Hopeless Unbeliever Posted March 22, 2013 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 Given the reactions of those who seem to know more on this situation, I think it's fair to say that this is more than just a dispute between Club D and Club P that poor wee manager M has been unfortunately caught up in the middle of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kni Posted March 22, 2013 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 Good to see Gus Poyet turn down the Reading job and stay at Brighton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peagreenboy Posted March 22, 2013 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 I'd be more concerned that club D would become skint far quicker than club P hence the reason that club P want the full amount up front. Are Club D in any trouble? They don't have Bomber "Gobshite" Brown in charge! I would have thought Club Other D would be the first to go down the plughole - especially as they're about to drop down into our friendly league ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G SUS Posted March 22, 2013 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 Good to see Gus Poyet turn down the Reading job and stay at Brighton. Are you seriously trying to compare that to MacNamara going to Dundee United? People need to get over this whole issue. He left us in an okish position, a better manager has put is in an even better position. Let's move on and focus on the run in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrantB Posted March 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 Are Club D in any trouble? They don't have Bomber "Gobshite" Brown in charge! I would have thought Club Other D would be the first to go down the plughole - especially as they're about to drop down into our friendly league ... It's no secret that they are cutting their player budget. Was one of the reasons Houston left (that and the fact that they wanted to cut his wages) Given the way they have conducted themselves over this matter, I wish a Dunfermline type situation on them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peagreenboy Posted March 22, 2013 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 It's no secret that they are cutting their player budget. Was one of the reasons Houston left (that and the fact that they wanted to cut his wages) Given the way they have conducted themselves over this matter, I wish a Dunfermline type situation on them. Yes, but cutting their playing budget isn't going down the pan, Pars style. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrantB Posted March 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 (edited) Yes, but cutting their playing budget isn't going down the pan, Pars style. Never said it was. That's wishful thinking on my part. I think club P are quite right to insist on the full amount up front. Thompson is a disgrace. Edited March 22, 2013 by GrantB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peagreenboy Posted March 22, 2013 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 Never said it was. That's wishful thinking on my part. I think club P are quite right to insist on the full amount up front. Thompson is a disgrace. But why? Just because of principle? Can we just not take the money and forget about that judas bass? Especially as we now have Super Arch confirmed as new manager? Why give any money at all to blood-sucking lawyers? Why is payment in instalments such an insult? Businessmen are in charge, not fans - what's wrong with this deal? Is it not a fairly simple deal, considering this is a burst football system, where everyone has no money at all? I really hope there's another reason for our intransigence except our ego. Which, let's face it, no Thistle fan should ever have. BUT I'm sure there must be other factors at play here, which we don't know about. I'm of course, talking from a point of ignorance and will happy to be corrected. I just don't want to see Thistle (or Team P for that matter) screwed out of money we really need - regardless of whichever league we're in next year - because of some point of pride or tribalism, or whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mediocre Pundit Posted March 22, 2013 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 Suggested on twitter than compensation is £100k for Jackie and £60k for Sid and United are only willing to pay the £80k. Don't know if true but would explain why we said no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kni Posted March 22, 2013 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 Suggested on twitter than compensation is £100k for Jackie and £60k for Sid and United are only willing to pay the £80k. Don't know if true but would explain why we said no. If true, that would be outrageous. Could the SFA take any action - enforcement or punitive measures? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potty trained Posted March 22, 2013 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 Suggested on twitter than compensation is £100k for Jackie and £60k for Sid and United are only willing to pay the £80k. Don't know if true but would explain why we said no. Completely untrue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mediocre Pundit Posted March 22, 2013 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 Completely untrue. Cool, good to know.not sure who it was that tweeted it mind. So, do you know what the deal is - are we purely haggling over timing of the money being paid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potty trained Posted March 22, 2013 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 McNamara owes us 80k. Not united. He hasn't paid it as agreed, so we are taking him to court. Pretty much exactly as the club site and The Sun have said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peagreenboy Posted March 22, 2013 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 Pretty much exactly as the club site and The Sun have said. ... it is kinda hard to believe anything The Sun Sez ... but hey, let's believe the club! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mediocre Pundit Posted March 22, 2013 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 Cheers PT. like said earlier, hope the contracts watertight. Also, McNamara is a ******. This undoes all his good work. Mon the Archie! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potty trained Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 Cheers PT. like said earlier, hope the contracts watertight. Also, McNamara is a ******. This undoes all his good work. Mon the Archie! I think you've got to say we believe we have a water tight case against him. The strength of the statement and the phrases used to describe him on the official site would suggest we have a tight case. The fact that united have distanced themselves by confirming its not them that owe us the money, also backs us up. I'd think that his contract confirmed a payment was required to be made. From what I recall united were pissing about trying to get out of paying it in one lump sum, hence why the press conference was delayed. It got to the stage that McNamara resigned from the club. I would therefore take that to mean... Up until the moment he resigned. United owed us the money, they had to "buy" his contract... However, the moment he resigned, it became his responsibility to release himself from the contract, via an 80k payment. We let him out the contract, and he still hasn't paid the 80k. We've kept our side of it, he hasn't. Unless there was a part of his contract that said it could be paid off in instalments then we have a water tight case. The fact we are chasing him for the full 80k again suggests there was nothing in the contract about paying off in instalments. I really hope this is over and done with and we win the case, the three of them on the coaching staff are darlings of the press and will no doubt already be writing their piece to the journo's to have printed for them painting us in a bad light. The fact seems to remain, we have not been paid the 80k which allowed him to leave the club. At a time when we have players contracts expiring, that's 3 or even 4 players wages for a year! Going by his tell all story to the press about our wages, 80k is about 30% of this seasons wage bill. We need that money. It's ironic that we have players that could be signed up using that 80k.., players that he's probably watching. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trotter Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 I think you've got to say we believe we have a water tight case against him. The strength of the statement and the phrases used to describe him on the official site would suggest we have a tight case. The fact that united have distanced themselves by confirming its not them that owe us the money, also backs us up. I'd think that his contract confirmed a payment was required to be made. From what I recall united were pissing about trying to get out of paying it in one lump sum, hence why the press conference was delayed. It got to the stage that McNamara resigned from the club. I would therefore take that to mean... Up until the moment he resigned. United owed us the money, they had to "buy" his contract... However, the moment he resigned, it became his responsibility to release himself from the contract, via an 80k payment. We let him out the contract, and he still hasn't paid the 80k. We've kept our side of it, he hasn't. Unless there was a part of his contract that said it could be paid off in instalments then we have a water tight case. The fact we are chasing him for the full 80k again suggests there was nothing in the contract about paying off in instalments. I really hope this is over and done with and we win the case, the three of them on the coaching staff are darlings of the press and will no doubt already be writing their piece to the journo's to have printed for them painting us in a bad light. The fact seems to remain, we have not been paid the 80k which allowed him to leave the club. At a time when we have players contracts expiring, that's 3 or even 4 players wages for a year! Going by his tell all story to the press about our wages, 80k is about 30% of this seasons wage bill. We need that money. It's ironic that we have players that could be signed up using that 80k.., players that he's probably watching. This. I also heard that Steven Pressley was due to be unveiled as the new DU manager on the Monday after a deal was struck with him on the Sunday. the problem was however that Falkirk also wanted their money in a lump sum (not sure of amount but was more than the £80k we were/are due for McNamara). Pressley was asked to consider resigning but refused to do so & so they approached Thistle to talk to McNamara. Negotiations were still ongoing to 'persuade' Pressley but to no avail so JM was offered job then the rest as is PT has described. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1971 Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 This. I also heard that Steven Pressley was due to be unveiled as the new DU manager on the Monday after a deal was struck with him on the Sunday. the problem was however that Falkirk also wanted their money in a lump sum (not sure of amount but was more than the £80k we were/are due for McNamara). Pressley was asked to consider resigning but refused to do so & so they approached Thistle to talk to McNamara. Negotiations were still ongoing to 'persuade' Pressley but to no avail so JM was offered job then the rest as is PT has described. This is exactly what happened. McNamara is showing himself up to be thoroughly classless. He left Celtic under accusations of being a treacherous wee money-grabber, and it seems that his morals are still similarly lacking. We are so much better off without him. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.