Bolton players strike!!

Sluffy - nobody’s believing you for a second, it’s just embarrassing.

To your original post;

- It was established on another thread that a £125,000 fee was paid to a company owned by the Andersons for consultancy. Are we really expecting them to work for free? Of course not, so no idea why you’re so keen to discredit that.

- PAYE has only been mentioned by you, KA gave no clear reasons in his explanation for why there had been a delay in payment - it’s a valid theory but let’s not present it as fact.

- You make no mention of the missing survival bonus, and focus on Amos, why? This was a squad decision by all accounts, again no evidence has been presented to the contrary.

I can forgive Anderson for not paying on time, the cash flow is clearly poor and he’s done a great job getting it into line. But communicate with those affected and don’t go on the attack to the press, scapegoat a player and try to turn the fans against the team.

wanderlust wrote:

Sluffy wrote:I think the real story is that if we were rolling in money the players would have been paid in full and on time but seeing that we aren't, Anderson simply tried to cut a few corners 

To me that is the "real story" - although I wouldn't call it cutting corners. I would call it piss poor management as all that was required to avoid the entire debacle was for Anderson to be open and honest with the players in the first instance.
If he couldn't pay the players on the due date, or even if he didn't want to pay them on that date for whatever reason, if he'd approached them and explained the situation in advance instead of conniving behind their backs there would have been no strike.
Attempting to justify his actions afterwards made things even worse as now all the world knows he is dodgy and not to be trusted in any dealings with him in the future which is bad for the club's reputation and threatens potential signings.

How do you know he didnt

T.R.O.Y wrote:Sluffy - nobody’s believing you for a second, it’s just embarrassing.

To your original post;

- It was established on another thread that a £125,000 fee was paid to a company owned by the Andersons for consultancy. Are we really expecting them to work for free? Of course not, so no idea why you’re so keen to discredit that.

- PAYE has only been mentioned by you, KA gave no clear reasons in his explanation for why there had been a delay in payment - it’s a valid theory but let’s not present it as fact.

- You make no mention of the missing survival bonus, and focus on Amos, why? This was a squad decision by all accounts, again no evidence has been presented to the contrary.

I can forgive Anderson for not paying on time, the cash flow is clearly poor and he’s done a great job getting it into line. But communicate with those affected and don’t go on the attack to the press, scapegoat a player and try to turn the fans against the team.

I really don't care what you or anyone wants to believe about me quite frankly, I've been on forums for far to long for that.

I've said what I did, no more no less.

As for the rest of what you post.

An £125,000 fee was paid to Athos (a company owned by a relative of KA) for consultancy fees.  There is no mention anywhere where I can establish who the actual owners of Athos are, what the consultancy was in relation to, or even if KA or LA had any dealings with it - so please feel free to show me where I've said otherwise.

Where did I ever claim the PAYE deferment was a fact?

I've mention unpaid bonus on ever occasion I believe and have not focused specifically on Amos outstanding June salary exclusively as you suggest except to point out how much he receives monthly and how much he had received in the year to the last missing payment.

I believe Anderson's reply was fair comment in view of the players going on what is almost as certainly a unofficial strike and whilst full mediation and grievance procedures had not been exhausted.

The matter should have been dealt with behind closed doors and until a legally convened official strike was organised by their union, the players, (if the situation could not ultimately be resolved amicably) and should have played the St Mirren friendly match and any other matches up until that point, if it did ever get to that.

Whatever Sluffy, you care so much you’d rather pretend you were ‘playing a prank’ (what sort of a prank is that by the way?), than admit you’d made a mistake.

Well at least we can agree on the matter should have been handled behind closed doors. Let’s see what the PFA come out with now, little more we can work out without more information.

T.R.O.Y wrote:Whatever Sluffy, you care so much you’d rather pretend you were ‘playing a prank’ (what sort of a prank is that by the way?), than admit you’d made a mistake.

Well at least we can agree on the matter should have been handled behind closed doors. Let’s see what the PFA come out with now, little more we can work out without more information.

Next move is KA's!  We have to hear his defense of not paying on time. As I have said before, something or someone really pissed him off to react in this way.  It is really interesting that the senior players went along with this. At the end of the day, there are no winners... KA has lost face with the players, the union, and the FA.  The players have lost face with the fans.  Who in their right mind would come to the club now (unless they have no options)?  I hope cooler heads will prevail and settle this soon and allow us to get off the bottom of the table quicker than last season.  A few wins could turn this all around.

y2johnny wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

Sluffy wrote:I think the real story is that if we were rolling in money the players would have been paid in full and on time but seeing that we aren't, Anderson simply tried to cut a few corners 

To me that is the "real story" - although I wouldn't call it cutting corners. I would call it piss poor management as all that was required to avoid the entire debacle was for Anderson to be open and honest with the players in the first instance.
If he couldn't pay the players on the due date, or even if he didn't want to pay them on that date for whatever reason, if he'd approached them and explained the situation in advance instead of conniving behind their backs there would have been no strike.
Attempting to justify his actions afterwards made things even worse as now all the world knows he is dodgy and not to be trusted in any dealings with him in the future which is bad for the club's reputation and threatens potential signings.

How do you know he didn't

Because the same sources that broke the story said so.

observer wrote:Next move is KA's!  We have to hear his defense of not paying on time. As I have said before, something or someone really pissed him off to react in this way.

Think we’ve had Ken’s defence, he made his statement which gave no reason for late payment - and said he won’t be commenting further.

I read the statement as an attempt to turn fans against players to be honest. A strange tactic given that they are the ones who can bring success on the pitch and in turn increase revenue.

wanderlust wrote:

y2johnny wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

Sluffy wrote:I think the real story is that if we were rolling in money the players would have been paid in full and on time but seeing that we aren't, Anderson simply tried to cut a few corners 

To me that is the "real story" - although I wouldn't call it cutting corners. I would call it piss poor management as all that was required to avoid the entire debacle was for Anderson to be open and honest with the players in the first instance.
If he couldn't pay the players on the due date, or even if he didn't want to pay them on that date for whatever reason, if he'd approached them and explained the situation in advance instead of conniving behind their backs there would have been no strike.
Attempting to justify his actions afterwards made things even worse as now all the world knows he is dodgy and not to be trusted in any dealings with him in the future which is bad for the club's reputation and threatens potential signings.

How do you know he didn't

Because the same sources that broke the story said so.

Would this be the same Marc Iles who told us categorically on numerous occasions that it would be either Adkins or Cotterill who would be our new boss after Lennon was sacked and was totally gobsmacked when Phil Parkinson was appointed.

If so I'd take whatever he says with a large pinch of salt.

I’d imagine Lust was talking about the players official statement.

T.R.O.Y wrote:I’d imagine Lust was talking about the players official statement.

He said -

wanderlust wrote:
Because the same sources that broke the story said so.

...so that would be Iles would it not?

The players issued a statement to Iles to 'break' the story - and in my opinion - it was unfortunate for all concerned that he did rather than let things get resolved behind closed doors as they should have been and currently are being so.

Nigel, If I were you, I would ignore all the arguing and bickering. This is now happening on a daily basis, and its pathetic. However, lie low until the season starts, and you might even see some sensible suggestions and comments about the club and football, (if you can wade through all the crap leading up to it).

gloswhite wrote:Nigel, If I were you, I would ignore all the arguing and bickering. This is now happening on a daily basis, and its pathetic. 

It's only Sluffy having a laugh.

He's right. Tomorrow sluffy will be revealing he's really the Chairman of the ST, and he's just played a great joke on us all for the last two years.

How we will laugh.

gloswhite wrote:Nigel, If I were you, I would ignore all the arguing and bickering. This is now happening on a daily basis, and its pathetic. However, lie low until the season starts, and you might even see some sensible suggestions and comments about the club and football, (if you can wade through all the crap leading up to it).

Spare me. You’ve been involved in enough back and forth topics yourself, don’t try and act as if you’re above them. If you have a high quality input please go ahead and make it, in the meantime people are free to debate conflicting views on the club however we wish.

wanderlust wrote:

y2johnny wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

Sluffy wrote:I think the real story is that if we were rolling in money the players would have been paid in full and on time but seeing that we aren't, Anderson simply tried to cut a few corners 

To me that is the "real story" - although I wouldn't call it cutting corners. I would call it piss poor management as all that was required to avoid the entire debacle was for Anderson to be open and honest with the players in the first instance.
If he couldn't pay the players on the due date, or even if he didn't want to pay them on that date for whatever reason, if he'd approached them and explained the situation in advance instead of conniving behind their backs there would have been no strike.
Attempting to justify his actions afterwards made things even worse as now all the world knows he is dodgy and not to be trusted in any dealings with him in the future which is bad for the club's reputation and threatens potential signings.

How do you know he didn't

Because the same sources that broke the story said so.

So the players said.  Ok

y2johnny wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

y2johnny wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

Sluffy wrote:I think the real story is that if we were rolling in money the players would have been paid in full and on time but seeing that we aren't, Anderson simply tried to cut a few corners 

To me that is the "real story" - although I wouldn't call it cutting corners. I would call it piss poor management as all that was required to avoid the entire debacle was for Anderson to be open and honest with the players in the first instance.
If he couldn't pay the players on the due date, or even if he didn't want to pay them on that date for whatever reason, if he'd approached them and explained the situation in advance instead of conniving behind their backs there would have been no strike.
Attempting to justify his actions afterwards made things even worse as now all the world knows he is dodgy and not to be trusted in any dealings with him in the future which is bad for the club's reputation and threatens potential signings.

How do you know he didn't

Because the same sources that broke the story said so.

So the players said.  Ok

Plus Iles in today's story about the players wanting to meet with Anderson to sort it out. I tend to believe the players as unlike Anderson, they haven't got a track record of being lying scumbags who strip the assets of companies to line their own pockets or breaking contracts they've signed up to.

Of course it is possible that Anderson has suddenly become a reformed person and that simultaneously the entire senior squad have decided to start lying to the media and then compound it by asking for a meeting for which there would be no possible reason.

Or rather it's not really.

wanderlust wrote:

y2johnny wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

y2johnny wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

Sluffy wrote:I think the real story is that if we were rolling in money the players would have been paid in full and on time but seeing that we aren't, Anderson simply tried to cut a few corners 

To me that is the "real story" - although I wouldn't call it cutting corners. I would call it piss poor management as all that was required to avoid the entire debacle was for Anderson to be open and honest with the players in the first instance.
If he couldn't pay the players on the due date, or even if he didn't want to pay them on that date for whatever reason, if he'd approached them and explained the situation in advance instead of conniving behind their backs there would have been no strike.
Attempting to justify his actions afterwards made things even worse as now all the world knows he is dodgy and not to be trusted in any dealings with him in the future which is bad for the club's reputation and threatens potential signings.

How do you know he didn't

Because the same sources that broke the story said so.

So the players said.  Ok

Plus Iles in today's story about the players wanting to meet with Anderson to sort it out. I tend to believe the players as unlike Anderson, they haven't got a track record of being lying scumbags who strip the assets of companies to line their own pockets or breaking contracts they've signed up to.

Of course it is possible that Anderson has suddenly become a reformed person and that simultaneously the entire senior squad have decided to start lying to the media and then compound it by asking for a meeting for which there would be no possible reason.

Or rather it's not really.

Not saying either is true as i dont know the facts. But I'm willing to wait rather than slag everyone

Don’t think we’re going to get anymore facts to be honest Johnny. A lack of communication certainly fits the narrative as to what’s happened and why better though.

T.R.O.Y wrote:Don’t think we’re going to get anymore facts to be honest Johnny. A lack of communication certainly fits the narrative as to what’s happened and why better though.

The only facts we know is the players wasted a lot of people's time and money by striking. 

We know they all got paid their regular salary. 

We know they would get their bonus eventually. 

We know anderson saved us from oblivion and is doing what he can on a shoestring budget and a juggling act.

We also know that this isn’t the first time this has happened. As I’ve said before the only people who can affect success on the pitch are the players so you need to keep them happy and motivated. This won’t do either.