Kacper Lopata

[Shrimper]

Yep, that too. I believe Kacper has some pretty solid interest from higher up the pyramid though, so that will have emboldened him too. I know these guys haven't been being paid on time but no point forcing yourself out if there aren't any immediate options that are more appealing on-pitch than an unlikely play-off push here.

I wonder, with us having a tough run of games if some have a similar process prepared but want to support the fans. If we fell 7/8 points behind the play offs they may then put it in. If that's an option for them.

 

[hlane17]

Ron's never great at talking to people, always comes over as patronising!

I heard the other day that he even flippantly wished the players a happy Valentine’s Day.

While I bet some struggled to find the money to take their partners out on a date.

If this is true I’ve lost any ounce of remaining respect for he who shall not be named.

 

[OldBlueLady]

From the person that states chanting 'Martin Out' a hinderance to the team

Yes. And your point is?

 

[dusterman]

I heard the other day that he even flippantly wished the players a happy Valentine’s Day.

While I bet some struggled to find the money to take their partners out on a date.

If this is true I’ve lost any ounce of remaining respect for he who shall not be named.

You had any left?

 

[bluesfansince1952]

No it isn’t. It may be morally dubious but it is legitimate to receive what is contractually due, there will be on obligation to use it for any one purpose and there is no intention to permanently deprive.

My understanding of the facts as set out was an allegation that loanees were not receiving their salaries even though the full amount has been paid to the loaning club by the parent club.

If someone's salary is being appropriated by a third party for their own or others use that is theft.

The appropriation without any explanation would normally be sufficient to establish the intention of permanently depriving the owner. Usually just spending such money as if it were one's own establishes such intent.

If a club receive money from the parent club of a loanee which is the salary of that player on the understanding that it will be passed on to that player and then 'swallow' it they would be obtaining by deception. The deception is that money is only being paid to the club the loanee is at in the belief it will be passed on to him. The money is the player's salary which the parent club is contractually obliged to pay and the club loaning the player have no claim whatsoever (at least none that I can see) on it.

What claim can the loaning club have on the money? If the player had not been loaned out the parent club would not have sent them any money.

Or am I missing something here?

 

[SouthendSpence]

My understanding of the facts as set out was an allegation that loanees were not receiving their salaries even though the full amount has been paid to the loaning club by the parent club.

If someone's salary is being appropriated by a third party for their own or others use that is theft.

The appropriation without any explanation would normally be sufficient to establish the intention of permanently depriving the owner. Usually just spending such money as if it were one's own establishes such intent.

If a club receive money from the parent club of a loanee which is the salary of that player on the understanding that it will be passed on to that player and then 'swallow' it they would be obtaining by deception. The deception is that money is only being paid to the club the loanee is at in the belief it will be passed on to him. The money is the player's salary which the parent club is contractually obliged to pay and the club loaning the player have no claim whatsoever (at least none that I can see) on it.

What claim can the loaning club have on the money? If the player had not been loaned out the parent club would not have sent them any money.

Or am I missing something here?

I think it’s the other way round, ie in this version of events we are the parent club and hold the contract and are being paid money providing the loan player out.

Which is very different and probably not quite as serious

 

[MountainDrew]

Yes. And your point is?

That Ron is getting away with murder, and you just slagged him off for what I can see as the first time, so why not get the crowd singing 'Martin Out' the side as literally been shot to pieces by the man and all you can do is back him, with Lopata we was playoffs, without 13th and below, and that will be a fact come the end of the season.

 

[tommy tucker]

That Ron is getting away with murder, and you just slagged him off for what I can see as the first time, so why not get the crowd singing 'Martin Out' the side as literally been shot to pieces by the man and all you can do is back him, with Lopata we was playoffs, without 13th and below, and that will be a fact come the end of the season.

One man doesnt make a team .The team was winning bfore he arrived And im sure they will win again now he has gone . NO one was at the training ground when Ron spoke to the players .So quite frankly unless Anyone heard what or was not said is pure speculation .

 

[duncan bulgaria]

I think it’s the other way round, ie in this version of events we are the parent club and hold the contract and are being paid money providing the loan player out.

Which is very different and probably not quite as serious

I doubt the player has a leg to stand on but the point I’m making is that this type of thing is so damaging to the club , our reputation is in tatters and it’s not only bigger teams that are laughing at us , it’s teams from lower down the pyramid too

How any player that decides to jump this ship has been shot down on here is not fair

This fringe player is not going to walk away I guess as he knows it could be detrimental to his career but KL on the other hand has the confidence that he will be playing at a higher level

 

[Maidstone Shrimper]

That Ron is getting away with murder, and you just slagged him off for what I can see as the first time, so why not get the crowd singing 'Martin Out' the side as literally been shot to pieces by the man and all you can do is back him, with Lopata we was playoffs, without 13th and below, and that will be a fact come the end of the season.

You clearly haven't been reading OBL's posts!

 

[tommy tucker]

I doubt the player has a leg to stand on but the point I’m making is that this type of thing is so damaging to the club , our reputation is in tatters and it’s not only bigger teams that are laughing at us , it’s teams from lower down the pyramid too

How any player that decides to jump this ship has been shot down on here is not fair

This fringe player is not going to walk away I guess as he knows it could be detrimental to his career but KL on the other hand has the confidence that he will be playing at a higher level

So maybe he should have chose a club higher up The bigger point is we win as ateam we lose as a team .KL is not the team .And kevin was quite right to send he home So he doesnt play for us now so whats the big deal We have other options in that postion

 

[hlane17]

You had any left?

A very good point

 

[Blue Streak]

My understanding of the facts as set out was an allegation that loanees were not receiving their salaries even though the full amount has been paid to the loaning club by the parent club.

If someone's salary is being appropriated by a third party for their own or others use that is theft.

The appropriation without any explanation would normally be sufficient to establish the intention of permanently depriving the owner. Usually just spending such money as if it were one's own establishes such intent.

If a club receive money from the parent club of a loanee which is the salary of that player on the understanding that it will be passed on to that player and then 'swallow' it they would be obtaining by deception. The deception is that money is only being paid to the club the loanee is at in the belief it will be passed on to him. The money is the player's salary which the parent club is contractually obliged to pay and the club loaning the player have no claim whatsoever (at least none that I can see) on it.

What claim can the loaning club have on the money? If the player had not been loaned out the parent club would not have sent them any money.

Or am I missing something here?

I think what you're missing is that Duncan Bulgaria said "Imagine you are a fringe player loaned to another club"

My understanding of the facts as set out was an allegation that loanees were not receiving their salaries even though the full amount has been paid to the loaning club by the parent club.

If someone's salary is being appropriated by a third party for their own or others use that is theft.

The appropriation without any explanation would normally be sufficient to establish the intention of permanently depriving the owner. Usually just spending such money as if it were one's own establishes such intent.

If a club receive money from the parent club of a loanee which is the salary of that player on the understanding that it will be passed on to that player and then 'swallow' it they would be obtaining by deception. The deception is that money is only being paid to the club the loanee is at in the belief it will be passed on to him. The money is the player's salary which the parent club is contractually obliged to pay and the club loaning the player have no claim whatsoever (at least none that I can see) on it.

What claim can the loaning club have on the money? If the player had not been loaned out the parent club would not have sent them any money.

Or am I missing something here?

Yeah I think what you're missing is that Duncan Bulgaria said "Imagine you are a fringe player who has gone out on loan". I took that as hypothetical. You took that as an allegation. Its becoming a bit of a trend on Shrimperzone now that hypothesis are taken as gospel and we then get a 20 page discussion about something that no one can actually confirm and prove has happened. Now if Duncan Bulgaria's posting was indeed an allegation and he wants to name the player in question and explain his relationship with said player then I will stand corrected.

 

[OldBlueLady]

That Ron is getting away with murder, and you just slagged him off for what I can see as the first time, so why not get the crowd singing 'Martin Out' the side as literally been shot to pieces by the man and all you can do is back him, with Lopata we was playoffs, without 13th and below, and that will be a fact come the end of the season.

You are quite wrong. I do not back him, and have said many, many times that no-one agrees with what he's doing or has done, but believe that we are stuck with him as his aims are so inextricably linked with the football club. That's being realistic.

I have never, EVER agreed with chanting anti Ron Martin stuff during live play and have said so on umpteen occasions. SUPPORT THE TEAM not the regime.

 

[overseas shrimper]

I doubt the player has a leg to stand on but the point I’m making is that this type of thing is so damaging to the club , our reputation is in tatters and it’s not only bigger teams that are laughing at us , it’s teams from lower down the pyramid too

How any player that decides to jump this ship has been shot down on here is not fair

This fringe player is not going to walk away I guess as he knows it could be detrimental to his career but KL on the other hand has the confidence that he will be playing at a higher level

We've signed a few of those in recent years.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

My understanding of the facts as set out was an allegation that loanees were not receiving their salaries even though the full amount has been paid to the loaning club by the parent club.

If someone's salary is being appropriated by a third party for their own or others use that is theft.

The appropriation without any explanation would normally be sufficient to establish the intention of permanently depriving the owner. Usually just spending such money as if it were one's own establishes such intent.

If a club receive money from the parent club of a loanee which is the salary of that player on the understanding that it will be passed on to that player and then 'swallow' it they would be obtaining by deception. The deception is that money is only being paid to the club the loanee is at in the belief it will be passed on to him. The money is the player's salary which the parent club is contractually obliged to pay and the club loaning the player have no claim whatsoever (at least none that I can see) on it.

What claim can the loaning club have on the money? If the player had not been loaned out the parent club would not have sent them any money.

Or am I missing something here?

Yes, the loaning club aren’t actually paying his wages. They are paying Southend a value that happens to be equivalent to his wages for the right to his registration on a temporary basis.

Additionally Southend have no permanent intention to deprive. Wages have been often late (a course of dealings which also works against any suggestion that there is a permanent intention to deprive) but that is a civil rather than criminal matter and the remedy is to serve a breach notice such as Łopata (or his agent) did.

 

[Tribal Chief]

What's morally dubious about it? He wasn' paid on time for 2 consectutive months and is legally entitled to clear off if he wants to.

What Kacper did is morally dubious. To be right with Southend United is to be right with God.

 

[JB Shrimper]

What Kacper did is morally dubious. To be right with Southend United is to be right with God.

I thought joining Southend made him morally dubious

 

[Farmer Fossett]

So maybe he should have chose a club higher up The bigger point is we win as ateam we lose as a team .KL is not the team .And kevin was quite right to send he home So he doesnt play for us now so whats the big deal We have other options in that postion

The options unfortunately are not as good. The team was better with Kacsper playing - may affect our chances of the playoff/promotion.

 

[tommy tucker]

The options unfortunately are not as good. The team was better with Kacsper playing - may affect our chances of the playoff/promotion.

That is strange if the team was better with him How comes when he was injured the team still won .We lost against Notts because they are a much stronger team then we have .And even with kl in that side we would still have lost .