Just in case you didnt hear about Romfo!

[Sliput]

Oh for gods sake !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you don't like the thread, don't read it...

But if you're going to post, at least make it something constructive or worthwhile, that comment adds absolutely nothing to the debate/thread...

Chris.

I think i have added quite a few posts on here !!

Okay then, this thread is going nowhere, my views seem to be in the minority, someone tries to help and gets slagged off.

The club dont make a statement...they get moaned at.
The club make a statement..........they get moaned at.

My comment is my view, i find this thread frustrating...hence the for gods sake.

Or...am i just a mole for the Devils ...ha ha ha we will never know :evil:

 

[Chris]

I think i have added quite a few posts on here !!

I'm not disputing that, but your last post, and the one I quoted was hardly adding anything to the conversation or thread...

For what it's worth, I can see both sides of the argument, the matter should be being conducted/solved in private, not via this forum, but if that fails - as it seemingly has - then what other options are open?

The club is supposed to be on the up, improving things that previous owners have neglected or done wrongly - issues such as this don't seem to fill people with confidence, despite the big/positive steps taken in other areas.

Chris.

 

[DevilDom]

My opinion on this whole mess is that some fans have taken different sides to the argument without knowing the full facts, and by taking sides are making themselves look rather silly.

I don't think that many people have taken sides - they just want to know the truth or at least the club's side of the story. That is part of the problem - we have only heard 1 side of the story and a rather vague statement from the club some time ago.

My view has always been that IF the club have acted as Romfo says then they have acted poorly. I have no other argument than Romfo's to weigh it up against as the club has said nothing of note (which breeds suspiscion IMO). If this is because legal proceedings are under way then why not just come out and say that officailly? Then we can all stop talking about it.

I want to talk about Hockey but for me the silence from the club is deafening.

 

[Finny]

But the club shouldn't really be expected to do PR's for every unhappy player/fan. If anyone is that upset about it then they should do the same as osh and contact the club.

I didn't really want to comment on this thread but the fact is that any EIHL contract is actually a 2 week rolling contract. This does of course make uni-deals complicated and I wouldn't like to guess how this is written into their contract - if it does at all.

The fact that Romfo appears to be complaining on here rather than going through his agent/solicitor would suggest that the Devils haven't done anything wrong.

 

[ASHIPP]

Why should the club feel it neccessary to come on to an unofficial forum and make a statement about an issue, irrespective of how controversial, that is absolutely nothing to do with the people on here?

Paul Ragan has already responded to Osh, who kindly printed the response on here for us to read. From the sound of it, the Club are going to be dealing directly with Scott. As it is a matter between ex-player and employer, that's the correct route to take. The fact that the club has not issued anything else public on this matter is being interpreted by many as if they don't care or are not doing anything. If there are legal issues involved, responses between parties will take an aweful lot longer than a quick e-mail or phonecall between them....and that, in all honesty, is not anybody else's business.

Scott made it public by posting on this forum..... which he is perfectly entitled to do. However, I don't know what he expected would happen from it. Whilst he will get some sympathy based on what he has said, nothing could be done in practical terms by the Forum because it is nothing to do with us at all. It won't detract a lot of posters from supporting the team. As has already been mentioned, there will always be situations where players have grievances with clubs, and vic-versa. This isn't the first or last time. In the end, the only way it can be practically resolved is for both parties to negociate privately....even if it takes a long time.

 

[DevilDom]

I hear what you are saying, but this does seem to have developed into quite a big issue with a fair number of fans interested to know the truth.

I think some sort of statement would serve to put the issue to bed or at least quieten it down.

 

[Finny]

I hear what you are saying, but this does seem to have developed into quite a big issue with a fair number of fans interested to know the truth.

I think some sort of statement would serve to put the issue to bed or at least quieten it down.

''In respect of certain accusations made by released player Scott Romfo, the clubs stance is not to discuss internal matters on public forums. The matter has been considered and legal recommendations sought, and any furure communication will be made directly to Mr Romfo.

For the record however, I remain unsatisfied at a number of untruths claimed by Mr Romfo in various communications, and as a result would like to reassure our fans that I remain satisfied at this juncture with our conduct as a club.''

Signed; Paul Ragan

There we go. All sorted.

 

[Chris]

From the sound of it, the Club are going to be dealing directly with Scott. As it is a matter between ex-player and employer, that's the correct route to take. The fact that the club has not issued anything else public on this matter is being interpreted by many as if they don't care or are not doing anything.

But that is exactly why this thread has become a talking point again...

Scott has come onto here to say the club haven't contacted him, and the matter - in his opinion - is no further solved than the first post on here...

I don't know what the real case/story is here, and without the club releasing something, most of us won't ever know., probably for the best.

Chris.

 

[osh]

I think what The Devil Torn means is "What makes Osh so important/who is Osh to receive a reply over him?"

You clearly have "contacts" within the club Osh. And I think DT is perfectly right to state that it is extremely unprofessional of the club if the only statement they make is to an "unknown" who posts on the fan forum.

Its a shame the Echo are too busy crawling to actually run a decent story on this horrendous treatment of Romfo. It would be an interesting article to read if the reporter gained official statements from all parties involved rather than the *hush hush whisper whisper dont say anything to anyone* approach the club are currently going for

Sorry Clare but I must take issue with you on a couple of your points raised about me. Firstly, Im sure DevilTorn is well able to speak for himself and doesn't require you to act as his spokesperson. I politely answered DT's post and certainly didn't interpret it in the manner you have. Also nothing 'makes me so important' as you are trying to suggest, i simply contacted the club to suggest they address this issue and they chose to email me and gave their permission to post their reply on here which clarified their position. DT very often contacts me by PM when we have various issues to discuss, and we seem to be able to sort our differences - if any - in this way.
Secondly, I have absolutely no 'contacts' as you are implying within the club. In fact, if you are familiar with my posts on here since I joined the forum, you will know that I have been critical of them more often than I have been in praising them. But to allay your assumptions, I confirm i have absolutely no connections within the club or even know anyone on a personal level who has any connection with the club.
I will continue to post on my own behalf as always. If you are that concerned that the Devils organisation are avoiding this matter, why not just do as I did and ask them for an answer ?

 

[Clare]

But the club shouldn't really be expected to do PR's for every unhappy player/fan.

I dont think its quite as simple as that though. Even without any input from Romfo/the club, it was perfectly clear back in January that they had seriously screwed up having dropped him then going and signing Finnerty. At the time I remember being very surprised that Romfo agreed to go back because from the outsiders view, to me, it had all seemed a bit underhand.

I think that this issue is quite a significant one, and has certainly generated lots of gossip. Its unfair on the employee and if it were in any other organisation, the employer would be expected to give some sort of reasoning behind their decisions. It appears Romfo hasnt even had that.

You are quite right - they shouldnt have to answer for personal grievances - but this is a professional grievance.

 

[Gazza272]

I dont think its quite as simple as that though. Even without any input from Romfo/the club, it was perfectly clear back in January that they had seriously screwed up having dropped him then going and signing Finnerty. At the time I remember being very surprised that Romfo agreed to go back because from the outsiders view, to me, it had all seemed a bit underhand.

I think that this issue is quite a significant one, and has certainly generated lots of gossip. Its unfair on the employee and if it were in any other organisation, the employer would be expected to give some sort of reasoning behind their decisions. It appears Romfo hasnt even had that.

You are quite right - they shouldnt have to answer for personal grievances - but this is a professional grievance.

Nothing underhanded about Romfo's sacking at all.

Finnerty became available we wanted to sign him, to do so we needed to cut someone. Up until that point Romfo had been the worst performer on the team so G cut him.

Thats hockey it happens. They certainly didnt screw up as Finnerty has been fantastic for us. When it was clear Scott wouldnt be able to continue his studies without some form of work the club brought him in on a reduced wage.

Are you suggesting Romfo should have stayed and finnerty not signed purely because Scott was on a Uni deal? If so what would have happened if Rod Hinks was on a uni deal? I doubt people would have been wanting him kept on.

 

[Clare]

It was the way they went about it. If they were going to sack anyone they should've sacked Davies :roll:

 

[Finny]

It was the way they went about it. If they were going to sack anyone they should've sacked Davies :roll:

I'm unsure if that is supposed to be a joke or not?

 

[Clare]

Personal opinion. Is that allowed?

 

[Finny]

It is allowed.

But I didn't where to start in regards to putting my point of view across as to why sacking Ben Davies and bringing in Ryan Finnerty would have been a non-starter. So I thought I best check you were being serious first.

 

[Clare]

............ Did I say sack him instead of Romfo?

 

[Chris]

No, but I doubt Finny and myself are the only ones to read it that way.

Chris.

 

[Finny]

But Davies is a brit and Finnerty is an import?

And I would take a wild stab in the dark that Finnerty might be earning a touch more than Ben Davies...

 

[Clare]

Oh dear lord.


Remove comment from context of thread.


Stand alone personal opinion.


They should sack Davies. Full stop. No swapping, exchanging or thinking about wages.


Easier to understand now?


Anyway, moving on because this has already created far too much in depth conversation.

 

[Finny]

Ok.

In that case can I ask why you think they should sack one of the brightest young prospects in UK hockey at the moment? In fact he was our Man of the Match in our last game.

I am struggling to find any reason for sacking Ben Davies.