Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just now, nzlatic said:

You’re missing the point. The dispute starts when AL says wheater will be topped up then changes his mind and Wheater says he doesn’t accept it. My issue is with what the club does AFTER this.

You’re missing the point. He said this to the squad, not Wheater. 
 

We agree on what happened after. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 187
  • Created
  • Last Reply
43 minutes ago, League one forever said:

Nah, sorry Dave. Comparing you’re top  earner and captain with a kid or squad filler isn’t the same. It’s quite naive.  Someone on more money should be able to handle things better than someone who is on a lot less. In fact, one may argue you could be looking at captain to lead on this, but sadly not. 


could you afford a 70% pay cut? Or even a 10%?

 

I live very comfortably on a modest salary - if 20% was taken id struggle at 70% I’d be defaulting all over the place

 

You might not like the money footballers make - I certainly don’t but they will stretch that wage every much as we will 

 

No body could be forced into Furlough , the club could have made him redundant, they didn’t, they offered something then didn’t keep to it. The club are 100% in the wrong 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, League one forever said:

You’re missing the point. He said this to the squad, not Wheater. 
 

We agree on what happened after. 

Ok, same thing though. I don’t care about the club not wanting to top up (although I do think promising something then not delivering is another common practice of theirs) just as I don’t care that Wheater didn’t accept it. It’s what happened next. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Chaddyexile84 said:


could you afford a 70% pay cut? Or even a 10%?

 

I live very comfortably on a modest salary - if 20% was taken id struggle at 70% I’d be defaulting all over the place

 

You might not like the money footballers make - I certainly don’t but they will stretch that wage every much as we will 

 

No body could be forced into Furlough , the club could have made him redundant, they didn’t, they offered something then didn’t keep to it. The club are 100% in the wrong 


I agree about saying you’ll pay the 20% then going back on it. That’s not right, and the entire squad not just Wheater have every right to be pissed at that.  It’s got nothing to do with what people earn, good luck to them. It’s the principle that when AL said, I’m not paying the top up, and you’ll all have to go on furlough- that the captain choose to kick off while the majority got their nut down and accepted it. (However hard the financial hit)

 

He isn’t special, nor should be treated differently to anyone else in the squad. I suspect he kicked off because he had the most to lose, but what do you want the club to do-

 ‘ok, we know you have the most to lose, so we’ll cover you but not the others?’ 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, League one forever said:

I honestly don’t know what you are all talking about. 
 

AL. Did. Not. Cut. ANYONES. Wages.

 

He placed his squad on furlough as he was perfectly entitled to do, which meant they had to take a cut on their wages because of their relatively high wages. A lot accepted it, a few didn’t.

 

Why? 
 

Was AL unfair when there is no coming in to place them on furlough? 

 

The inability for people to accept some balance is staggering.  For clarity, the owners are a disgrace. But that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be able to debate things, without it always being seen through that prism. 

I think that the employee had to accept being put on furlough. The employer could only offer furlough as an option. Someone who knows I’m sure will correct me if I’m wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, League one forever said:


I agree about saying you’ll pay the 20% then going back on it. That’s not right, and the entire squad not just Wheater have every right to be pissed at that.  It’s got nothing to do with what people earn, good luck to them. It’s the principle that when AL said, I’m not paying the top up, and you’ll all have to go on furlough- that the captain choose to kick off while the majority got their nut down and accepted it. (However hard the financial hit)

 

He isn’t special, nor should be treated differently to anyone else in the squad. I suspect he kicked off because he had the most to lose, but what do you want the club to do-

 ‘ok, we know you have the most to lose, so we’ll cover you but not the others?’ 
 


No I expect them to follow the threat they issued via Natalie Atkinson on the website about making anyone not accepting Furlough redundant as other non football companies had to 

 

I do not expect them to make him wear a schoolboys kit, make him travel to games he knows full well he won’t play in and have to beg a referee to wear shorts that won’t strangle his bollocks 

 

they are absolute scum 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Chaddyexile84 said:


No I expect them to follow the threat they issued via Natalie Atkinson on the website about making anyone not accepting Furlough redundant as other non football companies had to 

 

I do not expect them to make him wear a schoolboys kit, make him travel to games he knows full well he won’t play in and have to beg a referee to wear shorts that won’t strangle his bollocks 

 

they are absolute scum 


Aye. The treatment after is beyond the pale. 

3 minutes ago, Pidge said:

I think that the employee had to accept being put on furlough. The employer could only offer furlough as an option. Someone who knows I’m sure will correct me if I’m wrong. 

Fair enough.
 

Be interesting to know if the squad had turned down the furlough whether a redundancy package was due on the outstanding contract. Because if it wasn’t, I can’t understand why you wouldn’t just make them all redundant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was actually a planned campaign of bullying. As mentioned by others, the club have tried to make Wheater and others unhappy enough to forgo their contractual rights and leave.  The motive of sending a seasoned adult professional away to train with the kids, to make him live away from his young family etc etc must have been to make him unhappy.  In fact they actually inflict the injury of damage to his mental health.

 

This club are a disgrace. Clearly AL had something to gain, but those in the admin of the club who did not refuse to action this, must carry some blame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me it's simple. Whether DW was right or wrong with what he accepted or refused, the bottom line is this.

 

Our once proud club is constantly being sullied and dragged through the dirt by a pair of dispicable, nasty, self-serving, egotistical brothers who have no respect for anyone including themselves. If they had any self respect at all, they would be better human beings for it.

 

They really are the lowest of the low, and not just because of this one incident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 100milesaway said:

Has he actually played since leaving us ?

 

We held his registration until March another petty move from our lowlife scum owners and that's what they are lowlife scum. I'm sure he will play for someone else next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you were CEO at the club Neil( GlossopLatic) are you saying there were never any circumstances when you did not keep hold of registrations until it suited the club to release.

I have watched your sometimes obscene attacks on the club and individuals recently, but many will not realise you were part of a system that has many questions to answer before this ownership came on the scene.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Barryowen said:

When you were CEO at the club Neil( GlossopLatic) are you saying there were never any circumstances when you did not keep hold of registrations until it suited the club to release.

I have watched your sometimes obscene attacks on the club and individuals recently, but many will not realise you were part of a system that has many questions to answer before this ownership came on the scene.

Who are you? Can't work it out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Barryowen said:

When you were CEO at the club Neil( GlossopLatic) are you saying there were never any circumstances when you did not keep hold of registrations until it suited the club to release.

I have watched your sometimes obscene attacks on the club and individuals recently, but many will not realise you were part of a system that has many questions to answer before this ownership came on the scene.

 

 

I haven't posted regularly on here or even read the forum in a long while but is this actually the red fleeced mystro posting juicey insider info at 1.30am on a Sunday morning ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Barryowen said:

When you were CEO at the club Neil( GlossopLatic) are you saying there were never any circumstances when you did not keep hold of registrations until it suited the club to release.

I have watched your sometimes obscene attacks on the club and individuals recently, but many will not realise you were part of a system that has many questions to answer before this ownership came on the scene.

 

Hate to tell you this but I'm not Neil Joy. :lol:

 

But if your Barry Owen then that probably explains alot as it show how much you know about anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, wroteforluck87 said:

 

 

I haven't posted regularly on here or even read the forum in a long while but is this actually the red fleeced mystro posting juicey insider info at 1.30am on a Sunday morning ?

 

With the level of investigation that has gone on to come to the assumption that I am Neil Joy then you would think its quite possible that it's Barry Owen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Barryowen said:

When you were CEO at the club Neil( GlossopLatic) are you saying there were never any circumstances when you did not keep hold of registrations until it suited the club to release.

I have watched your sometimes obscene attacks on the club and individuals recently, but many will not realise you were part of a system that has many questions to answer before this ownership came on the scene.

As were you to be fair....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Barryowen said:

When you were CEO at the club Neil( GlossopLatic) are you saying there were never any circumstances when you did not keep hold of registrations until it suited the club to release.

I have watched your sometimes obscene attacks on the club and individuals recently, but many will not realise you were part of a system that has many questions to answer before this ownership came on the scene.

"you were part of a system that has many questions to answer" 

Kettle, pot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, League one forever said:

You did, Wheater went to the PFA and there was argument between them and the clubs lawyers- I assume nothing came of it. 

personally being on the end of bullying in the workplace (and took it to grievance too). I had trade union support. I just wondering if player/PFA went down this route? I did not hear that they did.

 

But it was heart-breaking to hear how he was made to feel and its impact. Sad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

With the level of investigation that has gone on to come to the assumption that I am Neil Joy then you would think its quite possible that it's Barry Owen.

I am sensing an I am Sparticus moment again, can't remember the name of the OWTB poster that B/O was trying to find a few seasons ago. Memory is shot who were they? Don't think they post on here anymore either

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...