Miffed

This. Having gone down a similar route with Russell Martin, it would be crazy to take another punt. As much as I like Danny, I just cant see it happening. Like you said, the Rangers fans wouldn't stand for it right now.

I think its dreadful...... but their fans only sing 2 songs anyway so wouldnt expect much else.

If you’re more concerned about what United fans think than saving our club then your head is in the wrong place

Im more than happy to be corrected if anyone knows about contract laws, particularly football contracts, but I don’t think it’s the same as you or I walking out of a job we’ve not been paid for. If you signed a contract that stated you would play football for the club and in return they would pay you a million pounds a year over a three year term… if the club breaks that contract you have all kinds of legal avenues that you could take in order to get your money. If you broke that contract you would risk losing three million pounds, potentially putting your home and any loans at risk. Would you risk it?

You’re side stepping now. Like I said, a player is in a far worse condition if they break the terms of the contract than if the club does. Demanding players strike is whimsical. Fans should be taking action on behalf of the players.

It’s simple….The players, up to now, have still been getting paid albeit late. If the club breaches a players contract … the player will still get the money owed to them one way or another and have options.. Options such as being able to take legal action against the club to get their payments The PFA will also have their backs … and possibly the EFL If the club went into administration, the players will be high up on the list of receivers. If the players breach contract then they don’t have a leg to stand on. Not only that, they are bringing the game into disrepute. They could have their contracts terminated or be fined…. Who knows what’s in the small print. The PFA have even advised the players against strike action IIRC Now tell me that any of that is wrong before you start name calling.

Yeah, breach your contract so that the owner doesn’t have to pay you. The complete opposite of what the boycotts are all about. Make it make sense

Quality debating skills. Love it

I never stated that the trust have requested boycotting away games. A few weeks ago I conceded that it wasn’t the right time, but we are clearly headed towards it being the case. My statement about away fans putting in tens of thousands is an absolute fact that cannot be argued against. It’s 100% an undeniable fact. And yes, the protests that have gotten the biggest media attention are boycotts. The boycott against Leeds made the front page of the BBC main page. Not just the sports page or the news page but the home page. Empty away ends would get media attention with the added bonus of not paying a single penny into the club. Win win

It’s either ‘not a penny more’ or it’s isnt. It can’t be, well…. Starve him of money but a little bit is alright. Otherwise, what’s a few pints in the stadium? What’s a few mars bars? Either money makes a difference or it doesn’t and away fans have given the owner tens of thousands already this season. it confuses the message. Empty away ends would send just a big a message as a few people shouting into a void. The protests that have gotten the most media attention so far are boycotts… and that’s a fact.

Don’t want to derail the thread but considering you’ve pressed on the matter …. The message from the trust has been ‘not a pound in the ground’ and then it was ‘not a penny more’ Its very clear that the message is that the most effective way to remove the owner is to starve him of funds. If that’s the case, you cannot justify away fans putting thousands of pounds into the club each week. A bit of shouting and scarf waving doesn’t offset the money that is being given to the owner its also created a two tier fanbase where some are allowed to put money into the club but others aren’t and are chastised and heavily criticised for it. And I’m finding it very interesting that more and more fans are becoming aware of the issue of away fans still funding the club (while others are making sacrifices)

As others have said, it will send a message…. If the owner thinks that thousands are going to blindly follow and renew then he needs to think again. It also sends a clear message that we are done with him.

I don’t know how it works so I’m purely guessing here. If there are any posters on here who are familiar with football contracts then I’m sure they can advise Let’s say you sign a 2 year contract that says you will play football and in return the club will pay you £10k a week. Thats an obligation from the club to pay you more than a million pounds over the course of the contract. If the club breaches the contract then I’m sure the players could take the club to court. If the worst should happen and the club goes into administration, the players payments would be pretty high up in the list of receivers. It’s all about probabilities. If the club break the contract then there is a good chance the player will get the money owed. If a player breaks the contract, brings the game into disrepute (eg striking or sitting on the ball as someone previously suggested) brings the club into disrepute then they could risk losing it all. Continuing to play keeps the players integrity. Fairly sure the PFA have advised the players against strike action too. People really need to move on from this idea

I’m sure there are some businesses who are losing money due to the boycotts and it’s not their fault. Is it reasonable to call them out, give them some free advertising or even push their products? We could promote a mass purchase of a crate beer from the Thornbridge Brewery website, for example.

Got 2 bars in, scrolled snd saw this bit and stopped listening I don’t know if this is any good or even serious but if you need to change this part and try again