...all feature in this interesting article from the Daily Express. Warnock has a clause which allows him to resign at any time. He apparently gets his petrol costs paid for by the club. Oh yeah, and the real reason Bates can't come and watch us is apparently because he spent so long celebrating his 80th back in Blighty. Real case of side before self there, eh, Ken? please log in to view this image
Bates knows he faces a barrage of abuse if he does show his face at Elland Road. THE TIDE HAS TURNED AGAINST YOU KENNY BOY!
What im hearing is Bates has put things in the contract he wouldn't normally so he gets the manager that the fans want... [awaiting Loiner's angry reply at why bates is a cockhead]
The reason why Bates can't come to the UK before 5 April is for tax reasons. Like all expats, he is subject to something called the 90 day rule. This allows you to be in the UK for only 90 days a year before you fall victim to the tax man. This happened to a former colleague. Unfortunately, he had to return suddenly due to his son breaking his back in a game of rugby. Tax man was there waiting for him. Nice eh? On Warnock, if he gets us up before the end of next season, whatever we'll have paid him or he'll have claimed for would have been worth it. Talking of worth it, I see Paynter scored again last night. For all the abuse he gets on here & the other site, I really hope Warnock can help Paynter rediscover his Swindon goal scoring touch. A front 4 of Paynter, Becchio, McCormack & a rejuvinated Somma would scare the sh&t out defences in this league. It should also worry quite a few defences in the PL as well. Morning by the way.
Boggers To be fair they know the rules and if they choose to avoid tax they have to stick with the consequences if for a reason they need to come into the country, ive got no time for tax dodgers!!!
Fair point YWBK. But the case I was referring to was as a result of this bloke's company sending him abroad to represent them. As such the Inland Revenue rules made him a tax exile, which meant he could only spend 90 days in any one tax year in the UK. Normally that wouldn't be a problem. But the rules don't really take account of such emergencies. That said, his company might have helped him out. Shaks, why should Paynter retire? If he finds his goalscoring touch, he'll get a hatful. Are Chelski suggesting Torres retires?
I still think Paynter could have a use if we can get him firing, but I don't see him as anything more than backup for Becchio at best.
Paynter, isnt and will not ever be good enough, not for this club, not for this league! Everyone could see that in L1! Warnock will get him out. I listened to the LUST broadcast from the magic sponge (I think) a while back & Bates couldnt comment because he had a cold (shame it didnt turn into anything worse) but that was on his 80th birthday. Hang over more like it Kenny boy?
Paynter ? or Torres? I wouldn't even put them in the same bracket. But I would have got rid of Torres ages ago or I'd pay him put goal. As for Paynter IMO should have been given away a long time ago. He's had too many chances and IMO is a step backwards if he ever plays for us again. We should have tried to get B. Sharp and paid him Paynters wages on top of his own.
The fact Paynter's desparately scrabbling to get recognition for 'goals' against Newcastle in a friendly and Hull in a reserve game behind closed doors shows how far he's fallen. 'Useless lump' would be putting it kindly.
Everyone gets a chance to prove themselves to the new manager. Paynter will only prove himself to be a useless lump - hopefully long before he gets anywhere near the first team.
I'd have preferred us to keep playing Paynter than sign Forsell. Forsell hasn't done better and has taken up wages. Paynter should leave, but only for better quality.
I'd have to agree. Got to admit though, I was pleased when we signed Forsell. Looked good on paper. Didn't realise though that it was lavvy paper. (Which is where you'd expect to find ****e).
