Is O'Neil right?

[ElmerFudd 0]

https://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/canaries-gary-o-neil-danel-sinani-timing-criticism-furloughing-staff-1-6606453

 

I find it embarrassing that City with millions in assets on the field should ask low paid workers to pay tax to subsidize their non-playoff staff, which I assume even includes Mr Webber, this cannot sit well with socialists like Delia and Michael.

[JF 694]

Sigh 😔 

[ElmerFudd 0]

2 minutes ago, JF said:

Sigh 😔 

Surely as football fans we can see that Liverpool and Spurs supporters did the right thing by challenging their clubs?

[First Wazzock 1,014]

Yawn...

[FenwayFrank 2,717]

This hasn’t been mentioned before....

Edited April 14, 2020 by FenwayFrank

[nutty nigel 7,902]

Now Elmer, do you know PortmanKing and his history on here?

I should imagine that it doesn't sit well with  you that he pledged money for our DS boys and girls and then reneged on it. I should imagine that you find it embarrassing that City fans made up the shortfall so that the CSF didn't have to go without.

If you come across him on your travels perhaps you could let him know how embarrassed you are by his behaviour. Behaviour that we have seen all to often from your grubby little club.

[JF 694]

44 minutes ago, ElmerFudd said:

Surely as football fans we can see that Liverpool and Spurs supporters did the right thing by challenging their clubs?

We’re not in the same stratosphere as either of those clubs when it comes to finances. We and many other clubs are going to have a battle on our hands to stay in business. We’re using the scheme for the exact reason it’s there to be used. To keep people employed and earning during this crisis instead of having to let them go

[yellow_belly 227]

Yes 100%. Any non NCFC  supporter (Eg the vast majority) feel that we are wrong. The echo chamber on here thinks differently. Obviously they are right!!

[JF 694]

5 minutes ago, yellow_belly said:

Yes 100%. Any non NCFC  supporter (Eg the vast majority) feel that we are wrong. The echo chamber on here thinks differently. Obviously they are right!!

So you’d rather the club just let the staff go then....

[Herman 11,136]

29 minutes ago, JF said:

We’re not in the same stratosphere as either of those clubs when it comes to finances. We and many other clubs are going to have a battle on our hands to stay in business. We’re using the scheme for the exact reason it’s there to be used. To keep people employed and earning during this crisis instead of having to let them go

This.

Where oh wise ones is the money going to come from to keep staff on?

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

34 minutes ago, JF said:

We’re not in the same stratosphere as either of those clubs when it comes to finances. We and many other clubs are going to have a battle on our hands to stay in business. We’re using the scheme for the exact reason it’s there to be used. To keep people employed and earning during this crisis instead of having to let them go

Does that answer the OPs question though? I mean, he did follow it up with a statement about furlough, but his question was "Is O'Neil right" which relates to signing a player during furlough. 

It didn't sit right with me. 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

5 minutes ago, Herman said:

This.

Where oh wise ones is the money going to come from to keep staff on?

The OP's question related to the signing of a player during furlough.

[lake district canary 4,831]

2 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

The OP's question related to the signing of a player during furlough.

The signing was a done deal ages ago. All that has been done is the formality of signing on the dotted line and so fulfilling a commitment that had already been made.

[Branston Pickle 4,150]

We have spent zilch on him, all that’s happened is him agreeing to join us in the summer.  Period.  O’Neil is just an idiot with a microphone.  Those who disagree with us using the retention scheme simply don’t understand what it is for.

Edited April 14, 2020 by Branston Pickle

[Herman 11,136]

10 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

The OP's question related to the signing of a player during furlough.

In that case then no.

[JF 694]

11 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Does that answer the OPs question though? I mean, he did follow it up with a statement about furlough, but his question was "Is O'Neil right" which relates to signing a player during furlough. 

It didn't sit right with me. 

As I understand it the deal was agreed in January, long before we knew what was about to happen in the coming months. Apparently the player himself was the one to announce the deal now so after that then I guess the club had to also

[Branston Pickle 4,150]

4 minutes ago, JF said:

As I understand it the deal was agreed in January, long before we knew what was about to happen in the coming months. Apparently the player himself was the one to announce the deal now so after that then I guess the club had to also

Pretty much.

i think what’s happening here is twofold i) some just want to bash the club and/or don’t understand the retention scheme, and ii) some who don’t seem to understand how pre-contract signings work.

The point is, we pretty much knew in January that he was signing, had it been made official then, no one would be giving a stuff. 

[ElmerFudd 0]

1 hour ago, nutty nigel said:

Now Elmer, do you know PortmanKing and his history on here?

I should imagine that it doesn't sit well with  you that he pledged money for our DS boys and girls and then reneged on it. I should imagine that you find it embarrassing that City fans made up the shortfall so that the CSF didn't have to go without.

If you come across him on your travels perhaps you could let him know how embarrassed you are by his behaviour. Behaviour that we have seen all to often from your grubby little club.

What?

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

47 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

some who don’t seem to understand how pre-contract signings work. 

Well I know that a player can sign for another club once there is fewer than 6 months left remaining on a players deal, although that would be 31st January or 1st February. 

If the player is under 24 though and their parent club offers them a deal at least equal to their current deal a compensation fee is owed to the parent club.

I can't imagine that his parent club wouldn't offer to match his current deal in order to trigger compensation, so people can stop saying that the deal is 'free' even if it were pre-crisis.

Where does this information come that, that he signed in January? 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

1 hour ago, lake district canary said:

The signing was a done deal ages ago.

Source? I've not seen this anywhere. 

[lake district canary 4,831]

11 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

1 hour ago, lake district canary said:

The signing was a done deal ages ago.

Source? I've not seen this anywhere. 

It has been known for weeks that he was going to sign.

[BigManInTheBarclay 84]

Didn't the player post that he's joining multiple times before the club did?

Kind of forced their hand in the decision to announce it. Maybe they weren't planning to until much later.

 

O'Neil is very quick to point the finger seemingly to get some attention.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

1 hour ago, ElmerFudd said:

What?

King Keano? 

Do you know him?

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 4,627]

Whether furloughing is right or wrong, and I think most agree that it probably isn't right, complaining about the Sinani deal is wrong for three major reasons:

- the deal won't come into effect until July anyway, so the club hasn't actually spent anything now apart from the electricity for the fax machine.

- regardless of whether most of the staff has been furloughed, the club is still a football club and business, and continues to operate with what staff are left behind. Signing footballers is a key part of the business.

- the deal was already reported as being done a couple of months ago- it has only now been confirmed. 

There's also a fourth point, but not as weighty as the other three, about the finances involved in this deal: it's a very cheap one and Sinani will take the place of Duda and possibly other higher-earning players, which means this deal actually saves the club money.

[norfolkbroadslim 225]

33 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

It has been known for weeks that he was going to sign.

That's not the same thing.

[Yellow Kiwi 20]

Sinani deal agreed by end of January. Pretty much feels to me like all they have done is finished up paperwork. Link is here for you TVB

https://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/ncfc-rumours-sinani-summer-deal-agreed-1-6486607

[norfolkbroadslim 225]

1 hour ago, Branston Pickle said:

We have spent zilch on him, all that’s happened is him agreeing to join us in the summer.  Period.  O’Neil is just an idiot with a microphone.  Those who disagree with us using the retention scheme simply don’t understand what it is for.

You mean other than a Signing on fee? Agent's fees? A commitment to pay his wages at 'x' thousands a week for 156 weeks starting in July.

Edited April 14, 2020 by norfolkbroadslim

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 4,627]

49 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Well I know that a player can sign for another club once there is fewer than 6 months left remaining on a players deal, although that would be 31st January or 1st February. 

If the player is under 24 though and their parent club offers them a deal at least equal to their current deal a compensation fee is owed to the parent club.

I can't imagine that his parent club wouldn't offer to match his current deal in order to trigger compensation, so people can stop saying that the deal is 'free' even if it were pre-crisis.

Where does this information come that, that he signed in January? 

Two things:

Players are free to negotiate with other clubs from January 1, as contracts expire in June 30.

The deal regarding players under the age of 24 is a deal that English clubs agreed with each other. Players moving to or from any association other than England don't count towards this. Cardiff (obviously Welsh but they're part of this because they play in England) were upset a few years when Joe Ledley left to join Celtic as it meant they wouldn't get compensation. As a result, we won't pay any compensation for Sinani.

[Branston Pickle 4,150]

1 hour ago, norfolkbroadslim said:

You mean other than a Signing on fee? Agent's fees? A commitment to pay his wages at 'x' thousands a week for 156 weeks starting in July.

We’ve as yet paid nothing to him - he’s contracted to another club until the summer.  Had we bought him in January no one would have blinked twice; the announcement might have been better timed but for me it’s far from embarrassing 

Edited April 14, 2020 by Branston Pickle

[Uncle Fred 526]

Why this had to be announced during the lock down I will never understand 

June time would have been fine

our handling of the virus fallout haS been poor from a pr Point of view