Apparently Portsmouth can lend anyone their debt. Its not against FA rules. In fact, its possible for them to apportion any part of the debt to any club. Apparently the administrator is considering moving the debt to Southampton and then Bournemouth and then Weymouth. A spokesman said they were within the rules of the FA and didn't think it contravened the spirit of the game.
i'm pretty sure the fa can veto this deal if they feel an unfair advantage is being gained. doubt it'll happen unless he is at fleetwood until qpr have played 12 games.
Hope your right WBA3-QPR2. Anyone fancy a trial with Fleetwood, we could take turns kicking the little ****. ILD OTBC
Hope he gets away with it as soon as he gets back to quite pathetic really he will get sent off again and will cost them points fine by me
Honestly, would you? Or would you **** yourself? I'm not looking to wum but genuinely curious as to what you personally would do if faced with Barton on a football pitch.
It doesn't exactly say Barton is going to Fleetwood. It says we're considering loaning him to a lower league club and that he's currently training with Fleetwood. Everyone here seems to have put 2 and 2 together and got 5.
quite right. he played against us for newcastle in a pre-season game a few years ago and the guy a few rows in front of me gave him some grief while he was about to defend a corner. barton's eyes, i'll never forget them. they said 'i wonder if you'd say that to me if there wasn't 15,000 people here with us'. proper scowling and quite scary! the guy admitted a few moments later that he thought barton was going to 'cantona' him
Certainly wouldn't **** myself, why would I? He's just another bully without any class or control. Look I'm pushing 60, so I guess he would beat me for pace now, but even now I would still stand up to him, I hate bully's and thugs. I'm just surprised your club and fans still seems to be trying to get round the ban!!! Violent behaviour in the work place is an instant dismissable offence, you should have set a precedent and sacked him! ILD OTBC
And more than likely be forced to pay him the remainder of his contract. The board spent weeks consulting with whoever knows about these things and came to the conclusion not to sack him so I can only assume that would be why. Going to Fleetwood would keep him match fit from October rather than effectively being banned for half the season if he were to stay here. I'm surprised no Championship clubs have tried to do the same thing to be honest. As much of a knob as he is, when he's on form he's still a very decent Prem player.
no championship teams are going to do it because they won't benefit from it! if he goes on loan somewhere merely to serve his ban, what's the point? if they were able to keep him till january then i'm sure they'd be interested, but this is down to qpr trying to get him back quicker. fleetwood will only be doing it for publicity. as far as i'm concerned its cheating but i don't make the rules and if there's a loophole in the system it will be exploited. i just hope the fa see exactly what is going on and deal with it properly. he should have been banned for a time period, not an amount of games.
Footballers have asked to be treated as "employees" like the rest of us. I think you'll find that employers can give two verbal, one written warning and then sack employees for misdemeanours. Why not footballers? And your choice of words is correct Supers. Its cheating. Dirty low down cheating. He doesn't need to go anywhere to keep fit. I run and keep fit without a bloody trainer or being told how to do it. Smoke screen after smoke screen to help out a piece of human trash.
In the real world, "instant dismissal", means exactly what it says, you are dismissed from your workplace/Job instantly, your contract is terminated at the same time. All you will be payed is any holiday entitlement, plus back pay to the end of the week/month! Also bear in mind if he had done that on a Saturday night outside a nightclub in front of the police he would have been arrested! I'm at a loss as to why the police didn't step in and do just that at the time, it was after all a Public order offence as well. He could have caused a riot! These people still get payed, their clubs molly coddle and protect them, and even though they have criminal records there is still clubs out there who are prepared to employ them, I hope to god we never stoop that low!! ILD OTBC
In my opinion the QPR board had three options: 1. Suck up the ban and try to bring him back into the fold 2. Try to offload him to another club either now with the ban or in January with it served 3. Instant dismissal for gross misconduct Option three may be the moral high ground but would involve the club potentially having to go to tribunal for wrongful dismissal and, if they lost, end up paying his contract out plus compensation. Even if they won the day at tribunal they would lose the asset value that Barton has when they transfer him out. Whether they are looking at option one or two I don't know but I can understand why financially they have gone down the path they have. It may stick in the throats of many but I am sure that QPR will have taken legal counsel and made the decision they have to minimise the damage to their club financailly.
Honestly, how can there be a case for wrongful dismissal??? He did it.......It was live on telly, in front of 50,0000 odd people in the stadium plus how many million T V viewers! It's been recorded for posterity, 3 acts of unprovoked violence!!!!!!! The only way that could be wrongful dismissal, would be if it was written into his contract that he was allowed to be violent to other players! I hate the scouse thug!! ILD OTBC
Is there a precedent in this country? I'm sure the first choice would have been to boot him out if it was available. If a Championship club offered to take him until Jan then it would benefit both parties. Obviously if it was a loan until the end of 12 games then it would be pointless for them.
watford, do you believe your club are cheating or rather attempting to cheat with this little move, cos i haven't found anyone who thinks you're not.
Not really, no. Though there are few similar bans to compare it to, if we're not breaking any rules then I don't see how it can be cheating. 12 games might as well have been 20 as it means he can't realistically be in the squad and loaning him out probably gets him back a bit early, depending where he goes and League Cup/LDV Auto Windscreens Cup (or whatever it is now) wins, but he'll still be out for a couple of months, which is plenty, and be able to play for a couple of months somewhere else. It benefits Barton to be loaned out but doesn't do an awful lot for the club. I wouldn't be surprised if the FA decree that he can go on loan but can't play until we have played 12 games. Seems the fairest move to me.
