Pritch

Anything and everything related to Barnet FC
becbee
Posts: 11719
Joined: 22 Jan 2011, 11:43

Re: Pritch

Post: # 368416Post becbee »

Jimbokav1971 wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 20:05
beew wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 19:35 If he is banned for 2 months, the club shouldn't pay him. We will need those wages to pay a loanee replacement. How many loans have we got and how many are we allowed in a match day squad?
I just want you to think about this for a moment.

The player is already likely to have to pay a fine, and while he is out suspended he will be missing out on win/goal/whatever bonus payments in line with what's in his contract. Fingers crossed it might just be a couple of months and then one of our most consistent players will be back again. You want to stop paying him, at a time when he's likely already short of cash, (and while money might be an issue, because I tend not to see too many successful gamblers and lots of rich betting companies), so you want to see him banned, fined, miss out on the bonus payments he usually receives and then you want to add to that by refusing to pay him too?

I'm really trying hard not to swear here but come on man!

If we are going to do that then we might as well just rip up his contract and tell him to move on, (and that's a ridiculous idea).

This is probably a time he needs help and support rather than a kicking! What the hell is wrong with everyone nowadays?
His contract will cover whether the club are obliged to pay him or not.
beew
Posts: 4591
Joined: 29 Jan 2012, 17:46

Re: Pritch

Post: # 368417Post beew »

Jimbokav1971 wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 20:05
beew wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 19:35 If he is banned for 2 months, the club shouldn't pay him. We will need those wages to pay a loanee replacement. How many loans have we got and how many are we allowed in a match day squad?
I just want you to think about this for a moment.

The player is already likely to have to pay a fine, and while he is out suspended he will be missing out on win/goal/whatever bonus payments in line with what's in his contract. Fingers crossed it might just be a couple of months and then one of our most consistent players will be back again. You want to stop paying him, at a time when he's likely already short of cash, (and while money might be an issue, because I tend not to see too many successful gamblers and lots of rich betting companies), so you want to see him banned, fined, miss out on the bonus payments he usually receives and then you want to add to that by refusing to pay him too?

I'm really trying hard not to swear here but come on man!

If we are going to do that then we might as well just rip up his contract and tell him to move on, (and that's a ridiculous idea).

This is probably a time he needs help and support rather than a kicking! What the hell is wrong with everyone nowadays?
He's let himself and the club down, there has to be punishment to discourage others from following his lead. If he wasn't one of our better players, would you have the same view. Also if you broke rules, in your job, that prevented you from working, would you expect your employer to pay you. (Ie you're a chauffeur and you get a 2 month ban for speeding)?
Jimbokav1971
Posts: 4341
Joined: 11 Apr 2011, 18:18

Re: Pritch

Post: # 368418Post Jimbokav1971 »

becbee wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 20:48
Jimbokav1971 wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 20:05
beew wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 19:35 If he is banned for 2 months, the club shouldn't pay him. We will need those wages to pay a loanee replacement. How many loans have we got and how many are we allowed in a match day squad?
I just want you to think about this for a moment.

The player is already likely to have to pay a fine, and while he is out suspended he will be missing out on win/goal/whatever bonus payments in line with what's in his contract. Fingers crossed it might just be a couple of months and then one of our most consistent players will be back again. You want to stop paying him, at a time when he's likely already short of cash, (and while money might be an issue, because I tend not to see too many successful gamblers and lots of rich betting companies), so you want to see him banned, fined, miss out on the bonus payments he usually receives and then you want to add to that by refusing to pay him too?

I'm really trying hard not to swear here but come on man!

If we are going to do that then we might as well just rip up his contract and tell him to move on, (and that's a ridiculous idea).

This is probably a time he needs help and support rather than a kicking! What the hell is wrong with everyone nowadays?
His contract will cover whether the club are obliged to pay him or not.
Legally, yes it does, but where as Toney might have been comfortable enough financially without getting paid while he was banned, (I don't know if he was), as a valued asset, not paying him and expecting him to come back firing on all cylinders probably isn't very sensible.

Instead Brentford treated him really well and the transfer window has just closed and Toney is still a Brentford player. They showed loyalty to him so he has showed loyalty to them in return. Without Brentford showing him that loyalty, he's probably at Chelsea or Arsenal now.
Last edited by Jimbokav1971 on 06 Feb 2024, 21:59, edited 1 time in total.
antbfc wrote:
"He owes everyone a naked run... His opinion is invalid"
Jimbokav1971
Posts: 4341
Joined: 11 Apr 2011, 18:18

Re: Pritch

Post: # 368419Post Jimbokav1971 »

beew wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 21:18
Jimbokav1971 wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 20:05
beew wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 19:35 If he is banned for 2 months, the club shouldn't pay him. We will need those wages to pay a loanee replacement. How many loans have we got and how many are we allowed in a match day squad?
I just want you to think about this for a moment.

The player is already likely to have to pay a fine, and while he is out suspended he will be missing out on win/goal/whatever bonus payments in line with what's in his contract. Fingers crossed it might just be a couple of months and then one of our most consistent players will be back again. You want to stop paying him, at a time when he's likely already short of cash, (and while money might be an issue, because I tend not to see too many successful gamblers and lots of rich betting companies), so you want to see him banned, fined, miss out on the bonus payments he usually receives and then you want to add to that by refusing to pay him too?

I'm really trying hard not to swear here but come on man!

If we are going to do that then we might as well just rip up his contract and tell him to move on, (and that's a ridiculous idea).

This is probably a time he needs help and support rather than a kicking! What the hell is wrong with everyone nowadays?
He's let himself and the club down, there has to be punishment to discourage others from following his lead. If he wasn't one of our better players, would you have the same view. Also if you broke rules, in your job, that prevented you from working, would you expect your employer to pay you. (Ie you're a chauffeur and you get a 2 month ban for speeding)?
Agreed he's let himself & others down, and that's what the ban and the fine is for.
The club may be within it's rights to not pay him, but if he;s a valued asset, (like Toney), then ostracising him and not paying him doesn't do anyone any favours does it?

Let me imagine I'm a chauffeur. Ok. I'm a good chauffeur and I've been a good employee and the plan is to have me back after my ban. My boss will have to weigh up whether he can afford to pay me, (while paying someone else to do my job), but he also needs to weigh up whether this additional cost is worth losing me when I get my licenece back, because if he doesn't look after me now, what's to stop me going and working somewhere else and taking clients with me when I do so. It's a decision and a conversation that needs to be made.

I'm not a chauffeur but a few years ago I had a job where I wasn't paid when I was sick. (This was pre-covid). I was sick, (I mean proper sick only got out of bed to crawl to and from the toilet), for 4 days and when I returned to work on the 5th day, (still sick but at least able to go to work), I was told to go home and go back to bed and not to worry about sick pay or anything like that. I was much better on Monday, (only slightly ill), so went to work and I was paid for the full previous week. This wasn't in my contract. This was just my boss saying that he valued me and was going to look after me.

That's the situation Pritch/DB/TK now fine themselves in.

I would also add that the ban is for "all footballing activities", but there is a pretty good chance that within The Hive umbrella there will be something found for Pritch to do during his ban. (I wojuld like to think so anyway).
antbfc wrote:
"He owes everyone a naked run... His opinion is invalid"
User avatar
ninestein
Posts: 6897
Joined: 03 Aug 2011, 20:00

Re: Pritch

Post: # 368420Post ninestein »

Ultimately it would be a disciplinary issue for the club to handle internally. A lot may also depend on the length of contract remaining, and how pro-active the player wants to get involved with putting things right long term.

If there is an addiction involved (this is pure speculation of course) then there presents an opportunity to do some good on the other side with educating other people in the profession to not make the same mistakes. He's done wrong, and let himself and the club down, but doesn't mean we have to hang him out to dry totally. He'll only rock up at a rival club and then the law of the ex comes into play. If the club decides to stand by him, we have to respect that.

Depending on the timing of the hearing, a 2-3 month ban could coincide largely with summer months. He could potentially miss the final league games, playoffs and pre-seson, but be back by the autumn. Too much at the moment we don't know.
Barnet showing all the flair of Rupert-the-Bears trousers, but lots more style!
beew
Posts: 4591
Joined: 29 Jan 2012, 17:46

Re: Pritch

Post: # 368421Post beew »

Jimbokav1971 wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 21:58
beew wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 21:18
Jimbokav1971 wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 20:05
beew wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 19:35 If he is banned for 2 months, the club shouldn't pay him. We will need those wages to pay a loanee replacement. How many loans have we got and how many are we allowed in a match day squad?
I just want you to think about this for a moment.

The player is already likely to have to pay a fine, and while he is out suspended he will be missing out on win/goal/whatever bonus payments in line with what's in his contract. Fingers crossed it might just be a couple of months and then one of our most consistent players will be back again. You want to stop paying him, at a time when he's likely already short of cash, (and while money might be an issue, because I tend not to see too many successful gamblers and lots of rich betting companies), so you want to see him banned, fined, miss out on the bonus payments he usually receives and then you want to add to that by refusing to pay him too?

I'm really trying hard not to swear here but come on man!

If we are going to do that then we might as well just rip up his contract and tell him to move on, (and that's a ridiculous idea).

This is probably a time he needs help and support rather than a kicking! What the hell is wrong with everyone nowadays?
He's let himself and the club down, there has to be punishment to discourage others from following his lead. If he wasn't one of our better players, would you have the same view. Also if you broke rules, in your job, that prevented you from working, would you expect your employer to pay you. (Ie you're a chauffeur and you get a 2 month ban for speeding)?
Agreed he's let himself & others down, and that's what the ban and the fine is for.
The club may be within it's rights to not pay him, but if he;s a valued asset, (like Toney), then ostracising him and not paying him doesn't do anyone any favours does it?

Let me imagine I'm a chauffeur. Ok. I'm a good chauffeur and I've been a good employee and the plan is to have me back after my ban. My boss will have to weigh up whether he can afford to pay me, (while paying someone else to do my job), but he also needs to weigh up whether this additional cost is worth losing me when I get my licenece back, because if he doesn't look after me now, what's to stop me going and working somewhere else and taking clients with me when I do so. It's a decision and a conversation that needs to be made.

I'm not a chauffeur but a few years ago I had a job where I wasn't paid when I was sick. (This was pre-covid). I was sick, (I mean proper sick only got out of bed to crawl to and from the toilet), for 4 days and when I returned to work on the 5th day, (still sick but at least able to go to work), I was told to go home and go back to bed and not to worry about sick pay or anything like that. I was much better on Monday, (only slightly ill), so went to work and I was paid for the full previous week. This wasn't in my contract. This was just my boss saying that he valued me and was going to look after me.

That's the situation Pritch/DB/TK now fine themselves in.

I would also add that the ban is for "all footballing activities", but there is a pretty good chance that within The Hive umbrella there will be something found for Pritch to do during his ban. (I wojuld like to think so anyway).
Fair point.
becbee
Posts: 11719
Joined: 22 Jan 2011, 11:43

Re: Pritch

Post: # 368422Post becbee »

Jimbokav1971 wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 21:48
becbee wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 20:48
Jimbokav1971 wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 20:05
beew wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 19:35 If he is banned for 2 months, the club shouldn't pay him. We will need those wages to pay a loanee replacement. How many loans have we got and how many are we allowed in a match day squad?
I just want you to think about this for a moment.

The player is already likely to have to pay a fine, and while he is out suspended he will be missing out on win/goal/whatever bonus payments in line with what's in his contract. Fingers crossed it might just be a couple of months and then one of our most consistent players will be back again. You want to stop paying him, at a time when he's likely already short of cash, (and while money might be an issue, because I tend not to see too many successful gamblers and lots of rich betting companies), so you want to see him banned, fined, miss out on the bonus payments he usually receives and then you want to add to that by refusing to pay him too?

I'm really trying hard not to swear here but come on man!

If we are going to do that then we might as well just rip up his contract and tell him to move on, (and that's a ridiculous idea).

This is probably a time he needs help and support rather than a kicking! What the hell is wrong with everyone nowadays?
His contract will cover whether the club are obliged to pay him or not.
Legally, yes it does, but where as Toney might have been comfortable enough financially without getting paid while he was banned, (I don't know if he was), as a valued asset, not paying him and expecting him to come back firing on all cylinders probably isn't very sensible.

Instead Brentford treated him really well and the transfer window has just closed and Toney is still a Brentford player. They showed loyalty to him so he has showed loyalty to them in return. Without Brentford showing him that loyalty, he's probably at Chelsea or Arsenal now.
Brentford "treated him well" because he was a valuable asset to them. They'd hardly have wanted to lose out either on his goals or a very large transfer fee. As it was, Toney made it clear he wanted to go to Chelsea or Arsenal in January and likely will go in the summer. No sign of his wanting to repay the loyalty shown towards him.
Last edited by becbee on 06 Feb 2024, 22:13, edited 1 time in total.
jamiefrbees
Posts: 3698
Joined: 24 Jan 2011, 11:46

Re: Pritch

Post: # 368423Post jamiefrbees »

Jimbokav1971 wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 20:05
beew wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 19:35 If he is banned for 2 months, the club shouldn't pay him. We will need those wages to pay a loanee replacement. How many loans have we got and how many are we allowed in a match day squad?
I just want you to think about this for a moment.

The player is already likely to have to pay a fine, and while he is out suspended he will be missing out on win/goal/whatever bonus payments in line with what's in his contract. Fingers crossed it might just be a couple of months and then one of our most consistent players will be back again. You want to stop paying him, at a time when he's likely already short of cash, (and while money might be an issue, because I tend not to see too many successful gamblers and lots of rich betting companies), so you want to see him banned, fined, miss out on the bonus payments he usually receives and then you want to add to that by refusing to pay him too?

I'm really trying hard not to swear here but come on man!

If we are going to do that then we might as well just rip up his contract and tell him to move on, (and that's a ridiculous idea).

This is probably a time he needs help and support rather than a kicking! What the hell is wrong with everyone nowadays?

Not everyone was born with a shred of empathy
john dockers shorts
Posts: 2050
Joined: 30 Apr 2011, 21:29

Re: Pritch

Post: # 368424Post john dockers shorts »

Sometimes I think its best to keep one's opinions to themselves.....
beew
Posts: 4591
Joined: 29 Jan 2012, 17:46

Re: Pritch

Post: # 368425Post beew »

john dockers shorts wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 22:23 Sometimes I think its best to keep one's opinions to themselves.....
That's what the forum is for. I still think he needs to be punished, you and others don’t, and it'll be interesting to see the line the club takes.
User avatar
ninestein
Posts: 6897
Joined: 03 Aug 2011, 20:00

Re: Pritch

Post: # 368427Post ninestein »

A ban from football, FA fine, loss of potential bonuses, and a scar against your reputation is already a punishment for someone who loves playing the game.

Ultimately the FA will decide how far the above goes. The club are Harry's employer. They have to find the right balance in their approach. They still have a duty of care to their employee if there's an underlying issue. And I suspect no decision will be made on a whim. Whatever stance the club takes I will respect. If Harry is to remain a Barnet player, he will still have my support if he's picked to play. I suspect he feels awful right now over this.

It was a story none of us saw coming when we woke up this morning. It's a shock. But as for our run-in, in a roundabout way it could galvanise the team.
Barnet showing all the flair of Rupert-the-Bears trousers, but lots more style!
John Hunt
Posts: 3136
Joined: 08 Feb 2011, 13:27

Re: Pritch

Post: # 368430Post John Hunt »

Good idea Jim. The bar is always short staffed.
FCBFCSA Manager / Former committee member of BFCSA and BFCSA1926
simmosenior
Posts: 355
Joined: 22 Jan 2011, 09:08

Re: Pritch

Post: # 368482Post simmosenior »

Kian Harratt of Huddersfield has got a four month ban for betting on 484 matches.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... on-matches>
ETBee
Posts: 2930
Joined: 16 Mar 2013, 10:16

Re: Pritch

Post: # 368483Post ETBee »

simmosenior wrote: 08 Feb 2024, 12:11 Kian Harratt of Huddersfield has got a four month ban for betting on 484 matches.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... on-matches>
I see that Harratt was also fined by the club for "hare coursing". I doubt that much of that goes on in North London!
hoppy
Posts: 4958
Joined: 15 Mar 2012, 09:43

Re: Pritch

Post: # 368484Post hoppy »

ETBee wrote: 08 Feb 2024, 12:22
simmosenior wrote: 08 Feb 2024, 12:11 Kian Harratt of Huddersfield has got a four month ban for betting on 484 matches.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... on-matches>
I see that Harratt was also fined by the club for "hare coursing". I doubt that much of that goes on in North London!
Fined for training to be a barber? Bit harsh.
Post Reply