Players leaving after not getting paid, or refusing to play?

[grovehill]

I've heard that Marcel is the one who's most distressed about not being paid.

Apparently he's had to borrow money off the in-laws over the last few months..

Sadly, he can't do that this week as they seem to have gone away for a few days.

 

[oggyale]

If a player refuses to play,for whatever reason,can the club then sack said player?.

 

[Wozzer]

cant blame any player for refusing to play...they haven't been paid for january and it doesn't look like they will be paid for february.you can only take this for so long before you react.

Nor can I. I think they should all take industrial action with immediate effect ... players and staff alike. Force these people to act.
I just can't understand people who continue to work when their employers treat them so badly.
I hope fans will remember, that while none of this situation was caused by Ridsdale, he certainly is in no hurry to bring things to a conclusion. In fact I would suggest the longer this situation continues, the happier he will be.
Time's a movin' on and nothing is being paid ... it all helps to reduce this season's liabilities of who takes over. As we are told Argyle are being run by Ridsdale at the moment, I must accept this cynical policy is his. How on earth can anyone think this guy is doing a good job.

PP I have you down as an intelligent man. With potential buyers the speed is out of Risdale s hands. In fact any purchase of a business takes time.

 

[blenks]

cant blame any player for refusing to play...they haven't been paid for january and it doesn't look like they will be paid for february.you can only take this for so long before you react.

Nor can I. I think they should all take industrial action with immediate effect ... players and staff alike. Force these people to act.
I just can't understand people who continue to work when their employers treat them so badly.
I hope fans will remember, that while none of this situation was caused by Ridsdale, he certainly is in no hurry to bring things to a conclusion. In fact I would suggest the longer this situation continues, the happier he will be.
Time's a movin' on and nothing is being paid ... it all helps to reduce this season's liabilities of who takes over. As we are told Argyle are being run by Ridsdale at the moment, I must accept this cynical policy is his. How on earth can anyone think this guy is doing a good job.

PP I have you down as an intelligent man. With potential buyers the speed is out of Ridsdale s hands. In fact any purchase of a business takes time.

But he wants to run the club for one of these new investors/owners he's supposedly got lined up and have a healthy slice of the action for zero personal financial input. So I reckon he will continue to manipulate the situation and play factions off against one another until he eventually gets what he wants or the club folds. If the club does end up being liquidated, which is still a possibility, he'll simply walk away and say he did his best as an unpaid consultant but it was just an impossible task.

I actually believe he'll get what he wants at the cheapest possible price and at the time of his choosing, in or out of administration - probably in it.

 

[Anonymous]

That's my worry as well.

He's gambling, if he wins, he's got himself brand new train set.

If he loses, he shrugs his shoulders, walks off into the sunset, and at the next fans meeting with (say) PNE, he'll say, 'I said along that there was only a 30% chance of surviving and those bunch of muppets couldn't run a pi$$ up in a brewery'.

 

[blenks]

That's my worry as well.

He's gambling, if he wins, he's got himself brand new train set.

If he loses, he shrugs his shoulders, walks off into the sunset, and at the next fans meeting with (say) PNE, he'll say, 'I said along that there was only a 30% chance of surviving and those bunch of muppets couldn't run a pi$$ up in a brewery'.

Precisely. As has been said before it's a complicated financial House of Cards and it'll either have some sort of resolution and stay intact for a while with him firmly at the helm calling all the shots or it'll collapse into the 'too hard to do' box.

 

[victor]

Ridders made it clear today that players are preferred creditors so, in the event of administration, they are guaranteed full payment of the money they are owed, and have not been paid.

However, the backroom staff do not have this cover.

So, the players have nothing to worry about - their payments may be delayed but they will come, whatever happens! It's the backroom staff that have to be worried, and they are clearly not the ones on thousands a week.

So, I say that the players should keep quiet and count their enormous blessings.

Furthermore, if they fail to perform for us, who will want most of them if we go bust?

They need to keep themselves on a wanted list, if nothing else!

 

[blenks]

Ridders made it clear today that players are preferred creditors so, in the event of administration, they are guaranteed full payment of the money they are owed, and have not been paid.

However, the backroom staff do not have this cover.

So, the players have nothing to worry about - their payments may be delayed but they will come, whatever happens! It's the backroom staff that have to be worried, and they are clearly not the ones on thousands a week.

So, I say that the players should keep quiet and count their enormous blessings.

Furthermore, if they fail to perform for us, who will want most of them if we go bust?

They need to keep themselves on a wanted list, if nothing else!

Provided the club can actually come out of administration of course and that's not 100% guaranteed - many, many legal and financial hurdles to overcome I suspect.

 

[victor]

Blenks - they also have the insurance policy of the PFA of course!

 

[richy2704]

Blenks - they also have the insurance policy of the PFA of course!

I was just about to say that the PFA loan applied for will pay there wages so they cant just walk out as Argyle will pay back that loan.......................eventually!!!!

 

[GreenGreen]

The players wages are considered a footballing debt. My understanding is the footballing debts have to be met in full by any new owners.

It's the not so magnificent seven, with the unsecured loans and the inland revenue and any non football debts that are bottom of the pile.

The sticky bits are the debts that are secured against the ground, but even these have limited value given the covenant on the land, suppose they have a value according to what you could charge a professional footie team to play on them. So these people may end up as landlords having bought a buy-to-let football ground.

 

[Dave Stoneman]

Ridders made it clear today that players are preferred creditors so, in the event of administration, they are guaranteed full payment of the money they are owed, and have not been paid.

However, the backroom staff do not have this cover.

So, the players have nothing to worry about - their payments may be delayed but they will come, whatever happens! It's the backroom staff that have to be worried, and they are clearly not the ones on thousands a week.

So, I say that the players should keep quiet and count their enormous blessings.

Furthermore, if they fail to perform for us, who will want most of them if we go bust?

They need to keep themselves on a wanted list, if nothing else!

Well, said Victor.
I'm sorry to have to say it but I think that a number of the players we have had over the last two to three years have not delivered what I felt as supporters was due. Things like committment, effort, passion and pride. For the latter part of last season a good number of performances were woeful and lacked anything that might be have been considered professional. And yet these players continued to draw down payment, through what I assume to be relatively standard contracts, tweeked to account for whatever personal terms can be squeezed out by agents.

Now, don't get me wrong I more than happy to see any individual rewarded for dedication, performance and committment, but I doubt that there are many supporters of any club who, if they put in a half assed working week and feeble performances, would expect anything other than a good kick up the ass as a start and ultimately the sack.

I am delighted that the PFA has a safety net for players, especially for those who through no fault of their own find themselves unpaid for the good work they have done, but, the players too are part of the problem in that the wages they can negotate seem, to me at least, lacking in any downward related playing performance penalty and absurdly large in relation to what is third tier football.

It has to be said that high wage demands and poor performances have been a significant contribution to the state in which Argyle find themselves. Irrespective of who is to blame for agreeing to stump up weekly payments of £5000 plus for journeyman players, the trend mirrors the malaise that is affecting football. Namely, living beyond our means to try and achieve some sort of success.

Yes, people should get paid for the work they do and ultimately the players will, but, If success means that putting players on a pedestal at the expense of abandoning backroom staff, living beyond our means, making local business suffer and forgetting we are a football club-Count me out. I don't ever want to go through this again.

 

[Wasteman]

Why is everyone so interested in the pointless speculation and politics ... let them swim in their own s***. Not worth wasting our time on them.