stirlingshirejambo Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/h/heart_of_midlothian/7777244.stm apologies if already posted. I'm sure Sir Gay and his friends will be gutted at this news before putting a different version on this story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/h/heart_of_midlothian/7777244.stm apologies if already posted. I'm sure Sir Gay and his friends will be gutted at this news before putting a different version on this story yes but we're still due abersheep 200 blabs for a cracked window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/h/heart_of_midlothian/7777244.stm apologies if already posted. I'm sure Sir Gay and his friends will be gutted at this news before putting a different version on this story Why? The fact is the money is 9 months overdue and hearts lied publically several times and claimed it was paid or would be paid shortly. The embarassment and damage was well done and finally paying up won't change that. the only way it could get any worse is if the BACS bounced Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Nick Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Why? The fact is the money is 9 months overdue and hearts lied publically several times and claimed it was paid or would be paid shortly. The embarassment and damage was well done and finally paying up won't change that. the only way it could get any worse is if the BACS bounced That makes no sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Bapswent Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Why? The fact is the money is 9 months overdue and hearts lied publically several times and claimed it was paid or would be paid shortly. The embarassment and damage was well done and finally paying up won't change that. the only way it could get any worse is if the BACS bounced Or you could have just said. Good im glad its paid. But then that would suggest you actually supported the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samster Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Why? The fact is the money is 9 months overdue and hearts lied publically several times and claimed it was paid or would be paid shortly. The embarassment and damage was well done and finally paying up won't change that. the only way it could get any worse is if the BACS bounced Not like you attempt to maintain a negative spin. The money has been paid so just deal with it. Be happy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loveofthegame Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Why? The fact is the money is 9 months overdue and hearts lied publically several times and claimed it was paid or would be paid shortly. The embarassment and damage was well done and finally paying up won't change that. the only way it could get any worse is if the BACS bounced Who gives a flying, the money is paid. You seem to be buying into the media's negative ****e that we read day in, day out. Wonder what the Hoboconomist's will make of this. Trouble ahead predicted i'm sure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Boo! This means no more hysteria or 'embarrassment' on this issue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Boo! This means no more hysteria or 'embarrassment' on this issue Which only means you'll have to find something else to make up excuses for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 All I can add is feck Arbroath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Or you could have just said. Good im glad its paid. But then that would suggest you actually supported the club. yes he could have, but that wouldn't attract as many replies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 All I can say is feck Arbroath. Other than get gubbed by us many moons ago, play in maroon, and sell us a player with a sell on clause and expect to get paid that small amount of money that clubs like that rely on to survive, what've they done to upset you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Stinkfinger Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Who has been sold then ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Who has been sold then ?? Websters contract was sold. To Webster. For 150k or whatever it was. Little point debating all that again, given that even Hearts have admitted that we were due to pay the sell on %, and we've now paid it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Stinkfinger Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Websters contract was sold. To Webster. For 150k or whatever it was. Little point debating all that again, given that even Hearts have admitted that we were due to pay the sell on %, and we've now paid it. no no no I was under the impression that we had to sell a player or 3 to be able to pay the dosh owed to Arbroath ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cigaro Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 no no no I was under the impression that we had to sell a player or 3 to be able to pay the dosh owed to Arbroath ! I wondered that too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Other than get gubbed by us many moons ago, play in maroon, and sell us a player with a sell on clause and expect to get paid that small amount of money that clubs like that rely on to survive, what've they done to upset you? Double feck them with nobs on! Should be East of Scotland Seniors like a few others taking money out the game. We have far too many pishy wee clubs in Scotland. Does not make any sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 It really is quite sad that because Arbroath had the cheek to ask for money they were legally owed after not being paid for 8 months that they are now getting the stuff in this thread thrown at them. I wonder what people would have to say if Sunderland decided not to pay the final installment of Gordon's fee for such a long time after it was due. Or the fact this incompetence will likely hinder future transfers with clubs reluctant to allow us to pay over a period of time and instead demand cash up front. the money is paid - great, it should have been paid 9 months ago, and it has done a lot of damage to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Quagmire Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Why? The fact is the money is 9 months overdue and hearts lied publically several times and claimed it was paid or would be paid shortly. The embarassment and damage was well done and finally paying up won't change that. the only way it could get any worse is if the BACS bounced Aye ok Prancer, business is business and late payments are as predictable as your negative posts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 It really is quite sad that because Arbroath had the cheek to ask for money they were legally owed after not being paid for 8 months that they are now getting the stuff in this thread thrown at them. I wonder what people would have to say if Sunderland decided not to pay the final installment of Gordon's fee for such a long time after it was due. Or the fact this incompetence will likely hinder future transfers with clubs reluctant to allow us to pay over a period of time and instead demand cash up front. the money is paid - great, it should have been paid 9 months ago, and it has done a lot of damage to us. Please list, with factual back up, the actual damage done to Heart of Midlothian FC. over this. Oh wait a minute you can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedbump Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Please list, with factual back up, the actual damage done to Heart of Midlothian FC. over this. Oh wait a minute you can't. It's a reputation thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Stinkfinger Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 It really is quite sad that because Arbroath had the cheek to ask for money they were legally owed after not being paid for 8 months that they are now getting the stuff in this thread thrown at them. I wonder what people would have to say if Sunderland decided not to pay the final installment of Gordon's fee for such a long time after it was due. Or the fact this incompetence will likely hinder future transfers with clubs reluctant to allow us to pay over a period of time and instead demand cash up front. the money is paid - great, it should have been paid 9 months ago, and it has done a lot of damage to us. Your posts do more damage than any late payments do and thats just to my napper,i don't know about all the rest of the uneducated thicko fitbaw supporters on here but you give me a fecking heidache. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 It's a reputation thing. In the meeja our reputation was as low as a snakes belly long before that. But what real damage did it do the club. None. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Aye ok Prancer, business is business and late payments are as predictable as your negative posts oh that old one aye every business pays there bills 9 months late Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedbump Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 In the meeja our reputation was as low as a snakes belly long before that. But what real damage did it do the club. None. Well it adds to that. It might and I stress might stop other clubs doing business with us. No real damage but reputation/perception within business is a big thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Please list, with factual back up, the actual damage done to Heart of Midlothian FC. over this. Oh wait a minute you can't. Simply put say hearts want to buy a player from another club and negotiate fees etc, you can guarentee given our horrendous well publicised payment record that the fee will be far less likely able to be spread over a period of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Well it adds to that. It might and I stress might stop other clubs doing business with us. No real damage but reputation/perception within business is a big thing. Is it though, Robert Maxwell was hated in the business world (well englandshire) but people continued to fall over themselves to do business with him until he topped himself or was topped by others unknown. Rupert Murdoch still thrives in this role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Bapswent Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Simply put say hearts want to buy a player from another club and negotiate fees etc, you can guarentee given our horrendous well publicised payment record that the fee will be far less likely able to be spread over a period of time. Ah, so your confusing the bigger 'supposed' problem of financial issues with the small specific of the Webster case. Your putting together 2+2 and coming up with what suits your agenda. Where in truth, the payments of the Webster situation is very different from transfer dealings. But you carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Don Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Simply put say hearts want to buy a player from another club and negotiate fees etc, you can guarentee given our horrendous well publicised payment record that the fee will be far less likely able to be spread over a period of time. That is a personal opinion of Yours, it is not factual evidence, and until this scenario happens you cannot use it as FACT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Is it though, Robert Maxwell was hated in the business world (well englandshire) but people continued to fall over themselves to do business with him until he topped himself or was topped by others unknown. Rupert Murdoch still thrives in this role. If he is dead at all!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Simply put say hearts want to buy a player from another club and negotiate fees etc, you can guarentee given our horrendous well publicised payment record that the fee will be far less likely able to be spread over a period of time. You really do spout some nonsense Prancer. Keep it up though as the country needs some comedy value in a downturn in the economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oh the hibees are gay Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Done and dusted, Next.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 You really do spout some nonsense Prancer. Keep it up though as the country needs some comedy value in a downturn in the economy. Factual evidence that it hasnt damaged us then? Thats my opinion, you posted yourse earlier. It doesnt make neither factual. As far as I am concerned I am glad its paid and we can move on, however, it was embarassing and damaging to the club that it happened. Its not even like we had to find the money, we simply had to pass on the money we received percentage wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiltedjedi Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Other than get gubbed by us many moons ago, play in maroon, and sell us a player with a sell on clause and expect to get paid that small amount of money that clubs like that rely on to survive, what've they done to upset you? I have no beef with Arbroath but, surely t get a sell on clause means we sold the player, and last time I looked Webster had not commanded a transfer fee from Hearts. Hearts agreed to pay Arbroath a percentage of th ecompensation we were due from Webster. Yes we should have paid it sooner, but it's done now so hopefully we can put this one to bed And apologies if this had been posted previously, I just couldn't be bothered wading through replies to Prancer and JR for slightly controversial statements on this issue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Quagmire Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 oh that old one aye every business pays there bills 9 months late Most do, unless you live in a perfect world ? All deals are different and all bills are prioritised. We hear about all concerning hearts business because people don't like us. FACT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 no no no I was under the impression that we had to sell a player or 3 to be able to pay the dosh owed to Arbroath ! apologies picked you up all wrong there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeeToonJambo Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 yes but we're still due abersheep 200 blabs for a cracked window. I don't think so. It has been proved that the window was broken before we arrived, though, funnily enough, it hasn't, to my knowledge, been acknowledged in the press, or by Aberdeen. Maybe I just missed that bit though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Brow Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Hopefully this will end one of the most tedious, pointless, handwringingiest (new word alert) and mundane 'stories' I can remember. Abroath owed 15k. Wowzers. Its a business, our reputation was fecked long before this. HEarts have always been skint in my lifetime as previous threads have pointed out. We've always been late payers. Nothing to see here. Please. Let. This. Rest. Dull. Love folk who get worked up about things they couldnt possibly know the ins and outs off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorgie rd eh11 Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 I don't think so. It has been proved that the window was broken before we arrived, though, funnily enough, it hasn't, to my knowledge, been acknowledged in the press, or by Aberdeen. Maybe I just missed that bit though. Is this true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Much of what has been said in the media (and for that matter on this forum) on this affair has been clearly driven by a desire to either attack Hearts or attack those currently in control of Hearts. One of the most dispiriting aspects has been to see this vindictiveness dressed up as concern for the interests for Arbroath FC. No newspaper is all that interested in the welfare Arbroath with the obvious exception of the Arbroath Herald. As it turns out they haven't had a lot to say about this affair (they certainly don't seem as concerned as our resident zebra-fondler pretends to be) There is, at least, a bit more detail on why there appeared to be an agreement in April only for it to collapse. NO NO CASH LIKELY FROM WEBBY TRANSFER With the dust now settled it appears that Arbroath have been the real losers in this drawn out yarn. When Webster left the club nearly seven years ago a sell-on clause was written in to the deal gaining Arbroath 17.5 per cent of any future transfer fee. But' date=' as this was a pioneering case and the final figure payable to Hearts is not strictly a fee, Arbroath's dreams of a cash windfall remain distant. Arbroath chairman, John Christison, explained: "We have spoken to the SFA about the issue and they are more than willing to take up the argument on our behalf. "It's disappointing as far as the final figure stands but, at the end of the day, it's out of our hands and we just have to accept the ruling made by the Court of Arbitration for Sport." [/quote'] LICHTIES FINALLY RECEIVE WEBSTER CASH Hearts appealed Webster's departure and a compensation fee of ?150' date='000 was set by the Court of Arbitration for Sport, far less than the Edinburgh club had expected. Arbroath were due 17.5 per cent of any future transfer fee. Club secretary Gary Callon explained: "We disputed with Hearts the amount we were due. "We based our figure on the full ?150,000 whereas they claimed it was 17.5% of ?150,000 - less the total of what they had already paid to us previously (?67,500). "We took some consultation on what figure the clause should be based on and were advised that Hearts' interpretation of the contract wording would be what it would be based on." Despite sending an invoice for the amount on August 1 payment had not been received forcing the Scottish Football Association (SFA) to become involved before Hearts' confirmed payment had been despatched on Friday. Part of the money, plus a recently secured Scottish Football Partnership grant will go towards a series of improvements at Gayfield. Mr Callon explained: "The floodlight system needs some upgrading and alterations as at present the average lux level and uniformity of the lighting is below that desired to meet SFA licensing criteria.[/quote'] ARBOATH PLEDGE TO GET TOUGH WITH HEARTS THE CHAIRMAN of Arbroath Football Club believes that Hearts have been treated too leniently over the Andy Webster transfer fee saga and the local club is now prepared to play hardball.Mr John Christison revealed that' date=' following a board meeting on Tuesday evening, the directors are now considering asking for Hearts' gate receipts to be frozen and approaching the SFA to impose a signing ban to force Hearts to pay the ?14,000 they owe. The Edinburgh club had initially indicated on their website on April 22 that they would pay the Lichties ?26,000 after the Gayfield club had negotiated a 17.5 per cent sell-on clause when the defender moved to Hearts for a ?75,000 fee in March, 2001. However, after a dispute between the two clubs over the wording of the agreement, Arbroath then agreed to accept the lesser sum of ?14,437 plus VAT from the ?150,000 Wigan paid Hearts for the player following a ruling from the Court of Arbitration for Sport in January. But the patience of the Lichties' board has finally run out and the directors discussed a number of ways to get the money paid. Mr Christison commented: "We have been too nice about this for too long and it is sad that it has come to this."[/quote'] So in essence when they thought they'd reached an agreement in April Arbroath thought they were due 17.5% of the ?150K compensation while Hearts thought it was 17.5% of the ?82.5K profit (?150K Compensation - ?67.5K Initial Transfer Fee). As it turns out Hearts view was correct and it took till August for Arbroath to accept to this and send a new invoice. So the timeline looks like this March 2001 Andy Webster moves from Arbroath to Hearts for ?67.5K with arbroath entitled to a sell on fee of 17.5% of the profit if he should be sold on. 4 May 2007 FIFA Awards Hearts ?625K compensation which represents a ?557.5K profit on the initial transer fee 30 Jan 2008 An appeal the Court of Arbitration for Sport reduce the compensation to ?150K, Which represents a ?82.5K Profit 7 Feb 2008 Hearts think that as there was no fee Arborath aren't entitled to anything. Arbroath think that they are entitled to 26.3K (17.5% of the compensation) 22 Apr 2008 Hearts agree to pay Arbroath their 17.5% and issue a statement on the club website. 12 Jun 2008 It transpires that Hearts have checked the contract and found that even if the compensation counts as a fee Arbroath are only entitled to ?14.4K (17.5% of the ?82.5K profit). Arbroath aren't convinced and ask the SFA to Intervene 1 Aug 2008 After taking consultation Arbroath accept that Hearts were right and submit an invoice for the lower amount. 23 Sep 2008 Wagesgate I, Hearts players don't get paid on time and have to wait for it to be resolved 13 Nov 2008 The Invoice remains unpaid and with the credit crunch starting to bite and rumours of sever cashflow problems at Tynecastle Arbroath are talking to the Press 30 Nov 2008 Wagesgate II, Hearts players don't get paid on time and have to wait for it to be resolved 4 Dec 2008 Arbroath step up the pressure by suggesting that they might get the SFA to stop Hearts from signing new players until they've cleared their invoice 8 Jan 2009 Hearts Transfer the cash to Arbroath. 9 Jan 2009 Arbroath receive it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broxburn Jambo Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 It really is quite sad that because Arbroath had the cheek to ask for money they were legally owed after not being paid for 8 months that they are now getting the stuff in this thread thrown at them. I wonder what people would have to say if Sunderland decided not to pay the final installment of Gordon's fee for such a long time after it was due. Or the fact this incompetence will likely hinder future transfers with clubs reluctant to allow us to pay over a period of time and instead demand cash up front. the money is paid - great, it should have been paid 9 months ago, and it has done a lot of damage to us. What damage has it done except give red tops some headlines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Much of what has been said in the media (and for that matter on this forum) on this affair has been clearly driven by a desire to either attack Hearts or attack those currently in control of Hearts. One of the most dispiriting aspects has been to see this vindictiveness dressed up as concern for the interests for Arbroath FC. No newspaper is all that interested in the welfare Arbroath with the obvious exception of the Arbroath Herald. As it turns out they haven't had a lot to say about this affair (they certainly don't seem as concerned as our resident zebra-fondler pretends to be) There is, at least, a bit more detail on why there appeared to be an agreement in April only for it to collapse. NO NO CASH LIKELY FROM WEBBY TRANSFER LICHTIES FINALLY RECEIVE WEBSTER CASH ARBOATH PLEDGE TO GET TOUGH WITH HEARTS So in essence when they thought they'd reached an agreement in April Arbroath thought they were due 17.5% of the ?150K compensation while Hearts thought it was 17.5% of the ?82.5K profit (?150K Compensation - ?67.5K Initial Transfer Fee). As it turns out Hearts view was correct and it took till August for Arbroath to accept to this and send a new invoice. So the timeline looks like this March 2001 Andy Webster moves from Arbroath to Hearts for ?67.5K with arbroath entitled to a sell on fee of 17.5% of the profit if he should be sold on. 4 May 2007 FIFA Awards Hearts ?625K compensation which represents a ?557.5K profit on the initial transer fee 30 Jan 2008 An appeal the Court of Arbitration for Sport reduce the compensation to ?150K, Which represents a ?82.5K Profit 7 Feb 2008 Hearts think that as there was no fee Arborath aren't entitled to anything. Arbroath think that they are entitled to 26.3K (17.5% of the compensation) 22 Apr 2008 Hearts agree to pay Arbroath their 17.5% and issue a statement on the club website. 12 Jun 2008 It transpires that Hearts have checked the contract and found that even if the compensation counts as a fee Arbroath are only entitled to ?14.4K (17.5% of the ?82.5K profit). Arbroath aren't convinced and ask the SFA to Intervene 1 Aug 2008 After taking consultation Arbroath accept that Hearts were right and submit an invoice for the lower amount. 23 Sep 2008 Wagesgate I, Hearts players don't get paid on time and have to wait for it to be resolved 13 Nov 2008 The Invoice remains unpaid and with the credit crunch starting to bite and rumours of sever cashflow problems at Tynecastle Arbroath are talking to the Press 30 Nov 2008 Wagesgate II, Hearts players don't get paid on time and have to wait for it to be resolved 4 Dec 2008 Arbroath step up the pressure by suggesting that they might get the SFA to stop Hearts from signing new players until they've cleared their invoice 8 Jan 2009 Hearts Transfer the cash to Arbroath. 9 Jan 2009 Arbroath receive it excellent analysis and layout of the pertinent facts. at least the whole saga gave the gutter press a convenient excuse to print sensational copy about a soft target, rather than them having to investigate more important and far more serious issues regarding the conduct of other clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 I'm glad we've paid Arboath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 excellent analysis and layout of the pertinent facts. at least the whole saga gave the gutter press a convenient excuse to print sensational copy about a soft target, rather than them having to investigate more important and far more serious issues regarding the conduct of other clubs. Having kept Arbroath waiting for 5 months for the money they probably were owed we don't come out of this very well although given that Arbroath spent 5 months chasing after money they certainly weren't owed neither do they. Others that emerge with little credit are Rangers, Wigan and Andy Webster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cigaro Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Having kept Arbroath waiting for 5 months for the money they probably were owed we don't come out of this very well although given that Arbroath spent 5 months chasing after money they certainly weren't owed neither do they. Others that emerge with little credit are Rangers, Wigan and Andy Webster. Of which there is no mention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Having kept Arbroath waiting for 5 months for the money they probably were owed we don't come out of this very well although given that Arbroath spent 5 months chasing after money they certainly weren't owed neither do they. Others that emerge with little credit are Rangers, Wigan and Andy Webster. yes, it would be fairly blinkered to say that hearts have acted correctly. other than that, the main insidious factor in the early days of this saga is undoutedly rangers. they bid for the player and the bid was turned down. after that the player was quickly unsettled and that resulted in him not attending hearts trip to ireland. it would be unfair to suggest that the player (however much one might despise him) didn't have an excellent season so i wont be doing that. he seems to have eventually put any thougts of moving to rangers aside and knuckled down, until he was dropped in that dundee united game. there are no facts to support this but i have no doubt whatsoever that rangers 'tapped up' webster at some point, whether that was before their bid or after, whether it was through the player himself or his agent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Dover Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Still think we could have made some good PR out of this, instead of the way it's gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 yes, it would be fairly blinkered to say that hearts have acted correctly. other than that, the main insidious factor in the early days of this saga is undoutedly rangers. they bid for the player and the bid was turned down. after that the player was quickly unsettled and that resulted in him not attending hearts trip to ireland. it would be unfair to suggest that the player (however much one might despise him) didn't have an excellent season so i wont be doing that. he seems to have eventually put any thougts of moving to rangers aside and knuckled down, until he was dropped in that dundee united game. there are no facts to support this but i have no doubt whatsoever that rangers 'tapped up' webster at some point, whether that was before their bid or after, whether it was through the player himself or his agent. A question for you Victorian, do you believe if Vlad had not taken the action he did, the droppings and the character asssasination - that he later withdrew/denied - would Webster have done this? By this I mean the bosman mk II scam and not simply left at the end of the season/contract in an existing manner? As I do not, and I would suggest romanov's ego cost hearts a lot of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Having kept Arbroath waiting for 5 months for the money they probably were owed we don't come out of this very well although given that Arbroath spent 5 months chasing after money they certainly weren't owed neither do they. Others that emerge with little credit are Rangers, Wigan and Andy Webster. They were due the money though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAYEL Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 A question for you Victorian, do you believe if Vlad had not taken the action he did, the droppings and the character asssasination - that he later withdrew/denied - would Webster have done this? By this I mean the bosman mk II scam and not simply left at the end of the season/contract in an existing manner? As I do not, and I would suggest romanov's ego cost hearts a lot of money. Nonsense. He was making his way to rangers any way he could. Now they are stuck with him. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.