Jump to content
Wanderers Ways. Neil Thompson 1961-2021

Todays Games


superjohnmcginlay

Recommended Posts

  • Site Supporter
1 hour ago, green genie said:

Rather external investment into the game than Utd and Pool living off shirt and tat sales to plastic glory hunters around the country.

Really?

I prefer it as we have it now. Living in a sustainable way- if that means selling lots of merchandise, so be it.

The Salford lot marketed themselves well over the years which is what made them a target for a take-over in the first place.

City have invested well off the pitch to help make then a bit more self sufficient in terms of players coming in.

At some point their cash tap will be switched off, as will that of Newcastle etc. At that point we'll see how we'll they've prepared themselves for the future beyond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Really?

I prefer it as we have it now. Living in a sustainable way- if that means selling lots of merchandise, so be it.

The Salford lot marketed themselves well over the years which is what made them a target for a take-over in the first place.

City have invested well off the pitch to help make then a bit more self sufficient in terms of players coming in.

At some point their cash tap will be switched off, as will that of Newcastle etc. At that point we'll see how we'll they've prepared themselves for the future beyond.

Actually have some sympathy for uniteds legacy from Munich and George Best attracting a fan base over years

Local Jannerpudlians are pathetic glory hunters with no backbone who buy into the whole cult around them, despite them being bankrolled by Moores family from Div 2 to Europe in same way Abramovich and middle East have done

Sure City's academy which already generated sales to give low net spend within FFP and international investments will see them right

Edited by green genie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Wonder how that fits contractually?

 

They haven’t paid him since September 21, but as unavailable to play City won’t be worried.


Be interesting if the review of last two outstanding counts means they get dropped by CPS. He’d have an interesting case for defamation and loss of earnings 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Wonder how that fits contractually?

He has not had his contract terminated. He was still being paid till September. He will still have a transfer value if he is eventually released. Maybe not in the UK though.

City could still terminate him, employment & criminal law is entirely different.

His behaviours were admitted to be pretty low class, found guilty or not.

Meanwhile some will be retried so it's not over yet.

It was clear from ongoing Court reports that whether he was found guilty or not his behaviour was poor ... as was that of the women involved also.

Messy.

Edited by Dr. Feelgood
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
3 minutes ago, Dr. Feelgood said:

He has not had his contract terminated. He was still being paid till September. He will still have a transfer value if he is eventually released. Maybe not in the UK though.

City could still terminate him, employment & criminal law is entirely different.

His behaviours were admitted to be pretty low class, found guilty or not.

Meanwhile some will be retried so it's not over yet.

It was clear from ongoing Court reports that whether he was found guilty or not his behaviour was poor ... as was that of the women involved also.

Messy.

Bit like Ched Evans

Whilst he did manage to clear his name, he didn't come out of it well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
3 minutes ago, green genie said:

They haven’t paid him since September 21, but as unavailable to play City won’t be worried.


Be interesting if the review of last two outstanding counts means they get dropped by CPS. He’d have an interesting case for defamation and loss of earnings 

That's quite surprising: obviously you can understand a suspension, but to not receive any money during it..

A difficult situation; there's the innocent until proven guilty rule, but inevitably when such allegations and cases occur, a player can't be allowed to contribute. 

Like you say, maybe a loss of earnings claim if the last charges don't yield a conviction. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
2 minutes ago, DirtySanchez said:

Bit like Ched Evans

Whilst he did manage to clear his name, he didn't come out of it well

Indeed.

He makes a fair point about inappropriate behaviour- if that falls below what is demanded and agreed to in his contract terms etc then he's fucked.

I can't remember too much about the allegations and reports, so if his behaviour was unacceptable then good riddance from the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
1 minute ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Indeed.

He makes a fair point about inappropriate behaviour- if that falls below what is demanded and agreed to in his contract terms etc then he's fucked.

I can't remember too much about the allegations and reports, so if his behaviour was unacceptable then good riddance from the game.

Maybe there's something in a player's contract about expected conduct off the pitch 

So whilst there's innocent until proven guilty, there's also an opportunity for the club to punish them for letting them get themselves in that position in the first place, innocent or not and tarnishing the club's reputation

The remaining charges may well be dropped but if he behaves himself then the situation shouldn't arise 

There may well be spurious claims but his conduct isn't what I'd expect Man City would want of him 

Wouldn't see de bruyne being in a situation like that 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

I can't remember too much about the allegations and reports, so if his behaviour was unacceptable then good riddance from the game.

In a nutshell he, & his mate, accepted they shagged a lot of impressionable young bints and he & various colleagues (Grealish was mentioned) happily went on the pull & were none-too fussed who they shagged. Swapping them about & sharing/roasting was par for the course.

They said it was only now, after the charges, that they appreciated this was not proper behaviour.

However, they were adamant that nothing was non-consensual. The girls knew where they were going & with what end in mind.

Care needs taking about victim blaming, informed consent and "no means no" but they didn't cover themselves in glory (even if they were covered in plenty else). Certainly left room for doubt.

Very murky indeed.

From an employment contract an employer could legally determine this, even if found not guilty of criminal acts by a jury, still breached ethical codes and brought the employer into disrepute.

An employer needn't even wait for the criminal outcome. 

Edited by Dr. Feelgood
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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.