Pre-Match Thread HMRC v SUFC - FINAL hearing on 1st March. DISMISSED

[Ricey]

I've had a few responses on here and to my Tweet itself asking for the source of my information, including from one chap who claimed the players had been paid when they had not (his source being a steward before the last home league game!)

In fact, I confirmed the players had not been paid - even before the Echo did after the game. I called the signings of GSM, Lomas, Harry Taylor and Blondy before anyone else. I've never once sprouted rubbish. I'm not here to mislead anyone. We all want the same as fans, to have our football club back and an end to the worry surrounding our status as a club. That said, I will not be posting my source.

Dagenham will be testing the water for Miley with a bid in the region of £25,000. Given the worsening financial uncertainty surrounding the club and the fact Ron Martin met with the players today in light of last month's outstanding wages, which most likely will remain to be paid before our D Day at the High Court on 1 March, it will be interesting to see if we can keep hold of one of our standout players this season to a rival when we're looking to cement our place in the playoffs.

I reported previously that we were in for Justham at Dagenham. That ship appears to have sailed given the embargo hanging over us. I imagine it'll be revisited at the end of the season with Arnold out of contract and likely to be moving on. As one fan pointed out on Twitter: "We should’ve been stealing Justham off them and they could take Miley! Honestly as the days go by of this month it just gets worse and worse."

Certainly, if Miley goes, it'll open the floodgates to other players being seriously looked at, with Notts County likely to revisit their earliest interest in our biggest talent, Jack Bridge.

If we lose Bridge and Miley even if Ron manages to fend off HMRC we are pretty stuffed. Two hugely influential players.

 

[Mark Corrigan]

I've had a few responses on here and to my Tweet itself asking for the source of my information, including from one chap who claimed the players had been paid when they had not (his source being a steward before the last home league game!)

In fact, I confirmed the players had not been paid - even before the Echo did after the game. I called the signings of GSM, Lomas, Harry Taylor and Blondy before anyone else. I've never once sprouted rubbish. I'm not here to mislead anyone. We all want the same as fans, to have our football club back and an end to the worry surrounding our status as a club. That said, I will not be posting my source.

Dagenham will be testing the water for Miley with a bid in the region of £25,000. Given the worsening financial uncertainty surrounding the club and the fact Ron Martin met with the players today in light of last month's outstanding wages, which most likely will remain to be paid before our D Day at the High Court on 1 March, it will be interesting to see if we can keep hold of one of our standout players this season to a rival when we're looking to cement our place in the playoffs.

I reported previously that we were in for Justham at Dagenham. That ship appears to have sailed given the embargo hanging over us. I imagine it'll be revisited at the end of the season with Arnold out of contract and likely to be moving on. As one fan pointed out on Twitter: "We should’ve been stealing Justham off them and they could take Miley! Honestly as the days go by of this month it just gets worse and worse."

Certainly, if Miley goes, it'll open the floodgates to other players being seriously looked at, with Notts County likely to revisit their earliest interest in our biggest talent, Jack Bridge.

Thanks for sharing.

Pretty deflating really, looks like at very best case our season is going to be over.

 

[Grayson]

I've had a few responses on here and to my Tweet itself asking for the source of my information, including from one chap who claimed the players had been paid when they had not (his source being a steward before the last home league game!)

In fact, I confirmed the players had not been paid - even before the Echo did after the game. I called the signings of GSM, Lomas, Harry Taylor and Blondy before anyone else. I've never once sprouted rubbish. I'm not here to mislead anyone. We all want the same as fans, to have our football club back and an end to the worry surrounding our status as a club. That said, I will not be posting my source.

To clarify, there's no doubting you, just wondered if somebody posting it on here as 'hearing' meant they heard it from another separate source too or was repeating the same information without referencing it.

 

[TJC]

Would be interested to see if this rumour began with a verified source or is just another rumour that's become "fact' through repetition.

Certainly as far as I am aware the norm is two months in line with FIFA rules (certainly at Prem & EFL level?). And then the club has 15 days to remedy the breach.

I look forward to someone posting a link to FA rules that suggest they operate different rules (or maybe I have missed it?)

Ah ha. Thats where I saw the 2 month thing. Knew I saw it somewhere.
Does that mean 2 missed payments or 2 full calendar months? If the former, it ties in nicely with winding up court appearence.

 

[Jai]

Dagenham get 1400 fans every games at Victoria Road, how the hell they can pay their players wages and staffs wages too.

Owned by wealthy Americans, who actually know what they're doing.

 

[kentblues]

Ah ha. Thats where I saw the 2 month thing. Knew I saw it somewhere.
Does that mean 2 missed payments or 2 full calendar months? If the former, it ties in nicely with winding up court appearance.

Equivalent of two missed monthly payments (to account for weekly or other periodic payment schedules) then 15 days to remedy. From memory its Article 13 or 14. Didn't realise it was any different in the National League (but if so someone will no doubt have the link).

 

[Maldon Blues]

Equivalent of two missed monthly payments (to account for weekly or other periodic payment schedules) then 15 days to remedy. From memory its Article 13 or 14. Didn't realise it was any different in the National League (but if so someone will no doubt have the link).

The remedy will explain where the '14 day' bit has appeared from. This seems pretty plausible.

I guess the players have been reassured that they will receive everything owed on 1st March. I'm sure they will... if we survive!

 

[BALDY]

Blues4lifeDan.......................I said this on another thread when Daggers lost Walker that they should be looking at Cardwell. It's now Miley. We cannot complain one bit. They are a better option than us now, end of. They are well run club who have a great reputation in the pyramid. Things we can only dream of.

Like destroying 4 (four) football clubs and selling 3 grounds---Wow what a history Dag and Red have!

 

[Supershrimper]

Would be interested to see if this rumour began with a verified source or is just another rumour that's become "fact' through repetition.

Certainly as far as I am aware the norm is two months in line with FIFA rules (certainly at Prem & EFL level?). And then the club has 15 days to remedy the breach.

I look forward to someone posting a link to FA rules that suggest they operate different rules (or maybe I have missed it?)

Rumour turning into fact on Shrimperzone?? I don't believe it, i'd need to see it mentioned at least 2 more times on shrimperzone before I believe it.

Back to the subject, yes its under Article 14bis. of the regulations for the status and transfer of players (last updated March 2022.) Its FIFA rules, so i'd imagine that would apply to the lowly depths of the national league also.

https://digitalhub.fifa.com/m/1b47c74a7d44a9b5/original/Regulations-on-the-Status-and-Transfer-of-Players-March-2022.pdf

 

[in the know]

If it's the correctly applicable rules...It doesn't mention the missed payments have to be consecutive months. most players have gone unpaid previously on a due date.

 

[Strykr]

Ah ha. Thats where I saw the 2 month thing. Knew I saw it somewhere.
Does that mean 2 missed payments or 2 full calendar months? If the former, it ties in nicely with winding up court appearence.

Almost as if planned...

 

[TrevorFitzpatrickHattrick]

This is all so thoroughly depressing.

As another poster mentioned above, the best case scenario looks like an asset-stripped playing staff and (barring a points deduction) midtable mediocrity. I'd be seriously worried about keeping hold of Kev and the wider management as well, given the monumental effort they've put in for it to all be fundamentally undermined.

I have to admit that I was previously very much in the "Ron will pull a rabbit out of the hat" brigade, but now fear that we're very much at the precipice. It's a huge testament to the players, staff and remaining employees behind the scenes that we can keep hobbling along in this state.

 

[kentblues]

If it's the correctly applicable rules...It doesn't mention the missed payments have to be consecutive months. most players have gone unpaid previously on a due date.

I think this is consecutive months, there is a separate clause somewhere about persistent breach and then how late counts as a breach and how many occasions comes into play also. But first a player has to place the club on notice? (has this happened?) and then irrespective of which breach the club appears to have 15 days to put it right. (By the way and they only have to remedy for that player not everyone)

But my point is that I saw the 14 days being referenced and there seems nothing to back it up? I am up front about where I am getting the information from so people can check. If its 14 days then tell us where that is coming from?

 

[kentblues]

This is all so thoroughly depressing.

As another poster mentioned above, the best case scenario looks like an asset-stripped playing staff and (barring a points deduction) midtable mediocrity. I'd be seriously worried about keeping hold of Kev and the wider management as well, given the monumental effort they've put in for it to all be fundamentally undermined.

I have to admit that I was previously very much in the "Ron will pull a rabbit out of the hat" brigade, but now fear that we're very much at the precipice. It's a huge testament to the players, staff and remaining employees behind the scenes that we can keep hobbling along in this state.

Is this because you believe the 14 days bit? And expect players to leave? On what basis do you believe its 14 days? I'm keen to hear from anyone who can back it up?

 

[Mr Browns Ghost]

Yes I'm sure the builders at the affordable housing site are thrilled at having to paint over the graffiti and I'm not sure how Anglian water will get it off their brickwork at the sewage pumping station.

These two points have really been on my mind and I too must confess how worried I am in how Anglian water will remove this

 

[Chrisb]

Does anyone know at what stage a points deduction by NL might be triggered ?

 

[Supershrimper]

I think this is consecutive months, there is a separate clause somewhere about persistent breach and then how late counts as a breach and how many occasions comes into play also. But first a player has to place the club on notice? (has this happened?) and then irrespective of which breach the club appears to have 15 days to put it right. (By the way and they only have to remedy for that player not everyone)

But my point is that I saw the 14 days being referenced and there seems nothing to back it up? I am up front about where I am getting the information from so people can check. If its 14 days then tell us where that is coming from?

Perhaps the meeting today was them putting themselves on notice, giving Ron 15 days to make payment and put it right. That leaves Ron up the the 28th February (which by then he should have sorted the bridging loan.....or not)

If its the later means little paying the players when the club may be wound up the next day

 

[Magnum PI]

Perhaps the meeting today was them putting themselves on notice, giving Ron 15 days to make payment and put it right. That leaves Ron up the the 28th February (which by then he should have sorted the bridging loan.....or not)

If its the later means little paying the players when the club may be wound up the next day

I don't believe so.

The players remain in the dark and yet still doing their best for the club. I'm sure like all of us they just want this resolved on 1 March.

 

[TrevorFitzpatrickHattrick]

Is this because you believe the 14 days bit? And expect players to leave? On what basis do you believe its 14 days? I'm keen to hear from anyone who can back it up?

I'm far from in-the-know, with respect to either club personnel or the intricacies of employment law. I'm merely expressing the fact that any optimism I had of a positive resolution has completely vanished and that as a mode of self-preservation, I'm gearing up for the worst.

 

[kentblues]

Perhaps the meeting today was them putting themselves on notice, giving Ron 15 days to make payment and put it right. That leaves Ron up the the 28th February (which by then he should have sorted the bridging loan.....or not)

If its the later means little paying the players when the club may be wound up the next day

Only if you think the club is already in breach- it's not two monthly payments yet so in some other way. I don't think so tbh. But if one line of speculation appears to close without doubt another will open.

I wouldn't believe anything unless its either backed up with evidence or from one of the small handful of reliable sources. The site does't run a fact checker service so who those people are will be informed by each members personal experience.

However, if it's my brother met a guy down the pub who knows someone at the club then Alt_ctrl_delete...