If Armagedon really happens then there will be bugger all left for any of us to do but sit and admire the display folks so I won't be alone. Look, I agree that on face value it looks like poor treatment for Arnason. I as good as said that earlier. Tar all footballers with the same brush.......erm yes pretty much I do. Not only players but management, Boards and the FA themselves. There is very little in the way of loyalty in football from anybody. If Arnason had received an offer do you really really believe he would still have been here? Come on be honest would he? You would not have blamed any of the players had they gone either to be fair. There was no offer and therefore he had nowhere to go did he. He will get his money and had he walked away previously he would probably have gotten less money in the end from elsewhere compared to the contract he had here. It is easy to say he was loyal when he had little other option to be fair. I applaud the squad for the valiant efforts they put in considering the pay situation and moral which should have been rock bottom. And no Mrs Reid, nobody should receive their cards by text in any profession not just this one.
Well there you go Mr Pedantic Doom Mercant - just say to yourself re tha PAFC situation. Armageddon sick of it
There may be more to the story than meets the eye, I don't have a clue, but on paper this is completely unfair. He wasn't being paid for a number of months and it appears to have been more of a statement than ultimatum. "We aren't being paid so why would sign a document to say I'm not being paid" appeared to be the gist of what he was saying and if the club had a backbone they would have asked him what his problem was and resolved the situation, Arnie was a decent player for our club and as per usual the underlying agenda was most probably cutting costs. Sacking him in this fashion has made the clubs image look worse than rock bottom as it is at present. What is happening to this club?
I have a feeling he made more of a fuss than he has let on. One "No" is not likely to have led to dismissal, I could be wrong. We may never know for sure but I hope he moves on and does well elsewhere.
Looking in from outside I would say this lad has been very badly treated. I know you lot are in a serious financial situation but to sack a player for wanting to be paid!? Very strange. Anyway good luck for this season! I really want you to find someone who will invest and bring you back from the brink.
gfclukey, I don't think anyone thinks he was well treated or necessarily agrees with this outcome. Personally I would like everyone to get paid including all the businesses that have dipped out and especially the backroom staff who don't get several grand a week. I believe however that this was unavoidable if you listen to the powers that be. I also think that it was not quite how either side of the argument are trying to state. I doubt as has been said that he was asked to sign a document, said no, and was sacked instantly. There have been casualties all over the place from this Administration and there may be more bodies to come. Hopefully we are coming to the end of this now and things will finally start to look up.
Sensible, am i right in thinking that July 4th is the day we come out of administration or what is happening?
July 4th is when the sale of the club is due to complete and the Irish officially hand over ops to Ridsdale, as soon as they pay the £5,000,000 to clear our owed debt then we are able to move out of adminstration. From what I understand, although there will probably be a transition period for this.
It's been very tough on a lot of club employees, especially those who weren't on overblown player wage rates in the first place. Arnason knew exactly what the score was and has done for several months. If he was going to be "sacked" then why wasn't he "sacked" back in April or whatever because all he's done since is rack up unpaid wages that the club is now being challenged to pay in full. That makes no sense. He's chosen not to sign the waiver which DOES make a difference, contrary to what he says, since it clearly gives him an advantage over his team-mates in any subsequent claim. That was his decision and he's merely been told he's free to find another club. This doesn't make any difference to his entitlement to back-pay, such as that may be. A non story I think.
My own personal view is, and not based on any particular knowledge, is that Arnason signed the paper back then and every month since presumably because he had nowhere else to go anyway. He knows he will get paid in the end and I believe he had an inkling that another club just might employ him now on reasonable money. Hence the non signature at this stage rather than before. I sincerely hope ALL of the employees, players and backroom alike, get paid their money in the end. If players are more or less guaranteed their wedge then the backroom staff are just as important to the club and enabling it to carry on as they are. We shall see in due course but it should be born in mind that it was the old brigade who caused them not to be paid not the incoming lot. Any anger if they are not paid should be directed there. Someone could of course pay them instead of an expensive playboy holiday perhaps.
Joe I'm not quite clear on the Football League rules - I THINK that "football debts" - including players must be paid FIRST - not necessarily in FULL. So in the simple situation where the club goes bust and there's £1,000 at the end of the day, players are owed £1,500 and other people £2,000, then the players get £1,000 and that's the end of it. In this case, I presume there IS enough to pay the football debts in full once the sale of the ground is brought in BUT there are secured creditors who have mortgages on the ground - Lombard as a normal bank, Mastpoint and the Supporters Training Trust for the money they lent during the crisis. They're legally preferred creditors not just football preferred creditors, so unless they get something, I guess they ultimately have the alternative of blocking the whole deal and putting the club into liquidation. Also, the other creditors, like the taxman, are going to feel hard done by if they get nothing and the players get the lot and would vote against the scheme. So in order to get an agreement, I think everyone is getting something with the result the football debts won't be paid in full. The Football League is insisting they must be paid in full but there will be an agreement that it's done over a number of years. That means the "new" club will be starting off with a potential debt. I don't know what's in the waivers the players have been signing. Have they agreed just to defer their wages until later or have they been writing them off altogether? No idea.
As I understood it notdistant it was to defer their wages only and definately not to write them off. Why would they agree to a write off. There was no need on their part and I cannot believe any of them would have played if it had been asked of them. Certainly not enough to form a team anyway.
