you think clubs like largs get wages. Out there magic money tree. See in the winter if we go 3/4 weeks without a game we're struggling like f**k to cover wages. wages come from gate money . Defending Robertson [emoji23][emoji23]. Largs were paying guys wages in those 8 weeks without a penny coming in. Gate money. Shop money. Etc etc. Your away with the fairies man. Clubs can go bust in 8 weeks without income but meanwhile paying say 16 guys 40 to 100 a week. Im not defending anyone just asking a question by your same logic about the 8 weeks no income would it not be the same if Talbot had played them on the 1st week then Largs would still have had to pay them for 7 weeks with no income cos surley players have contracts till season ends not just when your team gets put out of all compition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BumbleBeeBlastie Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Im not defending anyone just asking a question by your same logic about the 8 weeks no income would it not be the same if Talbot had played them on the 1st week then Largs would still have had to pay them for 7 weeks with no income cos surley players have contracts till season ends not just when your team gets put out of all compition? How are you just asking?? I was talking glesga boy was I not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smudger Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 How are you just asking?? I was talking glesga boy was I not Calm doon only asking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lang Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Im not defending anyone just asking a question by your same logic about the 8 weeks no income would it not be the same if Talbot had played them on the 1st week then Largs would still have had to pay them for 7 weeks with no income cos surley players have contracts till season ends not just when your team gets put out of all compition? Correct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BumbleBeeBlastie Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Calm doon only asking Aww ok I'll calm doon [emoji23]. Am calm mate. How folk cannae see my point is baffling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skid Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 All depends on what's on the players contracts. Payments could be certain number of weeks, or a certain number of payments and not necessarily the termination date ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLESGABOY Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 48 minutes ago, Skid said: All depends on what's on the players contracts. Payments could be certain number of weeks, or a certain number of payments and not necessarily the termination date ! But would still need paid up in full regardless of when Largs season ended or how many weeks they went without games etc.... Contracts aren`t linked to club income they`re due paid regardless of the clubs cashflow etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLESGABOY Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 1 hour ago, BumbleBeeBlastie said: Aww ok I'll calm doon . Am calm mate. How folk cannae see my point is baffling Because you`re point is moot. It`s got nothing to do with defending anybody. The point has been explained to you (obviously not clearly enough) If Talbot had played them on the 1st week then Largs would still have had to pay them for 7 weeks with no income.End off. A contract is binding. Is that the fixture guys fault? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BumbleBeeBlastie Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Because you`re point is moot. It`s got nothing to do with defending anybody. The point has been explained to you (obviously not clearly enough) If Talbot had played them on the 1st week then Largs would still have had to pay them for 7 weeks with no income.End off. A contract is binding. Is that the fixture guys fault? Pish. Tell largs that. How do you know what contracts there players were on. And aye your defending it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BumbleBeeBlastie Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Because you`re point is moot. It`s got nothing to do with defending anybody. The point has been explained to you (obviously not clearly enough) If Talbot had played them on the 1st week then Largs would still have had to pay them for 7 weeks with no income.End off. A contract is binding. Is that the fixture guys fault? Actually just spoke a committee man of another junior club and he's of same opinion as me. I'll take that over robertsons lover glesgaboy [emoji23][emoji23] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BumbleBeeBlastie Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 All depends on what's on the players contracts. Payments could be certain number of weeks, or a certain number of payments and not necessarily the termination date ! He's just trying to defend Robertson ffs. Prob cause his club voted him back in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLESGABOY Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 1 minute ago, BumbleBeeBlastie said: Pish. Tell largs that. How do you know what contracts there players were on. And aye your defending it. Your dislike of the fixtures guy is making you look/sound like a total fanny....try and think before you type or ask someone who is in control of all their faculties for help ffs... If, as you are suggesting, there is a possibility that the Largs players didn`t have contracts that ran until the end of the season (and probably the same contract that almost every other club/player uses) then your point is lost again as they then wouldn`t be obliged to pay anything to them with or without income or maybe they were playing without being under contract?? Did Largs decide at the start of the season to sign players on contracts that didn`t run until the end of the season?? Don`t be so stupid. Largs were left paying contracts because they failed to win enough games to extend their season by competing in the latter stages of the cups. Nothing to do with the fixtures guy.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BumbleBeeBlastie Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Your dislike of the fixtures guy is making you look/sound like a total fanny....try and think before you type or ask someone who is in control of all their faculties for help ffs... If, as you are suggesting, there is a possibility that the Largs players didn`t have contracts that ran until the end of the season (and probably the same contract that almost every other club/player uses) then your point is lost again as they then wouldn`t be obliged to pay anything to them with or without income or maybe they were playing without being under contract?? Did Largs decide at the start of the season to sign players on contracts that didn`t run until the end of the season?? Don`t be so stupid. Largs were left paying contracts because they failed to win enough games to extend their season by competing in the latter stages of the cups. Nothing to do with the fixtures guy.... Holy f**k. I suggest your making yourself look a complete walloper as well as an idiot backing up fixtures man [emoji85]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BumbleBeeBlastie Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Imagine actually thinking 8 weeks without a game don't affect clubs money. Imagine thinking it's not a problem. This is the problem. Wallopers like you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLESGABOY Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 5 minutes ago, BumbleBeeBlastie said: Actually just spoke a committee man of another junior club and he's of same opinion as me. I'll take that over robertsons lover glesgaboy Well that`s it then. You`ve spoke to a committee man................Drinking unsupervised on an empty head during the week should be a crime....the whole woe is me thing and poor Kilbirnie in relation to the fixtures guy is just embarrassing now. Get over it and if I were you I`d be more concerned about how you`re going to stay in the division next year assclown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BumbleBeeBlastie Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Well that`s it then. You`ve spoke to a committee man................Drinking unsupervised on an empty head during the week should be a crime....the whole woe is me thing and poor Kilbirnie in relation to the fixtures guy is just embarrassing now. Get over it and if I were you I`d be more concerned about how you`re going to stay in the division next year assclown Look pal you talk utter drivel. Your defending Robertson. And if you think it's all just a kilbirnie thing your wired to the moon. Ave spoke many many committee men about money side of running a club and how the fixtures man has shafted them.. And your talking shite if you think 8 weeks without a game doesn't affect a club financially. What's embarrassing is your making a tit of yourself using the old bullshit of judging me as a person [emoji23]. Cause I have different opinion. f**k up. Catch yi later yer boring me now. Maybe actually have a decent chat some day without yer bullshit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.