You have a point, but I don't see them as any worse than many others we've had over the years - but then that's a whole other thread!!!

I really hope that this investment and new ownership and management happens and we can put all this behind us and have a genuine new start.

Has Simms been paid.

Could these players be taking a big financial risk with reports of new investment imminent? Could this turn out to be a classic example of cutting your nose off to spite your face? I question if these players would have been better advised to delay their actions until new investment talks are finally concluded.

I pretty sure that any new investors will want (and be doing their calculations on) Superleague rugby and the only way this will happen is if the club honours its creditors. If the club are forced out of business now it is likely these players will be kissing their golden handshakes goodbye, as new investors are likely to just walk away without a dangaling SL carrot.

The winding up petition hearing has been adjourned. I hope this is because new ownership and new investment are imminent. www.salfordonline.com/sport_page ... r_day.html

The winding up petition hearing has been adjourned. I hope this is because new ownership and new investment are imminent. www.salfordonline.com/sport_page ... r_day.html

Attended the hearing along with Walshovski. Was one other Salford fan there and a female journo, assumed to be from the MEN. Made a few scribbles as the hearing went along:

The petition from SG has now been withdrawn. The only squabble with SG/Salford now seems to be over costs which are still live. Impression seems to be that Salford are going to try and get them back later on in the proceedings. S.G. served a schedule for costs, but it was unsigned and non-serviceable apparently.

Patten and Anderson have now been substituted onto the petition, however. None of the costs were mentioned out loud and we couldn't get close enough to the emails being passed around.

The barrister for Salford, a Miss Darcy, tried to get Patten and Anderson fobbed off on a technicality, due to not putting in their notice on a certain form in compliance with some rule (rule 4.9, if I remember rightly...) but the judge wasn’t having any of it, there’s no stipulation that the form is required, apparently. Would’ve just meant the players could bring their own petition against the club, but good old Miss Darcy did a sterling job on that front. There was a couple of other minor technicalities, Anderson’s home address not being on the notice, for instance, but the judge thought it daft to block it on those grounds.

Patten goes on now as the main name on the petition as he’s owed more, I assume Anderson will be on as a secondary name.

The whole HMRC issue seems to still be hanging around, however, with no real mention of it other than stating that they wished to join the petition but had no representation there this morning. Seemed very, very strange, but who knows what’s going on there. Seems they won't be on it as things stand.

Petition now to be amended, re-served and re-advertised. Next hearing is on the 7th of January. And my final scribble just says “costs reserved.”

Didn`t realize anybody could attend this hearing as I would have turned out in support.Still dont understand the outcome , but hey ho it seems to be good news.Wonder why HMRC arent pushing for money if they are owed ? Patten cant surely be owed a fortune,can he ? I see on twitter this morning that he is now unemployed !

From the Sky News site

"....Patten, who retired at the end of the season and has returned to Australia, and Anderson are each thought to be owed around £40,000, while HMRC are thought to be seeking more than £50,000 in unpaid tax....."

To be honest, it's just as well there wasn't many turned up. Only a small room, a fair few turning up might not have gone down too well! Was mainly all procedural stuff anyhow, a lot of it went over my head.

I dont get it. How can Patten be owed £40,000.He will surely have been on a lot more than Anderson,so why are they both supposed to be owed around the same amount Why have the other players been paid and not them, or are we going to get a raft of players joining the petition ?There must be some sort of disagreement with the club for them to have withheld so much money.

I think they will be pushing but also mindful that Salford Reds not existing in their present form could cost them considerably more in lost revenue going forward.

My guess is many professional sports clubs will be behind with HMRC payments and its standard procedure for them to get involved when anybody brings a petition against any business that are behind with them. The fact they did not send any representation would suggest its not an enormous amount or considered a priority for them.



I could be wrong on this but aren’t overseas players paid a basic monthly salary and then a lump sum payment at the end of their contracts?

According to the report on sky text Patten and Anderson are owed back pay from a salary sacrifice arrangement they entered into.

Part of a naughty scheme which was found out by the HMRC a few years back..

No I think you may be getting confused with royalty payments that other clubs were guilty of making to players to avoid tax.

Did Ms Darcy not use any good business-speak ?
I have been trying to recall a word used when a soccer club went a bit wrong,but my memory is shot.
Amortisation may not be relevant to this particular matter but may be to investors.
When it comes to business my ignorance is bliss.
Well done for attending and thanks for the update.

The official club statement acknowledges the players adding to the WUP but also says the payments aren't due until the end on November. If this is the case how can they be added to the petition? I've not really got a clue about these things but common sense says to me that if the payments aren't due until end of November and it is currently only the end of October then there isn't a problem is there?

Good to see the club getting statements out in a timely fashion - I wonder if the usual detractors will give the club any credit for doing just what they've been demanding?

To answer Ledge787, anyone can "say" they are owed money, that's the purpose of the court hearing - if they've added themselves to the petition and it's subsequently found that they are in the wrong then the costs of the club defending themselves could be awarded against the petitioners I believe.

Am I reading this right? Patten and Anderson supported the WUP petition that could have put the club out of business this morning and their former teammates and colleagues out of work for contractual payments that are not due to them until the end of November.

Well the clubs says:
".....however the club maintains that payments owed to these players will be made on time and in advance of the second court date.
This matter relates to contractual payments not due to be made until the end of November."

Presumably the two concerned believe otherwise.

Who is right?
Who knows?

HMRC don't tend to get involved if they payment plans are maintained. They will monitor the situation.

4.9 relates to service and notice of a petition I think.

This probably explains alot of Pattens moaning if he deferred wages. I wonder how much he earned if he is owed 40,000. (too much for what we got)

With both players being out of contract, how can the money owed to them be due in November?

was anybody knitting in the gallery?

Seriously you are clutching onto these if you think the powers that be need a high 5 for telling people what everyone knew anyway!




Barton Flyer you name suits because your head in well untruly stuck in the clouds. Please see what the rest are seeing and conform to acknowledging the grim reaper that John Wilkinson and his inept colleagues have left the club at deaths door.

Another gem from the bard.

Damned if they do,and damned if they don't.
Par for the course on here

Think for once the club seem to be doing this right, released statements when the WUP was started and pretty quickly after todays hearing.

Sure we'd all like a daily update on the take over/investment but if all parties don't want details being released then the club would be a little stupid to risk anything by making any comment on it.

I more can't wait to see how long after anything is announced or signed before the regulars start a new witch hunt, fault finding knobber athon again.