Greenhill Road Posted August 2, 2018 Report Share Posted August 2, 2018 Just scored a great goal there for Hibs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Zo Posted August 2, 2018 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2018 Scoring tonight can't have done his proposed move to Celtic any harm. Hopefully Celtic get a deal sorted with Hibs asap and increase our coffers to the tune of a cool £1 million. come on Celtic get that biscuit tin opened! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted August 2, 2018 Report Share Posted August 2, 2018 It looks like Hibs might well be out of Europe by this time next week. I would have thought that will hasten McGinns departure.Does them not being slow it down? [emoji57] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted August 2, 2018 Report Share Posted August 2, 2018 I thought they also got a wad of cash for McArthur? However if you weren't meaning 2009 to be recent times then I would look at the guy Hamilton sold to West ham (?), the youngster Falkirk sold to a championship club both of whom were very inexperienced and the aforementioned United who sold their talent to celtic. McArthur is now an established EPL level player, turned out to be a bargain.The reason we never got fees like that for McGinn and the rest is cause none of them are as good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted August 2, 2018 Report Share Posted August 2, 2018 McArthur is now an established EPL level player, turned out to be a bargain.The reason we never got fees like that for McGinn and the rest is cause none of them are as good. Thanks for pointing out that McArthur wasn't an established EPL player when he left Hamilton Accies [emoji1303] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munoz Posted August 2, 2018 Report Share Posted August 2, 2018 1 hour ago, Mr Zo said: Scoring tonight can't have done his proposed move to Celtic any harm. Hopefully Celtic get a deal sorted with Hibs asap and increase our coffers to the tune of a cool £1 million. come on Celtic get that biscuit tin opened! From a Hibs point of view , by holding on to J McGinn they have just made a fair whack of cash courtesy of his goal tonight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPAFKA Jersey 2 Posted August 2, 2018 Report Share Posted August 2, 2018 7 hours ago, Soctty said: If Hibs can get players to reduce the cash coming in, they pay us less. IT's common sense. IF they get Allan and three other players and Celtic pay £1m less, Hibs save themselves £333k. It's basic. Hibs would like not far off £5m, as that would leave them with just over £3m. The lower it goes, the less value is in it for them selling for cash, so throw in a few players and they save on the sell on clause. It's up to you whether you regard that as shafting us - I think it is, and think most clubs in their position would try to do the same. Sorry mate, genuinely not being obtuse, but I don't follow. If Celtic pay Hibs 2.5mm, Hibs get 1.675m If Celtic pay Hibs 1m and some players (that they may or may not actually want), Hibs get 666k. How is that beneficial to Hibs just because they also got a few of Celtic's cast offs. Genuinely lost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LargsBud Posted August 2, 2018 Report Share Posted August 2, 2018 4 minutes ago, TPAFKA Jersey 2 said: Sorry mate, genuinely not being obtuse, but I don't follow. If Celtic pay Hibs 2.5mm, Hibs get 1.675m If Celtic pay Hibs 1m and some players (that they may or may not actually want), Hibs get 666k. How is that beneficial to Hibs just because they also got a few of Celtic's cast offs. Genuinely lost. In their eyes it will be better to get £3million worth of players than £2million of that value in cash. What makes them any more "cast offs" than players they would spend the equivalent in cash on? Obviously thats a case where it would be 100% players which is a difficult deal to make but any deal involving any players is beneficial to Hibs as they split less with us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabuddies Posted August 2, 2018 Report Share Posted August 2, 2018 From the current SPFL rules. 45. When two Football clubs, at least one of whom is a Club, exchange Players with no monetary consideration, and there exists, in a previous transfer agreement relating to one or both Players, a provision that another Club or club is due a percentage or share of an onward transfer fee, the clubs exchanging Players must place a financial valuation on the respective Players. This valuation must be agreed in writing between the Clubs and/or club concerned and Communicated to the Scottish FA in order that a calculation can be made of the percentage of that valuation or amount otherwise calculated due to the other Club and/or club. 46. Should a Club, which is entitled to benefit financially from a Player's onward transfer, dispute the valuation placed on any Player in an exchange situation, or, should the Board consider that any such valuation may not be a true reflection of such Player's worth, a Compensation Tribunal will determine the value of or appropriate Compensation for the Player concerned. So, my reading of that is that clubs can no longer get away with gerrymandering the values of players. Comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddies1877 Posted August 2, 2018 Report Share Posted August 2, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPAFKA Jersey 2 Posted August 2, 2018 Report Share Posted August 2, 2018 24 minutes ago, rabuddies said: From the current SPFL rules. 45. When two Football clubs, at least one of whom is a Club, exchange Players with no monetary consideration, and there exists, in a previous transfer agreement relating to one or both Players, a provision that another Club or club is due a percentage or share of an onward transfer fee, the clubs exchanging Players must place a financial valuation on the respective Players. This valuation must be agreed in writing between the Clubs and/or club concerned and Communicated to the Scottish FA in order that a calculation can be made of the percentage of that valuation or amount otherwise calculated due to the other Club and/or club. 46. Should a Club, which is entitled to benefit financially from a Player's onward transfer, dispute the valuation placed on any Player in an exchange situation, or, should the Board consider that any such valuation may not be a true reflection of such Player's worth, a Compensation Tribunal will determine the value of or appropriate Compensation for the Player concerned. So, my reading of that is that clubs can no longer get away with gerrymandering the values of players. Comments. That clears that up then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MenstrieSaint Posted August 2, 2018 Report Share Posted August 2, 2018 Wonder if after playing Aberdeen a couple of times that Burnley might have a different opinion of Scottish football than they did a fortnight ago , and might just start to take a wee bit of interest in John McGinn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ged62 Posted August 3, 2018 Report Share Posted August 3, 2018 Scoring tonight can't have done his proposed move to Celtic any harm. Hopefully Celtic get a deal sorted with Hibs asap and increase our coffers to the tune of a cool £1 million. come on Celtic get that biscuit tin opened!You kidding? When it comes to Celtic they want to steal Scottish teams players for next to nothing. They have history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmer john Posted August 3, 2018 Report Share Posted August 3, 2018 in my opinion, it is looking like Celtic will buy John McGinn before the end of this transfer window with Scott Allan going the other way in part exchange....probably not for as much combined value as we would hope, and likely not in time for us to spend some of our windfall. I think that is what will transpire. I will meet a Hibs fan farmer at the bar at the Kintyre Agricultural show later today and he will confirm or debunk this. There you are now. And, getting a bad feeling about Stephen if the situation above plays out as described...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soctty Posted August 3, 2018 Report Share Posted August 3, 2018 8 hours ago, TPAFKA Jersey 2 said: Sorry mate, genuinely not being obtuse, but I don't follow. If Celtic pay Hibs 2.5mm, Hibs get 1.675m If Celtic pay Hibs 1m and some players (that they may or may not actually want), Hibs get 666k. How is that beneficial to Hibs just because they also got a few of Celtic's cast offs. Genuinely lost. I can't see Lennon taking players he doesn't want. If that were the case I think the deal would already be done. If Hibs want Allan - who starred for them before - how is Celtic's view of him related to Hibs'? The cash price would still have to make sense on top of the player/players. Genuinely can't see how this is so difficult for you to grasp... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soctty Posted August 3, 2018 Report Share Posted August 3, 2018 (edited) . Edited August 3, 2018 by Soctty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soctty Posted August 3, 2018 Report Share Posted August 3, 2018 (edited) 9 hours ago, buddies1877 said: It appears I - and others - stand corrected. This is a welcome inclusion in the SPFL rules, and one that would've been very welcome in the years goneby where clubs fudged transfers to weasel there way out of sell on clauses. Very happy to be proved wrong. Edited August 3, 2018 by Soctty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazil85 Posted August 3, 2018 Report Share Posted August 3, 2018 15 hours ago, beyond our ken said: Name that legislation you can’t because there is none you clearly misunderstand the very narrow definition that the word legislation carries it refers to acts of parliament not all things related to the law I absolutely don't, legislation is the process of enacting laws through parlament. There isn't one single element of legislation that ties into contract law, there are several. The process to legislate allows us to confirm if a contract is legally binding or not. As LPM has elluded to, if you and me sign a contract saying you'll pay me £500 for pushing someone off a building, it wouldn't be legally binding as there is previously passed legislation against murder. This is unbelievable you're still trying to debate this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazil85 Posted August 3, 2018 Report Share Posted August 3, 2018 15 hours ago, beyond our ken said: Then then think again, cos you are out of your depth Show me where I'm out of my depth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazil85 Posted August 3, 2018 Report Share Posted August 3, 2018 14 hours ago, buddies1877 said: Did you write this contact out and keep it from Stuart Gilmour because I remember him tweeting few weeks ago he thinks it would go to a tribunal if any players were involved in the transfer of mcginn You mean the tweet where he said he's not sure and took a guess? We will only get value of the cash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beyond our ken Posted August 3, 2018 Report Share Posted August 3, 2018 32 minutes ago, bazil85 said: I absolutely don't, legislation is the process of enacting laws through parlament. There isn't one single element of legislation that ties into contract law, there are several. The process to legislate allows us to confirm if a contract is legally binding or not. As LPM has elluded to, if you and me sign a contract saying you'll pay me £500 for pushing someone off a building, it wouldn't be legally binding as there is previously passed legislation against murder. This is unbelievable you're still trying to debate this you are 100% wrong, legislation is the accumulation of written laws and the legal definition is that pieces of legislation are the written acts of parliament, such as the misuse of drugs act or the health and safety at work act. These are actual laws and contracts are agreements. Legally enforceable through the courts, but only by interpretation and precedent and not by act of parliament. It's unbelievable that you refuse to accept that you were flying a kite by saying that a knowledge of legislation would explain how a contract works. they are two different branches of law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pod Posted August 3, 2018 Report Share Posted August 3, 2018 The wonders of the web. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beyond our ken Posted August 3, 2018 Report Share Posted August 3, 2018 42 minutes ago, bazil85 said: Show me where I'm out of my depth. because you contend that legislation governs contract law. it doesn't. You can refer to compliance with any piece of legislation in any contract, but that doesn't make it more enforceable, it is just a way of applying your terms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beyond our ken Posted August 3, 2018 Report Share Posted August 3, 2018 (edited) 9 minutes ago, pod said: The wonders of the web. I did use the web as a resource in my studies, which armed me with a basic understanding of legal principles, but I would never portray myself as an expert in the law as my knowledge is only good enough to let me do my job and also to understand where my limitations are. It goes no further. In the context of this argument, I didn't need to browse for any material as I know the basics. To be fair to Bazil, he clearly hasn't googled for info to support his argument. if he did he would have stepped away from the keyboard by now Did you notice that Bazil is now arguing with me rather than purporting the thoroughly debunked idea that any makeweight in a deal for McGinn has no impact on the sum SMFC receives if he is sold by Hibs? Edited August 3, 2018 by beyond our ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Posted August 3, 2018 Report Share Posted August 3, 2018 9 minutes ago, pod said: The wonders of the web. Scary to read 2 posters arguing about things most of us know nothing about and don't care about at this time in the morning We will get what we get when McGinn moved, and all we should hope is to get some money rather than nothing in 12 months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.