Jump to content

?50.000 Compensation From Sfa.


Guest jambomickey

Recommended Posts

according to the star that's the figure hearts looking for for lee wallaces injury! quite right aswell.

 

Pretty much what they recently fined us for ill-discipline. Cheers for giving us our money back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So does this mean that we get 50k plus Lee's wages for the time he is injured?

 

I was under the assumption that it covered 12 weeks of his wages?

 

?4,200 a week x 12 weeks = 50K (there about's). Then again, is he on that much?

Edited by heartsfc_fan
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the assumption that it covered 12 weeks of his wages?

 

?4,200 a week x 12 weeks = 50K (there about's). Then again, is he on that much?

 

 

Sounds about right.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the assumption that it covered 12 weeks of his wages?

 

?4,200 a week x 12 weeks = 50K (there about's). Then again, is he on that much?

There's the medical costs included in that aswell I think. Whatever that costs i'm not sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I'd rather sue the fecker that put in what was undoubtedly a pre-meditated assault!

 

The SFA should be insured for this sort of happening so it's maybe not that big a story?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hearts have once again been hit with a fine for poor discipline, but after topping the disciplinary table for the sixth consecutive year, the Tynecastle side have been hit with a record ?60,000 fine.

 

The SFA have ordered Jim Jefferies side to pay ?50,000 within 30 days, with the remaining ?10,000 suspended until January.

................

 

We need more 10 000!

 

Mr. Romanov said: "Gentlemen, the fines I am paying are of no help to you. Let me have my money back!"

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be expecting at least double that amount.

 

Wages + Medical fee's + the damage his injury will cause our team. 100 - 200k would be a much fairer amount.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they should be forced to provide a player of the same position who is valued at more or the equivalent to the player who is injured....like how insurance companies payout.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I'd rather sue the fecker that put in what was undoubtedly a pre-meditated assault!

 

The SFA should be insured for this sort of happening so it's maybe not that big a story?

 

Hardly. It was a bad challenge but it certainly wasn't pre-meditated. Or an assault.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they should be forced to provide a player of the same position who is valued at more or the equivalent to the player who is injured....like how insurance companies payout.

 

Got anyone in mind? :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...