Transfer Embargo
- Thread starter Chazz Rheinhold
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
I have zero ****ing clue who you are, apart from maybe called James and you maybe support the Tigers.
You calling anyone a ‘drama queen’ when you have a full-on meltdown whenever Mike White or any other journalist dares to criticise Acun or ask him difficult questions in interviews is the pot calling the kettle black.
I do not want the club to fail or go bust or anything of the sort. I don’t revel in the club’s current predicament either. All the red flags have been there for ages. I do want Acun to sell the club and have done for a year. I’m not shy in expressing that. I think he’s a terrible owner.
He's juggling money from his other companies, he said as much at the q&a.
The views expressed in my posts are not necessarily mine.
Crikey even the egg chasers are piling in on us now .. Good old Hill Daily Fail
Maguire was speaking in the wake of the Tigers being handed a transfer fee restriction punishment by the RFL for non payments, which leaves the club unable to sign any players in this transfer window for a fee or loan players with a fee attached. That punishment will stand for the next three transfer windows, with City currently going through the process of appealing the punishment in the hope of getting it reduced.
Maguire was speaking in the wake of the Tigers being handed a transfer fee restriction punishment by the RFL for non payments, which leaves the club unable to sign any players in this transfer window for a fee or loan players with a fee attached. That punishment will stand for the next three transfer windows, with City currently going through the process of appealing the punishment in the hope of getting it reduced.
The thing is Drew, it was openly discussed the players were informed they would be paid 2 days late due to an International money transfer, this may have been delayed by a Bank Holiday, National Holiday etc, and they were supposedly paid within the month in which they should have been paid. Have we heard anyone kicking up a fuss, if so I missed it. For sure, you would hope money is in the UK account as necessary. As for the transfer, the club are saying we hold a credit note which covers the cost of Barry, two transactions separate, but in the case of a credit note it cant be used against the initial transaction because thats already dead in the water and will be used against a future transaction. As for the suing, if he had left names out of it and simply said 'the owners' of the mentioned clubs or his opening gambit, I'd be inclined to agree. I personally think he would struggle to prove much of what has been written and most of it as it stands is supposition lending itself to make a story.
Last edited:
Totally. If you want more time off accept been paid less. Not sure the agents will push for that one.
The article is very dramatic, but people are jumping to Acun’s defence because of what he is saying has happened, & which is happening. Acun is very good at spinning stuff, but if it all comes crashing down around him, then it’s going to make him look very bad & those that defended him look stupid.
For now, everyone should keep their powder dry & look at only the facts, not what he said, she said.
Current facts, as far as I can tell:
We paid wages late a couple of months ago!
We didn’t pay a loan fee within a specified time period!
We currently have a 3 window transfer fee ban!
Answers to those, from Acun, were:
Money from overseas delayed the wage payment!
Some confusion of who owed who what, & it’s all sorted now, we’re all friends & good relations, all paid off, nothing to worry about!
We’re appealing it!
Outside of that, it’s all here say!
What will happen, will happen!
For now, everyone should keep their powder dry & look at only the facts, not what he said, she said.
Current facts, as far as I can tell:
We paid wages late a couple of months ago!
We didn’t pay a loan fee within a specified time period!
We currently have a 3 window transfer fee ban!
Answers to those, from Acun, were:
Money from overseas delayed the wage payment!
Some confusion of who owed who what, & it’s all sorted now, we’re all friends & good relations, all paid off, nothing to worry about!
We’re appealing it!
Outside of that, it’s all here say!
What will happen, will happen!
It doesn’t take an article to damage our current reputation.
It’s simply factual that there are currently only two clubs under fee restrictions in all tiers of the EFL: us and Sheffield Wednesday. There are a lot of EFL clubs with unfit or mental owners, yet they haven’t ended up on that list. Sure, there are a lot of nuances to City’s situation but, to me, being one of only two teams restricted from paying for players speaks volumes about Acun’s tenure as owner and our current state as a club.
A competent owner wouldnt have us with a fee restriction
Full stop
Full stop
It’s feels like the EFL charges caught most media by surprise so it feels like HDM and Radio Humberside and others were caught off guard and have been playing catch up a bit.
it feels like they’ve rolled it in to a narrative they were aware of and had likely been building a report on, the missed payments to suppliers. Add to that the ‘late’ player wages and you have the article above.
it’s not great and the club deserve criticism. It might change but at this stage the three things are separate and so feel need to be dealt with as much. For the moment at least.
Players were paid within contracted time. With the excuse of international money transfers. Not ideal but in isolation fine.
The current EFL saga if down to the Barry fee and a credit note. It could well be lifted almost straight away at the appeal if true. No issues, just a misunderstanding.
The late payment to the suppliers is ann issue that needs sorting but currently isn’t an EFL thing. It’s bad practice but could well be a cultural thing. Needs address ASAP but not the same thing.
it feels like they’ve rolled it in to a narrative they were aware of and had likely been building a report on, the missed payments to suppliers. Add to that the ‘late’ player wages and you have the article above.
it’s not great and the club deserve criticism. It might change but at this stage the three things are separate and so feel need to be dealt with as much. For the moment at least.
Players were paid within contracted time. With the excuse of international money transfers. Not ideal but in isolation fine.
The current EFL saga if down to the Barry fee and a credit note. It could well be lifted almost straight away at the appeal if true. No issues, just a misunderstanding.
The late payment to the suppliers is ann issue that needs sorting but currently isn’t an EFL thing. It’s bad practice but could well be a cultural thing. Needs address ASAP but not the same thing.
Yes, as Acun explains.
Regardless of the explanation though - the players were paid late (2 days, whatever) as we didn’t have the money in the U.K. to pay them. Samuels said that the money wasn’t available to pay them - that’s correct. It being available a couple of days later doesn’t make the first statement untrue.
As for the Barry transfer - it seems a mess from the outside of football world, I’m sure it makes sense inside. But the fact of the matter is if we had the money available - why did we miss the payment.
As I say, the article feels sensational and not quite the full truth - but I really don’t feel as though it falls into defamation.
Surely its for the best if we arent allowed to sign anyone for fees
Dont trust this current ownership anymore
Dont trust this current ownership anymore
If you bought something and you had a credit note and then went back to the same shop, would you pay in cash or use the credit note.
The defamation I was referring to was more personal.
As for Samuels saying the money wasn't available to pay them, its pure guesswork.. If you are paid monthly, sometimes you'll get in on the 26th, sometimes the 28th.... as I said no one seems to have kicked up a stinks unless a player has leaked it to HDM or an employee.
Anyway....
It doesn’t really matter if a player kicked up a stink or not.
My point is that it’s a fact that the money wasn’t available to pay them on the normal day - everything else about whether it’s acceptable to be only 2 days late with warning is opinion.
There are some here who are in the vehemently Acun out camp, calling him all sorts and hanging him out to dry and haranguing others for thinking differently. Entitled to their opinion of course, daft all thats what. forum is for.
The other camp is one of 'its an absolute **** show and no denying' and leaves us in a bad position, but at the same time remembering what the man has tried to do. and done. Has he done wrong, the truth will out.
In any walk of life no one should ever by hung for trying their absolute best, even if they come up short.
Hes not trying to learn to play an instrument
Hes playing with millions of pounds with the future of the club potentially at risk
He didnt spend the money out of the goodness of his heart
And again
No well run clubs have this fee restriction in place in the first place