Possible Di Canio lawsuit one reason for embargo (From The Wiltshire Gazette and Herald)

super red wrote:
Absolutely bizarre. So the FL keep us in embargo just in case PDC sues!! He might wait another year!!

super red wrote:
Absolutely bizarre. So the FL keep us in embargo just in case PDC sues!! He might wait another year!!

super red wrote:
Can't believe PDC will sue, surely he won't get another job in English football if he'd did. Untenable, he would make himself untouchable!!

batch wrote:

super red wrote:
Absolutely bizarre. So the FL keep us in embargo just in case PDC sues!! He might wait another year!!

That's why the statement doesn't sit right with me. Someone may do something so we'll keep you under embargo...I don't think it work quite like that.

Now the wages owed to the back-room staff up to quitting point, that I can see being considered tangible football debt.

The 1957 debt is even more strange though, I've seen people speculate linking it to the immanent County Ground lease expiry - that would kind of make sense.

I guess its all a question of finding money for all this, but the Black era is very much over in that regard.

Its starting to look like it is going to be an 'interesting' ride over the next weeks and months isn't it.

EastleazeRed wrote:
So much for all the scaf waving and kissing the badge Paolo ? In the end it was always about you .

who am i wrote:
Omg the anti dicanio brigade are out in force today. Lets all step back a little shall we. The adver understands the potential lawsuit from former manager pdc is ONE of the reasons behind the embargo. Well the adver also understood that the embargo was being lifted almost everyday since four weeks ago. Like many I can not believe for one minute that a debt from 1957 and a possible lawsuit that might not take place for a number of years is behind this. Something smells and it's not a pleasant odour.

who am i wrote:
Omg the anti dicanio brigade are out in force today. Lets all step back a little shall we. The adver understands the potential lawsuit from former manager pdc is ONE of the reasons behind the embargo. Well the adver also understood that the embargo was being lifted almost everyday since four weeks ago. Like many I can not believe for one minute that a debt from 1957 and a possible lawsuit that might not take place for a number of years is behind this. Something smells and it's not a pleasant odour.

Baritone wrote:
The FL cannot impose an embargo "just in case" PDC sues. That would be illegal. It would be a different matter if PDC had already filed a suit but he is reported as saying that he is "considering" it. In any case, the embargo was imposed long before PDC threatened to sue.

And as for debts going back fifty years!

No - I cannot help but feel that the Board is trying to pull the wool over our eyes. Meanwhile, we desperately need an infusion of new blood to lift the team through these last, few games.

And what about our backer - the investor in the background. Does he know what is going on, because he is unlikely to be playing games - he will want his investment protected and, eventually, a return on that investment. Is he aware of what is going on?

These are indeed hard times for fans and if promotion is lost due to the club''s inability to get us out of the embargo, the Board will be seen to have failed massively by the fans.

smirg kcab wrote:
A mans got to do what a mans got to do,
Onwards and upwards
He's lined up for the Leeds job
How many of you would do the same?
(All of you)
Black and co has left us in the shiiter

Med Red wrote:
Excellent posts Baritone and Who am I. If there isn't any truth in the claim that the embargo is still in place because of the possibility that Di Canio might sue the club, then perhaps the FL should make a statement denying that this is the case. Hopefully they will. If they remain silent then maybe we should assume the statement made by the club is correct.

The Jockster wrote:

smirg kcab wrote:
A mans got to do what a mans got to do,
Onwards and upwards
He's lined up for the Leeds job
How many of you would do the same?
(All of you)
Black and co has left us in the shiiter

Spot on Grim - I posted eons ago that PDc would be going to Leeds - Warnock is just minding the shop until the end of the season but the deal is as good as done I think.

And yes we'd all do the same - I currently am lol!

LeGod wrote:
So one of the members of the football league panel is the Vice Chairman of Bournemouth fc so surely he has a conflict of interest to make life difficult for us and this cant be right. The whole situation absolutely stinks one rule for STFC and not for anyone else.

umpcah wrote:

who am i wrote: Omg the anti dicanio brigade are out in force today. Lets all step back a little shall we. The adver understands the potential lawsuit from former manager pdc is ONE of the reasons behind the embargo. Well the adver also understood that the embargo was being lifted almost everyday since four weeks ago. Like many I can not believe for one minute that a debt from 1957 and a possible lawsuit that might not take place for a number of years is behind this. Something smells and it's not a pleasant odour.

"a possible lawsuit that might not take place for a number of years " ? A number of years ? I cant see Di Canio being that patient - can you ?

BurtBacharach wrote:
Utter BS. Unfortunately we've been spoilt during 07-12... with the backing we had. Sustainability = No pot to pee in.

Can't see Ferry or our better players sticking around so we can 'develop youth'.

I'm starting to wonder if this consortium are aiming to do what the loonies who've owned Leeds for the last few months have done. Handle us for a few months before looking for a profit from moving the club on to the next consortium. Which i expect would be an epic profit, if they can see through promotion with little put in.

sadgit wrote:
International Robin2 says...

I don't blame PDC for walking - this season, he gave us his all and we gave him nothing back.”



Get a life!
PDC wasted loads of money and he and Spencer pocketed the rest.

RobinsTalk wrote:
Just waiting for the FL to deduct every point we've won since 1957 now. ...

Since 1950 wrote:

EastleazeRed wrote:
So much for all the scaf waving and kissing the badge Paolo ? In the end it was always about you .

Steady Eastleaze, we don't actually know if it is PDC yet.

If he wanted to be cleaver though he could come out now and say he has no intention to sue.

If he doesn't it would tend to indicate that he indeed does plan to sue. If he comes out and says he wont sue then it blows the boards cover.

Med Red wrote:
Excellent posts Baritone and Who am I. If there isn't any truth in the claim that the embargo is still in place because of the possibility that Di Canio might sue the club, then perhaps the FL should make a statement denying that this is the case. Hopefully they will. If they remain silent then maybe we should assume the statement made by the club is correct.

EastleazeRed wrote:
So much for all the scaf waving and kissing the badge Paolo ? In the end it was always about you .

smirg kcab wrote:

The Jockster wrote:

smirg kcab wrote:
A mans got to do what a mans got to do,
Onwards and upwards
He's lined up for the Leeds job
How many of you would do the same?
(All of you)
Black and co has left us in the shiiter

Spot on Grim - I posted eons ago that PDc would be going to Leeds - Warnock is just minding the shop until the end of the season but the deal is as good as done I think.

And yes we'd all do the same - I currently am lol!

Get every penny out of them jock.
Is your case related from 1957 also lol.
( and people still believe this)
Onwards and upwards.
You can see why other clubs fans come on here and call us inbred s , thick, 6 fingered, and all the rest lol
Just a thought

Stilloyal wrote:
This is total b0ll0cks and bu11sh1t, the only person that can claim a debt after six years is the taxman (so my accountant told me ). I can't believe any debt has laid undiscovered for 50 years. When we were relegated 2 divisions for irregularities the taxman went through our books thoroughly so surely they would have found something then.
Furthermore the "possibility" of a former employee suing us is also cr4p and not a legal reason for keeping us in embargo.
I think our new board have discovered that they have bitten off more than they can chew, it's certainly hard for me to swallow this drivell.

andy5364 wrote:

smirg kcab wrote:

The Jockster wrote:

smirg kcab wrote:
A mans got to do what a mans got to do,
Onwards and upwards
He's lined up for the Leeds job
How many of you would do the same?
(All of you)
Black and co has left us in the shiiter

Spot on Grim - I posted eons ago that PDc would be going to Leeds - Warnock is just minding the shop until the end of the season but the deal is as good as done I think.

And yes we'd all do the same - I currently am lol!

Get every penny out of them jock.
Is your case related from 1957 also lol.
( and people still believe this)
Onwards and upwards.
You can see why other clubs fans come on here and call us inbred s , thick, 6 fingered, and all the rest lol
Just a thought

Describing yourself again then grim ! Coyr

bearwoodred wrote:
Is there snow in Swindon~? We have got 3 or 4 inches in sunny Brum - usual chaos unsuing!!

Thought Paolo"shall I or sharnt I sue them" dC might help shoveling!!

mickry wrote:
There were clear negatives to DiCanio's character as a manager. One of these was his lack of empathy with good 'division 3' players far less naturally gifted than he was as a player. hence, I think, his apparent inability to understand when to praise and encourage and when to criticise and (therefore) discourage his men.
On the other hand, there was it seemed, a 'wear-the-heart-on-t

he sleeve' generosity of spirit which came out when, for example, he helped clear snow from the pitch, and so on.
So I can't believe that, HAVING RESIGNED, and therefore VOLUNTARILY, departed he imagines that he has a leg to stand on in any court case against the club. More importantly, I can't believe he would be so incredibly mean spirited as to even WANT to sue. As has been said, if he goes through with this then let him take warning that my eternal curse will dog him until the end of his miserable days.
If, on the other hand, he lets this whole sordid affair go, then my blessings go with him.
Mick.

the wizard wrote:
Forget PDC being to blame for this, Sam has said its a player, so I'm thinking Leon Clarke, maybe its somebody else but he was the one that had the biggest spat, or just as an outsider, Caddis.

As goes the 57 debt, well after previous admin, CVA and Diamond Mike I think its a smoke screen.

Still waiting for the job title of Greg Hall which again is a worry. Whether these guys are saints or sinners they need to come clean and with something tangible and believable.
Like many others, I now fear for our future, and can see many good players walking away this summer, not perhaps the best way to go for our club.

cleevesinoz wrote:
So PDC is still getting the headlines !!!!!!!
It was good while it lasted but now he is a joke and I hope he never gets a job.
As for a debt from 50 yrs ago WTF.
How many times have people looked over the books and found nothing .I smell a large bucket of BS labeled this belongs to the Football League.How many more hurdles do the club need to jump and I bet the embargo will be lifted on April Fools Day.

Dig deep Swindon and show the knockers we can do it no matter what the put in the way.

COYR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!

smirg kcab wrote:

andy5364 wrote:

smirg kcab wrote:

The Jockster wrote:

smirg kcab wrote:
A mans got to do what a mans got to do,
Onwards and upwards
He's lined up for the Leeds job
How many of you would do the same?
(All of you)
Black and co has left us in the shiiter

Spot on Grim - I posted eons ago that PDc would be going to Leeds - Warnock is just minding the shop until the end of the season but the deal is as good as done I think.

And yes we'd all do the same - I currently am lol!

Get every penny out of them jock.
Is your case related from 1957 also lol.
( and people still believe this)
Onwards and upwards.
You can see why other clubs fans come on here and call us inbred s , thick, 6 fingered, and all the rest lol
Just a thought

Describing yourself again then grim ! Coyr

6 fingered but my girlfriend dont seem to mind, if she's happy then I'm happy.
Onwards and upwards
And she's a good sister

Lanky wrote:

cleevesinoz wrote:
So PDC is still getting the headlines !!!!!!!
It was good while it lasted but now he is a joke and I hope he never gets a job.
As for a debt from 50 yrs ago WTF.
How many times have people looked over the books and found nothing .I smell a large bucket of BS labeled this belongs to the Football League.How many more hurdles do the club need to jump and I bet the embargo will be lifted on April Fools Day.

Dig deep Swindon and show the knockers we can do it no matter what the put in the way.

COYR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hmmm its opinions like this, and those of the other Anti-PDC brigade that make me laugh....
Surely PDC getting the headlines is the fault of the Media, and the fans, like you cleevesinoz. What has he actually come out and said or done to get the headlines over the past 2 weeks (apart from a fairly inconspicuous interview for Football Focus?). Nothing. The adver has created a sensationalist headline, based on what?

Like many others have said, it seems absurd to keep us in an embargo for the fear of a "potential sueing". I think something else is going on.

I'd be disappointed if PDC DOES sue - but at the moment, I don't think he will . And even if he did, its not going to delete our sucess over the past 2 years from the record books (even if he did have a big budget as people love pointing out so often).

Cookie43 wrote:
To be honest PDC, embargoes,
New owners, new debt, old debt ,
Lawsuits, !!!!!
I couldn't give a f.ckin monkeys bollo.x
Anymore Iam sick of it all
I am just gonna get behind the team and Kmac and concentrate on the most important thing the Swindon town team 3 points tomorrow
Come on u Reds!!!!!!!?!!

LeGod wrote:
Yep the vice chairman of Bournemouth definetly on the FL committe the mighty bournemouth fans can say what they like but with decision the FL are making no representation should be made by an opposing vice chairman on decisions like this especially when both clubs are pushing for promotion. The whole thing stinks from the statement from our board to the whole embargo with the FL. I still feel there is another story unravelling around all this bull****. Next week is the last week to sign players so lets see if **** Jed is true to his word so far none of his statements have come true.

the don69 wrote:

Lanky wrote:

cleevesinoz wrote:
So PDC is still getting the headlines !!!!!!!
It was good while it lasted but now he is a joke and I hope he never gets a job.
As for a debt from 50 yrs ago WTF.
How many times have people looked over the books and found nothing .I smell a large bucket of BS labeled this belongs to the Football League.How many more hurdles do the club need to jump and I bet the embargo will be lifted on April Fools Day.

Dig deep Swindon and show the knockers we can do it no matter what the put in the way.

COYR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hmmm its opinions like this, and those of the other Anti-PDC brigade that make me laugh....
Surely PDC getting the headlines is the fault of the Media, and the fans, like you cleevesinoz. What has he actually come out and said or done to get the headlines over the past 2 weeks (apart from a fairly inconspicuous interview for Football Focus?). Nothing. The adver has created a sensationalist headline, based on what?

Like many others have said, it seems absurd to keep us in an embargo for the fear of a "potential sueing". I think something else is going on.

I'd be disappointed if PDC DOES sue - but at the moment, I don't think he will . And even if he did, its not going to delete our sucess over the past 2 years from the record books (even if he did have a big budget as people love pointing out so often).

We point it out Lanky!because where would he have took us without his huge budget,huge turnover of players and the money he had from Black????????

madterrier wrote:
And don't be confounded by the terminology or the Adver's vague understanding of it.

A debenture is a loan. It's just a certificate that acknowledges a debt. for a fixed term, and usually for a fixed rate of interest.

A debenture is unsecured. Which means it's backed by nothing more than the reputation and integrity of the borrower.

I find it impossible to understand how two administrations would not have eliminated this debt entirely. I'm not an accountant, but I've seen enough administrations in business. Hard to believe how this can still be on the books - only debt taken on since we came out of administration the last time should still be there.

Lanky wrote:

the don69 wrote:

Lanky wrote:

cleevesinoz wrote:
So PDC is still getting the headlines !!!!!!!
It was good while it lasted but now he is a joke and I hope he never gets a job.
As for a debt from 50 yrs ago WTF.
How many times have people looked over the books and found nothing .I smell a large bucket of BS labeled this belongs to the Football League.How many more hurdles do the club need to jump and I bet the embargo will be lifted on April Fools Day.

Dig deep Swindon and show the knockers we can do it no matter what the put in the way.

COYR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hmmm its opinions like this, and those of the other Anti-PDC brigade that make me laugh....
Surely PDC getting the headlines is the fault of the Media, and the fans, like you cleevesinoz. What has he actually come out and said or done to get the headlines over the past 2 weeks (apart from a fairly inconspicuous interview for Football Focus?). Nothing. The adver has created a sensationalist headline, based on what?

Like many others have said, it seems absurd to keep us in an embargo for the fear of a "potential sueing". I think something else is going on.

I'd be disappointed if PDC DOES sue - but at the moment, I don't think he will . And even if he did, its not going to delete our sucess over the past 2 years from the record books (even if he did have a big budget as people love pointing out so often).

We point it out Lanky!because where would he have took us without his huge budget,huge turnover of players and the money he had from Black????????

He had that at his disposal and he used it! And using it got him results! Where is the issue?
There have been countless examples of people being given a large budget and not getting success. Look at Leicester at the moment?

I don't know what your job is - but imagine if you boss said "Here is your task, and this is what you have at your disposal to achieve it. Use it how you want, obviously it would be nicer if you saved a little bit, but get the job done". Personally I would use it all to get to the objective - even if I made some mistakes along the way. As if I didn't achieve my goal, people would say "you had this resource and you didn't use it and you failed in your goal".

Paolo had a large budget. He used his large budget. He achieved the promotion and left us on course for the Championship. Other people may have done the same - other people may have completely failed. But the point is, Paolo achieved success.

If he didn't have that budget, maybe he wouldn't have done as well, maybe he would. Maybe he wouldn't have taken the job? Who knows - its this hypothetical chat like "Anyone could have got us up with that money" that is a completely lazy point of debate as no one can prove you right or wrong. Its a lazy opinion for people who can't think of facts to back up their points.

Med Red wrote:
Hang on a cotton pickin minute there peeps.... Jed's saying he's confident the embargo will be lifted before transfer deadline. He's saying that the embargo is in place because Di Canio might sue the club. Therefore, presumably the club are trying to negotiate an out of court settlement with PDC to get the embargo lifted? If only Ritchie hadn't been sold!

Is that you Lovesey wrote:
I wish PDC would just walk away from a club which gave him his managerial start, backed all of his transfer mistakes and watched as he fell out with numerous players shifting them on for free because his pride wouldn't let him reconcile, all of which put us on the brink of administration....

So we had to sell a player to avoid administration, wow that made his job untenable, 1 player against the 15 players he signed then decided weren't good enough, what club would want him with a record like that, add a law suit into it and you kiss bye bye career.

I loved PDC but am starting to see the reality and that this club meant nothing to him, the fans meant nothing to him, the players meant nothing to him, all he cared about was Paolo Di Canio.

We have a new board and the same fans, if he fell out with Patey and Black get over it show some dinity, you quit when we needed you to see things through, move on, we have....

the don69 wrote:

Lanky wrote:

the don69 wrote:

Lanky wrote:

cleevesinoz wrote:
So PDC is still getting the headlines !!!!!!!
It was good while it lasted but now he is a joke and I hope he never gets a job.
As for a debt from 50 yrs ago WTF.
How many times have people looked over the books and found nothing .I smell a large bucket of BS labeled this belongs to the Football League.How many more hurdles do the club need to jump and I bet the embargo will be lifted on April Fools Day.

Dig deep Swindon and show the knockers we can do it no matter what the put in the way.

COYR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!





!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hmmm its opinions like this, and those of the other Anti-PDC brigade that make me laugh....
Surely PDC getting the headlines is the fault of the Media, and the fans, like you cleevesinoz. What has he actually come out and said or done to get the headlines over the past 2 weeks (apart from a fairly inconspicuous interview for Football Focus?). Nothing. The adver has created a sensationalist headline, based on what?

Like many others have said, it seems absurd to keep us in an embargo for the fear of a "potential sueing". I think something else is going on.

I'd be disappointed if PDC DOES sue - but at the moment, I don't think he will . And even if he did, its not going to delete our sucess over the past 2 years from the record books (even if he did have a big budget as people love pointing out so often).

We point it out Lanky!because where would he have took us without his huge budget,huge turnover of players and the money he had from Black????????

He had that at his disposal and he used it! And using it got him results! Where is the issue?
There have been countless examples of people being given a large budget and not getting success. Look at Leicester at the moment?

I don't know what your job is - but imagine if you boss said "Here is your task, and this is what you have at your disposal to achieve it. Use it how you want, obviously it would be nicer if you saved a little bit, but get the job done". Personally I would use it all to get to the objective - even if I made some mistakes along the way. As if I didn't achieve my goal, people would say "you had this resource and you didn't use it and you failed in your goal".

Paolo had a large budget. He used his large budget. He achieved the promotion and left us on course for the Championship. Other people may have done the same - other people may have completely failed. But the point is, Paolo achieved success.

If he didn't have that budget, maybe he wouldn't have done as well, maybe he would. Maybe he wouldn't have taken the job? Who knows - its this hypothetical chat like "Anyone could have got us up with that money" that is a completely lazy point of debate as no one can prove you right or wrong. Its a lazy opinion for people who can't think of facts to back up their points.

Black lied to him Lanky so he should sue Black,on your other points it is all if,buts and maybe's and we'll never know?but with money,it should be much easier to be successful in the lower league's,the higher you go,then it gets harder with money!!!!!!!

the don69 wrote:

madterrier wrote:
And don't be confounded by the terminology or the Adver's vague understanding of it.

A debenture is a loan. It's just a certificate that acknowledges a debt. for a fixed term, and usually for a fixed rate of interest.

A debenture is unsecured. Which means it's backed by nothing more than the reputation and integrity of the borrower.

I find it impossible to understand how two administrations would not have eliminated this debt entirely. I'm not an accountant, but I've seen enough administrations in business. Hard to believe how this can still be on the books - only debt taken on since we came out of administration the last time should still be there.

They can also be secured Terrier!and some do not even have to be registered!they are very,very complex and redemption dates can be any time period!!!!!!!!!!

the wizard wrote:
If Jed is oh so good for his word and most sincerely wants championship football here next season, and is going to have all these problems sorted before the loan window closes, then perhaps he needs to get on with it, or his word will be good for nothing, never to be believed or trusted again maybe.

mike1990 wrote:

the don69 wrote:

Lanky wrote:

the don69 wrote:

Lanky wrote:

cleevesinoz wrote:
So PDC is still getting the headlines !!!!!!!
It was good while it lasted but now he is a joke and I hope he never gets a job.
As for a debt from 50 yrs ago WTF.
How many times have people looked over the books and found nothing .I smell a large bucket of BS labeled this belongs to the Football League.How many more hurdles do the club need to jump and I bet the embargo will be lifted on April Fools Day.

Dig deep Swindon and show the knockers we can do it no matter what the put in the way.

COYR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!






!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hmmm its opinions like this, and those of the other Anti-PDC brigade that make me laugh....
Surely PDC getting the headlines is the fault of the Media, and the fans, like you cleevesinoz. What has he actually come out and said or done to get the headlines over the past 2 weeks (apart from a fairly inconspicuous interview for Football Focus?). Nothing. The adver has created a sensationalist headline, based on what?

Like many others have said, it seems absurd to keep us in an embargo for the fear of a "potential sueing". I think something else is going on.

I'd be disappointed if PDC DOES sue - but at the moment, I don't think he will . And even if he did, its not going to delete our sucess over the past 2 years from the record books (even if he did have a big budget as people love pointing out so often).

We point it out Lanky!because where would he have took us without his huge budget,huge turnover of players and the money he had from Black????????

He had that at his disposal and he used it! And using it got him results! Where is the issue?
There have been countless examples of people being given a large budget and not getting success. Look at Leicester at the moment?

I don't know what your job is - but imagine if you boss said "Here is your task, and this is what you have at your disposal to achieve it. Use it how you want, obviously it would be nicer if you saved a little bit, but get the job done". Personally I would use it all to get to the objective - even if I made some mistakes along the way. As if I didn't achieve my goal, people would say "you had this resource and you didn't use it and you failed in your goal".

Paolo had a large budget. He used his large budget. He achieved the promotion and left us on course for the Championship. Other people may have done the same - other people may have completely failed. But the point is, Paolo achieved success.

If he didn't have that budget, maybe he wouldn't have done as well, maybe he would. Maybe he wouldn't have taken the job? Who knows - its this hypothetical chat like "Anyone could have got us up with that money" that is a completely lazy point of debate as no one can prove you right or wrong. Its a lazy opinion for people who can't think of facts to back up their points.

Black lied to him Lanky so he should sue Black,on your other points it is all if,buts and maybe's and we'll never know?but with money,it should be much easier to be successful in the lower league's,the higher you go,then it gets harder with money!!!!!!!

Lets see PDC take the Stevenage job and see what he could do there lol.

Lanky wrote:

mike1990 wrote:

the don69 wrote:

Lanky wrote:

the don69 wrote:

Lanky wrote:

cleevesinoz wrote:
So PDC is still getting the headlines !!!!!!!
It was good while it lasted but now he is a joke and I hope he never gets a job.
As for a debt from 50 yrs ago WTF.
How many times have people looked over the books and found nothing .I smell a large bucket of BS labeled this belongs to the Football League.How many more hurdles do the club need to jump and I bet the embargo will be lifted on April Fools Day.

Dig deep Swindon and show the knockers we can do it no matter what the put in the way.

COYR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!







!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hmmm its opinions like this, and those of the other Anti-PDC brigade that make me laugh....
Surely PDC getting the headlines is the fault of the Media, and the fans, like you cleevesinoz. What has he actually come out and said or done to get the headlines over the past 2 weeks (apart from a fairly inconspicuous interview for Football Focus?). Nothing. The adver has created a sensationalist headline, based on what?

Like many others have said, it seems absurd to keep us in an embargo for the fear of a "potential sueing". I think something else is going on.

I'd be disappointed if PDC DOES sue - but at the moment, I don't think he will . And even if he did, its not going to delete our sucess over the past 2 years from the record books (even if he did have a big budget as people love pointing out so often).

We point it out Lanky!because where would he have took us without his huge budget,huge turnover of players and the money he had from Black????????

He had that at his disposal and he used it! And using it got him results! Where is the issue?
There have been countless examples of people being given a large budget and not getting success. Look at Leicester at the moment?

I don't know what your job is - but imagine if you boss said "Here is your task, and this is what you have at your disposal to achieve it. Use it how you want, obviously it would be nicer if you saved a little bit, but get the job done". Personally I would use it all to get to the objective - even if I made some mistakes along the way. As if I didn't achieve my goal, people would say "you had this resource and you didn't use it and you failed in your goal".

Paolo had a large budget. He used his large budget. He achieved the promotion and left us on course for the Championship. Other people may have done the same - other people may have completely failed. But the point is, Paolo achieved success.

If he didn't have that budget, maybe he wouldn't have done as well, maybe he would. Maybe he wouldn't have taken the job? Who knows - its this hypothetical chat like "Anyone could have got us up with that money" that is a completely lazy point of debate as no one can prove you right or wrong. Its a lazy opinion for people who can't think of facts to back up their points.

Black lied to him Lanky so he should sue Black,on your other points it is all if,buts and maybe's and we'll never know?but with money,it should be much easier to be successful in the lower league's,the higher you go,then it gets harder with money!!!!!!!

Lets see PDC take the Stevenage job and see what he could do there lol.

I agree fully!!
But who would you say is the greatest manager of the past 25 years? Alex Ferguson. He has (nearly) always had a large budget to play with and he has got results with it.

You don't ask him to go to Stevenage to prove he is a good manager without funds do you?

I would genuinely love a SAF or Mourinio to take over a League 2 club at the end of their careers to see how they do.

the don69 wrote:

the wizard wrote:
If Jed is oh so good for his word and most sincerely wants championship football here next season, and is going to have all these problems sorted before the loan window closes, then perhaps he needs to get on with it, or his word will be good for nothing, never to be believed or trusted again maybe.

Or as Jock put it Wiz!Jed the red has lost his street cred!LOL!!!!!!!!

Lanky wrote:

the don69 wrote:

Lanky wrote:

cleevesinoz wrote: So PDC is still getting the headlines !!!!!!! It was good while it lasted but now he is a joke and I hope he never gets a job. As for a debt from 50 yrs ago WTF. How many times have people looked over the books and found nothing .I smell a large bucket of BS labeled this belongs to the Football League.How many more hurdles do the club need to jump and I bet the embargo will be lifted on April Fools Day. Dig deep Swindon and show the knockers we can do it no matter what the put in the way. COYR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!

Hmmm its opinions like this, and those of the other Anti-PDC brigade that make me laugh.... Surely PDC getting the headlines is the fault of the Media, and the fans, like you cleevesinoz. What has he actually come out and said or done to get the headlines over the past 2 weeks (apart from a fairly inconspicuous interview for Football Focus?). Nothing. The adver has created a sensationalist headline, based on what? Like many others have said, it seems absurd to keep us in an embargo for the fear of a "potential sueing". I think something else is going on. I'd be disappointed if PDC DOES sue - but at the moment, I don't think he will . And even if he did, its not going to delete our sucess over the past 2 years from the record books (even if he did have a big budget as people love pointing out so often).

We point it out Lanky!because where would he have took us without his huge budget,huge turnover of players and the money he had from Black????????

He had that at his disposal and he used it! And using it got him results! Where is the issue? There have been countless examples of people being given a large budget and not getting success. Look at Leicester at the moment? I don't know what your job is - but imagine if you boss said "Here is your task, and this is what you have at your disposal to achieve it. Use it how you want, obviously it would be nicer if you saved a little bit, but get the job done". Personally I would use it all to get to the objective - even if I made some mistakes along the way. As if I didn't achieve my goal, people would say "you had this resource and you didn't use it and you failed in your goal". Paolo had a large budget. He used his large budget. He achieved the promotion and left us on course for the Championship. Other people may have done the same - other people may have completely failed. But the point is, Paolo achieved success. If he didn't have that budget, maybe he wouldn't have done as well, maybe he would. Maybe he wouldn't have taken the job? Who knows - its this hypothetical chat like "Anyone could have got us up with that money" that is a completely lazy point of debate as no one can prove you right or wrong. Its a lazy opinion for people who can't think of facts to back up their points.

deviant in the tupping pen wrote:
Re the 1957 debt/debentures, I tried to explain it my earlier post, but maybe not very well. I have a Debenture. Being a taffy, I have one with the WRU. I took it out in 1999, and in exchange for giving the WRU a sizeable chunk of cash, I get first dibs on tickets to rugby games at the Millennium Stadium. My debenture ends in 2050, at which time I get all my money back, but with no interest (by that time it might just be enough to buy me a decent lunch in Cardiff - except I'll be long dead by then!). Point is, that money will still be owed to my estate. So, going back to STFC, if the debenture taken out in 1957 was, say, a 55 year debenture, then the debt would only have arisen last year. So it is entirely plausible, and, in my opinion, sufficient to warrant caution on behalf of the FL. Lecture over!

International Robin2 wrote:
Can no one understand why Di Canio walked? He's always maintained the main reason he walked was because of a broken agreement in his contract which gave him the final say on the sale of players.. Arguably, that's Constructive Dismissal and has a pretty strong case for it too. If you really believe PDC is the main reason we are in this embargo in the first place, you are extremely shortsighted. Let's back to the pure facts. Black decided at the beginning of the season to sell the club in January - catastrophic for any football club being sold mid-season! Not to mention he told no-one of his intentions until Patey walked through the door. I don't blame PDC for walking - this season, he gave us his all and we gave him nothing back.

the don69 wrote:

Cookie43 wrote:
To be honest PDC, embargoes,
New owners, new debt, old debt ,
Lawsuits, !!!!!
I couldn't give a f.ckin monkeys bollo.x
Anymore Iam sick of it all
I am just gonna get behind the team and Kmac and concentrate on the most important thing the Swindon town team 3 points tomorrow
Come on u Reds!!!!!!!?!!

Best post of the day Cookie!Feck em all,Siege mentality chaps u redddddssss!!!!!!!!

Cookie43 wrote:

the don69 wrote:

Cookie43 wrote:
To be honest PDC, embargoes,
New owners, new debt, old debt ,
Lawsuits, !!!!!
I couldn't give a f.ckin monkeys bollo.x
Anymore Iam sick of it all
I am just gonna get behind the team and Kmac and concentrate on the most important thing the Swindon town team 3 points tomorrow
Come on u Reds!!!!!!!?!!

Best post of the day Cookie!Feck em all,Siege mentality chaps u redddddssss!!!!!!!!

to blo.ody right Don i am sick to the back teeth of all of it

lets just support the lads and kmac
big support needed sat lads and lasses

mike1990 wrote:
Heavy snow in Yorkshire,the Sheff Utd v Brentford game must be in doubt and Scunny v Donny with more snow forecast tonight,Bradford's game already off,wonder how many will be off in Div1,main thing is though ours will go ahead.

smirg kcab wrote:

Cookie43 wrote:

the don69 wrote:

Cookie43 wrote:
To be honest PDC, embargoes,
New owners, new debt, old debt ,
Lawsuits, !!!!!
I couldn't give a f.ckin monkeys bollo.x
Anymore Iam sick of it all
I am just gonna get behind the team and Kmac and concentrate on the most important thing the Swindon town team 3 points tomorrow
Come on u Reds!!!!!!!?!!

Best post of the day Cookie!Feck em all,Siege mentality chaps u redddddssss!!!!!!!!

to blo.ody right Don i am sick to the back teeth of all of it

lets just support the lads and kmac
big support needed sat lads and lasses

Last time we played them was the final nail in the coffin, when lee Hughes officially sent us down,
Hope tomorrow we storm to the top after a great win and performance .
Onwards and upwards.
Then I'm sure the rest of the craaap will sort it's self out wether it's today:next week: next year.
We move on a take each game as it comes.
Coymr

albatross wrote:
I can't believe anyone is falling for this. In my view, the board are clearly trying to shift the blame onto PDC. Lots of clubs have been sued by ex managers (e.g. Adkins & Southampton) and I don't recall there ever being any embargo put in place. And if they don't even have £30k to pay off this 1957 debt then we really are in trouble. I hope I'm wrong but I've got a terrible feeling about this board.

albatross wrote:
I can't believe anyone is falling for this. In my view, the board are clearly trying to shift the blame onto PDC. Lots of clubs have been sued by ex managers (e.g. Adkins & Southampton) and I don't recall there ever being any embargo put in place. And if they don't even have £30k to pay off this 1957 debt then we really are in trouble. I hope I'm wrong but I've got a terrible feeling about this board.

albatross wrote:
I can't believe anyone is falling for this. In my view, the board are clearly trying to shift the blame onto PDC. Lots of clubs have been sued by ex managers (e.g. Adkins & Southampton) and I don't recall there ever being any embargo put in place. And if they don't even have £30k to pay off this 1957 debt then we really are in trouble. I hope I'm wrong but I've got a terrible feeling about this board.

LeGod wrote:
So one of the members of the football league panel is the Vice Chairman of Bournemouth fc so surely he has a conflict of interest to make life difficult for us and this cant be right.
The whole situation absolutely stinks one rule for STFC and not for anyone else.

smirg kcab wrote:

Cookie43 wrote:

the don69 wrote:

Cookie43 wrote:
To be honest PDC, embargoes,
New owners, new debt, old debt ,
Lawsuits, !!!!!
I couldn't give a f.ckin monkeys bollo.x
Anymore Iam sick of it all
I am just gonna get behind the team and Kmac and concentrate on the most important thing the Swindon town team 3 points tomorrow
Come on u Reds!!!!!!!?!!

Best post of the day Cookie!Feck em all,Siege mentality chaps u redddddssss!!!!!!!!

to blo.ody right Don i am sick to the back teeth of all of it

lets just support the lads and kmac
big support needed sat lads and lasses

Last time we played them was the final nail in the coffin, when lee Hughes officially sent us down,
Hope tomorrow we storm to the top after a great win and performance .
Onwards and upwards.
Then I'm sure the rest of the craaap will sort it's self out wether it's today:next week: next year.
We move on a take each game as it comes.
Coymr

Steve. Brentford wrote:

smirg kcab wrote:

Cookie43 wrote:

the don69 wrote:

Cookie43 wrote:
To be honest PDC, embargoes,
New owners, new debt, old debt ,
Lawsuits, !!!!!
I couldn't give a f.ckin monkeys bollo.x
Anymore Iam sick of it all
I am just gonna get behind the team and Kmac and concentrate on the most important thing the Swindon town team 3 points tomorrow
Come on u Reds!!!!!!!?!!

Best post of the day Cookie!Feck em all,Siege mentality chaps u redddddssss!!!!!!!!

to blo.ody right Don i am sick to the back teeth of all of it

lets just support the lads and kmac
big support needed sat lads and lasses

Last time we played them was the final nail in the coffin, when lee Hughes officially sent us down,
Hope tomorrow we storm to the top after a great win and performance .
Onwards and upwards.
Then I'm sure the rest of the craaap will sort it's self out wether it's today:next week: next year.
We move on a take each game as it comes.
Coymr

Yes lads we are all sick of it and you have it spot on lets support the boys its all we can do that`s constuctive.We ARE Swindon and no matter whats thrown at us we always will be.

old town robin wrote:

the wizard wrote:
Forget PDC being to blame for this, Sam has said its a player, so I'm thinking Leon Clarke, maybe its somebody else but he was the one that had the biggest spat, or just as an outsider, Caddis.

As goes the 57 debt, well after previous admin, CVA and Diamond Mike I think its a smoke screen.

Still waiting for the job title of Greg Hall which again is a worry. Whether these guys are saints or sinners they need to come clean and with something tangible and believable.
Like many others, I now fear for our future, and can see many good players walking away this summer, not perhaps the best way to go for our club.

He also said it happened in January and there was only one player i remember leaving in January and that was matt Ritchie.

super red wrote:
Can't believe PDC will sue, surely he won't get another job in English football if he'd did. Untenable, he would make himself untouchable!!

mark.s wrote:

LeGod wrote:
So one of the members of the football league panel is the Vice Chairman of Bournemouth fc so surely he has a conflict of interest to make life difficult for us and this cant be right.
The whole situation absolutely stinks one rule for STFC and not for anyone else.

Pahaha, now you're being ridiculous. You're not this mental on our website.

FL board members are unable to vote on issues that effect their league for this reason. The FL board is made up of reps from across the leagues. In any case, I’m not sure our director really give two hoots, as long as he can enjoy his jolly ups at board meetings and football matches.

It's not a Bournemouth led FL conspiracy, Swindon Town just need to get their house in order.

jfmorty wrote:
This is all just so WIERD. I have spent 50 years supporting the Town from homes all over Europe, and I have never known anything like this year 2013

I've been to Wembley to see us lift the FL Cup in the days of Don Rogers et al, I've been tied to the phone when we got promoted to the Premier league via the play-offs, I've lost the money I paid for my shares, I've seen the scandals of illegal payments and lost book-keeping records, I've been to Harlepool on a wet Saturday to see Charlie Henry score with his knee, I've been up and down so many times that I have lost count, but have always stayed loyal to my home-town team.

I have enjoyed the last 18 months with PDC, promotion, players coming in and out faster than a revolving door, bust-ups, tantrums, tattoos and all.

But when will this soap-opera end? When will it all start to make sense?

Law suits? 1957? You couldn't make it up. Pinch me and maybe I'll wake up.

Cookie43 wrote:

the don69 wrote:

Cookie43 wrote:
To be honest PDC, embargoes,
New owners, new debt, old debt ,
Lawsuits, !!!!!
I couldn't give a f.ckin monkeys bollo.x
Anymore Iam sick of it all
I am just gonna get behind the team and Kmac and concentrate on the most important thing the Swindon town team 3 points tomorrow
Come on u Reds!!!!!!!?!!

Best post of the day Cookie!Feck em all,Siege mentality chaps u redddddssss!!!!!!!!

to blo.ody right Don i am sick to the back teeth of all of it

lets just support the lads and kmac
big support needed sat lads and lasses

who am i wrote:

Lanky wrote:

the don69 wrote:

Lanky wrote:

cleevesinoz wrote: So PDC is still getting the headlines !!!!!!! It was good while it lasted but now he is a joke and I hope he never gets a job. As for a debt from 50 yrs ago WTF. How many times have people looked over the books and found nothing .I smell a large bucket of BS labeled this belongs to the Football League.How many more hurdles do the club need to jump and I bet the embargo will be lifted on April Fools Day. Dig deep Swindon and show the knockers we can do it no matter what the put in the way. COYR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!

Hmmm its opinions like this, and those of the other Anti-PDC brigade that make me laugh.... Surely PDC getting the headlines is the fault of the Media, and the fans, like you cleevesinoz. What has he actually come out and said or done to get the headlines over the past 2 weeks (apart from a fairly inconspicuous interview for Football Focus?). Nothing. The adver has created a sensationalist headline, based on what? Like many others have said, it seems absurd to keep us in an embargo for the fear of a "potential sueing". I think something else is going on. I'd be disappointed if PDC DOES sue - but at the moment, I don't think he will . And even if he did, its not going to delete our sucess over the past 2 years from the record books (even if he did have a big budget as people love pointing out so often).

We point it out Lanky!because where would he have took us without his huge budget,huge turnover of players and the money he had from Black????????

He had that at his disposal and he used it! And using it got him results! Where is the issue? There have been countless examples of people being given a large budget and not getting success. Look at Leicester at the moment? I don't know what your job is - but imagine if you boss said "Here is your task, and this is what you have at your disposal to achieve it. Use it how you want, obviously it would be nicer if you saved a little bit, but get the job done". Personally I would use it all to get to the objective - even if I made some mistakes along the way. As if I didn't achieve my goal, people would say "you had this resource and you didn't use it and you failed in your goal". Paolo had a large budget. He used his large budget. He achieved the promotion and left us on course for the Championship. Other people may have done the same - other people may have completely failed. But the point is, Paolo achieved success. If he didn't have that budget, maybe he wouldn't have done as well, maybe he would. Maybe he wouldn't have taken the job? Who knows - its this hypothetical chat like "Anyone could have got us up with that money" that is a completely lazy point of debate as no one can prove you right or wrong. Its a lazy opinion for people who can't think of facts to back up their points.

Top post. I been trying to word it like this for weeks lol.

BournemouthRobin wrote:

Cookie43 wrote:

the don69 wrote:

Cookie43 wrote:
To be honest PDC, embargoes,
New owners, new debt, old debt ,
Lawsuits, !!!!!
I couldn't give a f.ckin monkeys bollo.x
Anymore Iam sick of it all
I am just gonna get behind the team and Kmac and concentrate on the most important thing the Swindon town team 3 points tomorrow
Come on u Reds!!!!!!!?!!

Best post of the day Cookie!Feck em all,Siege mentality chaps u redddddssss!!!!!!!!

to blo.ody right Don i am sick to the back teeth of all of it

lets just support the lads and kmac
big support needed sat lads and lasses

Agree with that - just going to support our fantastic players and new manager now. Big credit to the players for diligently keeping us in contention through all this...

joey butler wrote:
35 year fan says...
10:48pm Thu 21 Mar 13

you should all definitely be reading sam morsheads twitter page.

he says the legal dispute is not di canio, goes back to january.it seems really strange that a possible legal dispute would lead to an FL embargo. must be major league. fitton (and his debt claims)? remember black said he wouldnt write them off. was he ever an employee though?”
....................

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

As Rebel asked at 8am this morning, how does today's headline from Sam fit with the above post last night?

IF the above post was correct, Sam has completely confused us between last night and 6am this morning???

Steve. Brentford wrote:

smirg kcab wrote:

Cookie43 wrote:

the don69 wrote:

Cookie43 wrote:
To be honest PDC, embargoes,
New owners, new debt, old debt ,
Lawsuits, !!!!!
I couldn't give a f.ckin monkeys bollo.x
Anymore Iam sick of it all
I am just gonna get behind the team and Kmac and concentrate on the most important thing the Swindon town team 3 points tomorrow
Come on u Reds!!!!!!!?!!

Best post of the day Cookie!Feck em all,Siege mentality chaps u redddddssss!!!!!!!!

to blo.ody right Don i am sick to the back teeth of all of it

lets just support the lads and kmac
big support needed sat lads and lasses

Last time we played them was the final nail in the coffin, when lee Hughes officially sent us down,
Hope tomorrow we storm to the top after a great win and performance .
Onwards and upwards.
Then I'm sure the rest of the craaap will sort it's self out wether it's today:next week: next year.
We move on a take each game as it comes.
Coymr

Yes lads we are all sick of it and you have it spot on lets support the boys its all we can do that`s constuctive.We ARE Swindon and no matter whats thrown at us we always will be.

jayden wrote:
Right lets forget pdc ,lets forget the Embargo ,lets forget the board and get behind the players as they are the ones who matter and these are the players we have to the end of the season .one last push from players and fans who both are running on empty.

jayden wrote:

jayden wrote: Right lets forget pdc ,lets forget the Embargo ,lets forget the board and get behind the players as they are the ones who matter and these are the players we have to the end of the season .one last push from players and fans who both are running on empty.

Good post Jayden ..... hold on thats me that is.

REDROM wrote:
Do most of you really believe the embargo is about PDC sewing, if you do then your just plain dumb..Typical Swindon "fans" lets just assume this and that. When has PDC mentioned suing??? He was stabbed in the back by the board, why the fook should he have to answer to back stabbers, and why should he answer to most people on here who were singing his praises all but 3 months ago. I don't think he will sue, he's a football man not a money man. all i see on this forum is a majority of two faced idiots. DarrenSTFCRomain being the biggest hypocrite of all. Hope we go on and win the league now, just to shut the idiots up..and if we do go up, do you think we would of without PDC.

Stratton Red wrote:

International Robin2 wrote:
Can no one understand why Di Canio walked? He's always maintained the main reason he walked was because of a broken agreement in his contract which gave him the final say on the sale of players.. Arguably, that's Constructive Dismissal and has a pretty strong case for it too. If you really believe PDC is the main reason we are in this embargo in the first place, you are extremely shortsighted. Let's back to the pure facts. Black decided at the beginning of the season to sell the club in January - catastrophic for any football club being sold mid-season! Not to mention he told no-one of his intentions until Patey walked through the door. I don't blame PDC for walking - this season, he gave us his all and we gave him nothing back.

1. I cannot believe PDC had a contractual arrangement that he had the final say on players. If he did then whoever agreed that, especially if there were no caveats, needs to take a long look at their business credentials.
2. If he did sue, the courts would have to take into consideration the extenuating circumstances i.e. Administration, and I cannot believe any sane judge (there are idiots) would view this as constructive dismissal. It may have made his job a little more difficult but it's not like we sold the squad and all he's left with is kids... It was one player.
3. Had he not already resigned before the take-over went through? If so there is a question mark as to who is actually in dispute with AB or new board...
*
All in all, not a leg to stand on.
*
As a PDC fan, if he really is suing us I hope he rots in hell - but will reserve judgement until things are much clearer.

REDROM wrote:
Do most of you really believe the embargo is about PDC sewing, if you do then your just plain dumb..Typical Swindon "fans" lets just assume this and that. When has PDC mentioned suing??? He was stabbed in the back by the board, why the fook should he have to answer to back stabbers, and why should he answer to most people on here who were singing his praises all but 3 months ago. I don't think he will sue, he's a football man not a money man. all i see on this forum is a majority of two faced idiots. DarrenSTFCRomain being the biggest hypocrite of all. Hope we go on and win the league now, just to shut the idiots up..and if we do go up, do you think we would of without PDC.

DarrenSTFCRomain wrote:

REDROM wrote:
Do most of you really believe the embargo is about PDC sewing, if you do then your just plain dumb..Typical Swindon "fans" lets just assume this and that. When has PDC mentioned suing??? He was stabbed in the back by the board, why the fook should he have to answer to back stabbers, and why should he answer to most people on here who were singing his praises all but 3 months ago. I don't think he will sue, he's a football man not a money man. all i see on this forum is a majority of two faced idiots. DarrenSTFCRomain being the biggest hypocrite of all. Hope we go on and win the league now, just to shut the idiots up..and if we do go up, do you think we would of without PDC.

When was the last game you went to then...

Was it vest spam in a friendly...

Paolo Di Canio is a west ham reject

The Jockster wrote:

Stratton Red wrote:

International Robin2 wrote:
Can no one understand why Di Canio walked? He's always maintained the main reason he walked was because of a broken agreement in his contract which gave him the final say on the sale of players.. Arguably, that's Constructive Dismissal and has a pretty strong case for it too. If you really believe PDC is the main reason we are in this embargo in the first place, you are extremely shortsighted. Let's back to the pure facts. Black decided at the beginning of the season to sell the club in January - catastrophic for any football club being sold mid-season! Not to mention he told no-one of his intentions until Patey walked through the door. I don't blame PDC for walking - this season, he gave us his all and we gave him nothing back.

1. I cannot believe PDC had a contractual arrangement that he had the final say on players. If he did then whoever agreed that, especially if there were no caveats, needs to take a long look at their business credentials.
2. If he did sue, the courts would have to take into consideration the extenuating circumstances i.e. Administration, and I cannot believe any sane judge (there are idiots) would view this as constructive dismissal. It may have made his job a little more difficult but it's not like we sold the squad and all he's left with is kids... It was one player.
3. Had he not already resigned before the take-over went through? If so there is a question mark as to who is actually in dispute with AB or new board...
*
All in all, not a leg to stand on.
*
As a PDC fan, if he really is suing us I hope he rots in hell - but will reserve judgement until things are much clearer.

I've become quite an expert lately on unfair, constructive & wrongful dismissal :) without knowing all the facts it's difficult to say if PDc has a case.

How quickly an icon goes from hero to zero- I think anyone who is wronged in their chosen profession should be entitled to redress don't you? :)

REDROM wrote:

DarrenSTFCRomain wrote:

REDROM wrote: Do most of you really believe the embargo is about PDC sewing, if you do then your just plain dumb..Typical Swindon "fans" lets just assume this and that. When has PDC mentioned suing??? He was stabbed in the back by the board, why the fook should he have to answer to back stabbers, and why should he answer to most people on here who were singing his praises all but 3 months ago. I don't think he will sue, he's a football man not a money man. all i see on this forum is a majority of two faced idiots. DarrenSTFCRomain being the biggest hypocrite of all. Hope we go on and win the league now, just to shut the idiots up..and if we do go up, do you think we would of without PDC.

When was the last game you went to then... Was it vest spam in a friendly... Paolo Di Canio is a west ham reject

Don't go to the CG. Here you go again assuming this and that with no facts to base your reply on "yet again" where does it state i go or have been,to the CG I'm what "you" would call an armchair fan, just like you are most of the season, but you do go now and again usually when Swindon are on the up, but how can you call the odds and call yourself a true fan is a joke, you go to the CG four may be five times a season, you never go to away games except Wembely and have the cheek to call others Glory hunters. guess what these are all facts about you. Hope PDC sues just to shut idiots like you up, but like i stated before he wont he's a football man not a money man.

DarrenSTFCRomain wrote:

jayden wrote:

jayden wrote: Right lets forget pdc ,lets forget the Embargo ,lets forget the board and get behind the players as they are the ones who matter and these are the players we have to the end of the season .one last push from players and fans who both are running on empty.

Good post Jayden ..... hold on thats me that is.

WELL this is me to you...
I think its the best post you have EVER done mate..
Hows it hanging ?? 2 the left or 2 the right...

This out standing debt can only be Mr F..
You no the man who promised the world and gave use malpas

mancrobin wrote:
I think for the first time ever there is a consensus emerging on here. Let's forget all this tosh, it's getting sooo boring and get behind the team who are 3rd in the league with the best goal diff by a country mile and a whisker from the top.

Can't be at the CG tomorrow but hope those that can lift the roof off.

COYR'ss

spectacles testicals wallet watch wrote:

The Jockster wrote:

Stratton Red wrote:

International Robin2 wrote:
Can no one understand why Di Canio walked? He's always maintained the main reason he walked was because of a broken agreement in his contract which gave him the final say on the sale of players.. Arguably, that's Constructive Dismissal and has a pretty strong case for it too. If you really believe PDC is the main reason we are in this embargo in the first place, you are extremely shortsighted. Let's back to the pure facts. Black decided at the beginning of the season to sell the club in January - catastrophic for any football club being sold mid-season! Not to mention he told no-one of his intentions until Patey walked through the door. I don't blame PDC for walking - this season, he gave us his all and we gave him nothing back.

1. I cannot believe PDC had a contractual arrangement that he had the final say on players. If he did then whoever agreed that, especially if there were no caveats, needs to take a long look at their business credentials.
2. If he did sue, the courts would have to take into consideration the extenuating circumstances i.e. Administration, and I cannot believe any sane judge (there are idiots) would view this as constructive dismissal. It may have made his job a little more difficult but it's not like we sold the squad and all he's left with is kids... It was one player.
3. Had he not already resigned before the take-over went through? If so there is a question mark as to who is actually in dispute with AB or new board...
*
All in all, not a leg to stand on.
*
As a PDC fan, if he really is suing us I hope he rots in hell - but will reserve judgement until things are much clearer.

I've become quite an expert lately on unfair, constructive & wrongful dismissal :) without knowing all the facts it's difficult to say if PDc has a case.

How quickly an icon goes from hero to zero- I think anyone who is wronged in their chosen profession should be entitled to redress don't you? :)

I understand your point but surely if PDC has contractual issues that must be with the old board as it was during their tenure that he said his position had become untenable and the terms of his agreement had changed significantly. Only my opinion.

DarrenSTFCRomain wrote:

REDROM wrote:

DarrenSTFCRomain wrote:

REDROM wrote: Do most of you really believe the embargo is about PDC sewing, if you do then your just plain dumb..Typical Swindon "fans" lets just assume this and that. When has PDC mentioned suing??? He was stabbed in the back by the board, why the fook should he have to answer to back stabbers, and why should he answer to most people on here who were singing his praises all but 3 months ago. I don't think he will sue, he's a football man not a money man. all i see on this forum is a majority of two faced idiots. DarrenSTFCRomain being the biggest hypocrite of all. Hope we go on and win the league now, just to shut the idiots up..and if we do go up, do you think we would of without PDC.

When was the last game you went to then... Was it vest spam in a friendly... Paolo Di Canio is a west ham reject

Don't go to the CG. Here you go again assuming this and that with no facts to base your reply on "yet again" where does it state i go or have been,to the CG I'm what "you" would call an armchair fan, just like you are most of the season, but you do go now and again usually when Swindon are on the up, but how can you call the odds and call yourself a true fan is a joke, you go to the CG four may be five times a season, you never go to away games except Wembely and have the cheek to call others Glory hunters. guess what these are all facts about you. Hope PDC sues just to shut idiots like you up, but like i stated before he wont he's a football man not a money man.

Ha ha nice one..
See ya tomorrow

The Jockster wrote:

spectacles testicals wallet watch wrote:

The Jockster wrote:

Stratton Red wrote:

International Robin2 wrote:
Can no one understand why Di Canio walked? He's always maintained the main reason he walked was because of a broken agreement in his contract which gave him the final say on the sale of players.. Arguably, that's Constructive Dismissal and has a pretty strong case for it too. If you really believe PDC is the main reason we are in this embargo in the first place, you are extremely shortsighted. Let's back to the pure facts. Black decided at the beginning of the season to sell the club in January - catastrophic for any football club being sold mid-season! Not to mention he told no-one of his intentions until Patey walked through the door. I don't blame PDC for walking - this season, he gave us his all and we gave him nothing back.

1. I cannot believe PDC had a contractual arrangement that he had the final say on players. If he did then whoever agreed that, especially if there were no caveats, needs to take a long look at their business credentials.
2. If he did sue, the courts would have to take into consideration the extenuating circumstances i.e. Administration, and I cannot believe any sane judge (there are idiots) would view this as constructive dismissal. It may have made his job a little more difficult but it's not like we sold the squad and all he's left with is kids... It was one player.
3. Had he not already resigned before the take-over went through? If so there is a question mark as to who is actually in dispute with AB or new board...
*
All in all, not a leg to stand on.
*
As a PDC fan, if he really is suing us I hope he rots in hell - but will reserve judgement until things are much clearer.

I've become quite an expert lately on unfair, constructive & wrongful dismissal :) without knowing all the facts it's difficult to say if PDc has a case.

How quickly an icon goes from hero to zero- I think anyone who is wronged in their chosen profession should be entitled to redress don't you? :)

I understand your point but surely if PDC has contractual issues that must be with the old board as it was during their tenure that he said his position had become untenable and the terms of his agreement had changed significantly. Only my opinion.

STW&W - you read too much into my post. It was really a direct reply to Stratton who also happens to be a work colleague and I just happen to be in a position to relate to employment issues similar to those being alluded to on here.
In all honesty I'm with SAP regarding the utter complete load of bow locks that has been written on the forums for days about the embargo, the new board, KMac, PDc, Black, the tea man, the dire food fayre at CG.

Roll on tomorrow when we'll be able to talk about Wilma & Joan missing a handbag load of chances, the ref being a plonker and the deafening vocal support from the Arkells @ DR :)

Oldhamred wrote:

joey butler wrote:
35 year fan says...
10:48pm Thu 21 Mar 13

you should all definitely be reading sam morsheads twitter page.

he says the legal dispute is not di canio, goes back to january.it seems really strange that a possible legal dispute would lead to an FL embargo. must be major league. fitton (and his debt claims)? remember black said he wouldnt write them off. was he ever an employee though?”
....................


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

As Rebel asked at 8am this morning, how does today's headline from Sam fit with the above post last night?

IF the above post was correct, Sam has completely confused us between last night and 6am this morning???

The following quote is taken from Andrew Blacks twitter account this evening when asked if he knew anything about the historical debt that has come to light.

"my understanding is that the club has been into admin twice in recent years in which case I imagine all debt has been cleared. I don't know anything about any old debt."

jayden wrote:

DarrenSTFCRomain wrote:

jayden wrote:

jayden wrote: Right lets forget pdc ,lets forget the Embargo ,lets forget the board and get behind the players as they are the ones who matter and these are the players we have to the end of the season .one last push from players and fans who both are running on empty.

Good post Jayden ..... hold on thats me that is.

WELL this is me to you... I think its the best post you have EVER done mate.. Hows it hanging ?? 2 the left or 2 the right... This out standing debt can only be Mr F.. You no the man who promised the world and gave use malpas

Yeah not bad Darren hoping to go to the dons game and meet up with steve have had a few family probs and a few other probs but no embargo.You going tomorrow?.

joey butler wrote:

Oldhamred wrote:

joey butler wrote:
35 year fan says...
10:48pm Thu 21 Mar 13

you should all definitely be reading sam morsheads twitter page.

he says the legal dispute is not di canio, goes back to january.it seems really strange that a possible legal dispute would lead to an FL embargo. must be major league. fitton (and his debt claims)? remember black said he wouldnt write them off. was he ever an employee though?”
....................



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

As Rebel asked at 8am this morning, how does today's headline from Sam fit with the above post last night?

IF the above post was correct, Sam has completely confused us between last night and 6am this morning???

The following quote is taken from Andrew Blacks twitter account this evening when asked if he knew anything about the historical debt that has come to light.

"my understanding is that the club has been into admin twice in recent years in which case I imagine all debt has been cleared. I don't know anything about any old debt."

Many thanks Oldham, for nothing.

It would be much more helpful if you had an opinion on the question that both Rebel and I posted about Sam.

Any opinion, either way, would be very much appreciated.

spectacles testicals wallet watch wrote:

The Jockster wrote:

Stratton Red wrote:

International Robin2 wrote:
Can no one understand why Di Canio walked? He's always maintained the main reason he walked was because of a broken agreement in his contract which gave him the final say on the sale of players.. Arguably, that's Constructive Dismissal and has a pretty strong case for it too. If you really believe PDC is the main reason we are in this embargo in the first place, you are extremely shortsighted. Let's back to the pure facts. Black decided at the beginning of the season to sell the club in January - catastrophic for any football club being sold mid-season! Not to mention he told no-one of his intentions until Patey walked through the door. I don't blame PDC for walking - this season, he gave us his all and we gave him nothing back.

1. I cannot believe PDC had a contractual arrangement that he had the final say on players. If he did then whoever agreed that, especially if there were no caveats, needs to take a long look at their business credentials.
2. If he did sue, the courts would have to take into consideration the extenuating circumstances i.e. Administration, and I cannot believe any sane judge (there are idiots) would view this as constructive dismissal. It may have made his job a little more difficult but it's not like we sold the squad and all he's left with is kids... It was one player.
3. Had he not already resigned before the take-over went through? If so there is a question mark as to who is actually in dispute with AB or new board...
*
All in all, not a leg to stand on.
*
As a PDC fan, if he really is suing us I hope he rots in hell - but will reserve judgement until things are much clearer.

I've become quite an expert lately on unfair, constructive & wrongful dismissal :) without knowing all the facts it's difficult to say if PDc has a case.

How quickly an icon goes from hero to zero- I think anyone who is wronged in their chosen profession should be entitled to redress don't you? :)

I understand your point but surely if PDC has contractual issues that must be with the old board as it was during their tenure that he said his position had become untenable and the terms of his agreement had changed significantly. Only my opinion.

Oi Den! wrote:

spectacles testicals wallet watch wrote:

The Jockster wrote:

Stratton Red wrote:

International Robin2 wrote:
Can no one understand why Di Canio walked? He's always maintained the main reason he walked was because of a broken agreement in his contract which gave him the final say on the sale of players.. Arguably, that's Constructive Dismissal and has a pretty strong case for it too. If you really believe PDC is the main reason we are in this embargo in the first place, you are extremely shortsighted. Let's back to the pure facts. Black decided at the beginning of the season to sell the club in January - catastrophic for any football club being sold mid-season! Not to mention he told no-one of his intentions until Patey walked through the door. I don't blame PDC for walking - this season, he gave us his all and we gave him nothing back.

1. I cannot believe PDC had a contractual arrangement that he had the final say on players. If he did then whoever agreed that, especially if there were no caveats, needs to take a long look at their business credentials.
2. If he did sue, the courts would have to take into consideration the extenuating circumstances i.e. Administration, and I cannot believe any sane judge (there are idiots) would view this as constructive dismissal. It may have made his job a little more difficult but it's not like we sold the squad and all he's left with is kids... It was one player.
3. Had he not already resigned before the take-over went through? If so there is a question mark as to who is actually in dispute with AB or new board...
*
All in all, not a leg to stand on.
*
As a PDC fan, if he really is suing us I hope he rots in hell - but will reserve judgement until things are much clearer.

I've become quite an expert lately on unfair, constructive & wrongful dismissal :) without knowing all the facts it's difficult to say if PDc has a case.

How quickly an icon goes from hero to zero- I think anyone who is wronged in their chosen profession should be entitled to redress don't you? :)

I understand your point but surely if PDC has contractual issues that must be with the old board as it was during their tenure that he said his position had become untenable and the terms of his agreement had changed significantly. Only my opinion.

Nobody can have a contractual dispute with a previous board of directors. The contract is between two legal persons - the company and the employee. Directors come and go.

But why don't we cut through all this stuff about potential legal action and old debts? These things must crop up all the time in football clubs. The point is that the club has not satisfied the Football League that it is sufficiently well funded to operate normally. Surely that is what we should be worried about, not some half-arsed nonsense about potential costs?

I also think the comparison with Portsmouth is pointless. The Football League have been monitoring that case for ages, so they will know all their circumstances. We don't know those circumstances, so how can we make the comparison? In fact, we don't even know the circumstances of our own club.

REDROM wrote:
Do most of you really believe the embargo is about PDC sewing, if you do then your just plain dumb..Typical Swindon "fans" lets just assume this and that. When has PDC mentioned suing??? He was stabbed in the back by the board, why the fook should he have to answer to back stabbers, and why should he answer to most people on here who were singing his praises all but 3 months ago. I don't think he will sue, he's a football man not a money man. all i see on this forum is a majority of two faced idiots. DarrenSTFCRomain being the biggest hypocrite of all. Hope we go on and win the league now, just to shut the idiots up..and if we do go up, do you think we would of without PDC.

Oldhamred wrote:

joey butler wrote:

Oldhamred wrote:

joey butler wrote:
35 year fan says...
10:48pm Thu 21 Mar 13

you should all definitely be reading sam morsheads twitter page.

he says the legal dispute is not di canio, goes back to january.it seems really strange that a possible legal dispute would lead to an FL embargo. must be major league. fitton (and his debt claims)? remember black said he wouldnt write them off. was he ever an employee though?”
....................




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

As Rebel asked at 8am this morning, how does today's headline from Sam fit with the above post last night?

IF the above post was correct, Sam has completely confused us between last night and 6am this morning???

The following quote is taken from Andrew Blacks twitter account this evening when asked if he knew anything about the historical debt that has come to light.

"my understanding is that the club has been into admin twice in recent years in which case I imagine all debt has been cleared. I don't know anything about any old debt."

Many thanks Oldham, for nothing.

It would be much more helpful if you had an opinion on the question that both Rebel and I posted about Sam.

Any opinion, either way, would be very much appreciated.

JB, apologies for quoting your post. It was not my intention to do so.

Not sure that the sarcasm in your reply was necessary.

My intention was to merely quote AB, nothing more.

With regards to the question YOU posted about Sam????

YOU have NOT asked a question, but you have quoted 35year fan and Rebel.

There is NO meaningfull contribution from you anywhere in the posting.

Many thanks JB, for NOTHING.

joey butler wrote:

Oldhamred wrote:

joey butler wrote:

Oldhamred wrote:

joey butler wrote:
35 year fan says...
10:48pm Thu 21 Mar 13

you should all definitely be reading sam morsheads twitter page.

he says the legal dispute is not di canio, goes back to january.it seems really strange that a possible legal dispute would lead to an FL embargo. must be major league. fitton (and his debt claims)? remember black said he wouldnt write them off. was he ever an employee though?”
....................





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

As Rebel asked at 8am this morning, how does today's headline from Sam fit with the above post last night?

IF the above post was correct, Sam has completely confused us between last night and 6am this morning???

The following quote is taken from Andrew Blacks twitter account this evening when asked if he knew anything about the historical debt that has come to light.

"my understanding is that the club has been into admin twice in recent years in which case I imagine all debt has been cleared. I don't know anything about any old debt."

Many thanks Oldham, for nothing.

It would be much more helpful if you had an opinion on the question that both Rebel and I posted about Sam.

Any opinion, either way, would be very much appreciated.

JB, apologies for quoting your post. It was not my intention to do so.

Not sure that the sarcasm in your reply was necessary.

My intention was to merely quote AB, nothing more.

With regards to the question YOU posted about Sam????

YOU have NOT asked a question, but you have quoted 35year fan and Rebel.

There is NO meaningfull contribution from you anywhere in the posting.

Many thanks JB, for NOTHING.

Oldham Red,

This was my question Friday evening,

''As Rebel asked at 8am this morning, how does today's headline from Sam fit with the above post last night?

IF the above post was correct, Sam has completely confused us between last night and 6am this morning???''

And your view was..... NOTHING!!

Try again, third time lucky??

Oldhamred wrote:

joey butler wrote:

Oldhamred wrote:

joey butler wrote:

Oldhamred wrote:

joey butler wrote:
35 year fan says...
10:48pm Thu 21 Mar 13

you should all definitely be reading sam morsheads twitter page.

he says the legal dispute is not di canio, goes back to january.it seems really strange that a possible legal dispute would lead to an FL embargo. must be major league. fitton (and his debt claims)? remember black said he wouldnt write them off. was he ever an employee though?”
....................






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

As Rebel asked at 8am this morning, how does today's headline from Sam fit with the above post last night?

IF the above post was correct, Sam has completely confused us between last night and 6am this morning???

The following quote is taken from Andrew Blacks twitter account this evening when asked if he knew anything about the historical debt that has come to light.

"my understanding is that the club has been into admin twice in recent years in which case I imagine all debt has been cleared. I don't know anything about any old debt."

Many thanks Oldham, for nothing.

It would be much more helpful if you had an opinion on the question that both Rebel and I posted about Sam.

Any opinion, either way, would be very much appreciated.

JB, apologies for quoting your post. It was not my intention to do so.

Not sure that the sarcasm in your reply was necessary.

My intention was to merely quote AB, nothing more.

With regards to the question YOU posted about Sam????

YOU have NOT asked a question, but you have quoted 35year fan and Rebel.

There is NO meaningfull contribution from you anywhere in the posting.

Many thanks JB, for NOTHING.

Oldham Red,

This was my question Friday evening,

''As Rebel asked at 8am this morning, how does today's headline from Sam fit with the above post last night?

IF the above post was correct, Sam has completely confused us between last night and 6am this morning???''

And your view was..... NOTHING!!

Try again, third time lucky??

You really are thick aren't you?

All you have done is re-ask the following question:

Rebel_phish says...
7:59am Fri 22 Mar 13

What I can't understand is why has Sam writen this article with the opening sentence of

THE potential of a lawsuit involving former manager Paolo Di Canio is one of the reasons Swindon Town remain in embargo, the Advertiser understands.

when he tweeted LAST NIGHT Di Canio IS NOT the reason behind the embargo.

You then tag on the bottom of your "Question" the following:

IF the above post was correct, Sam has completely confused us between last night and 6am this morning???”

Do you think the above becomes a question because you use 3 question marks?

If you do, then I'm afraid you are wrong.

You need to reverse the words "has" and "Sam" for it to become a question.

I'll help you out by doing it for you.
Please print out and keep for future reference.

IF the above post was correct, has Sam completely confused us between last night and 6am this morning???”

Whilst the above is still far from perfect, it is now at least understandable as a question.