Hob Nob Anyone?

Nameless wrote:

Snowflake Royal wrote:

Nameless wrote:
Does that work the other way too ?

If a club decides they no longer want a player should that player just go and find another club ?

Er, yeah. If they want to continue their career and play football.

But people defended Gunter and McLeary’s decision to sit tight and take the money. And should we be able to tell Aluko that he is no longer wanted and should leave ?
It seems that clubs should not ‘stand in the way’ of a player wanting to break their contract but if a club tried to push a contracted player out it might not be seen as acceptable...

Gunter and McCleary are towards the end of their career, and most of the fans recognised they still had something to offer, including next season.

They're perfectly entitled to stay and take the money. But if they want to play football, and stay relevant to get good clubs down the line, then they should have been looking to move. Then it's up to them to decide what is more important to them.
Staying and fighting for a place
Staying to take the money and just train
Go elsewhere possibly on a big pay cut to play.

And as for Aluko. We did tell him to get lost. Again, at the end of his career he'd rather do oxf*rd all earning his money.

I don't think Vic ever said any one could forced out of a contract. He was talking about making pragmatic decisions

Snowflake Royal wrote:

Nameless wrote:

Snowflake Royal wrote: Er, yeah. If they want to continue their career and play football.

But people defended Gunter and McLeary’s decision to sit tight and take the money. And should we be able to tell Aluko that he is no longer wanted and should leave ?
It seems that clubs should not ‘stand in the way’ of a player wanting to break their contract but if a club tried to push a contracted player out it might not be seen as acceptable...

Gunter and McCleary are towards the end of their career, and most of the fans recognised they still had something to offer, including next season.

They're perfectly entitled to stay and take the money. But if they want to play football, and stay relevant to get good clubs down the line, then they should have been looking to move. Then it's up to them to decide what is more important to them.
Staying and fighting for a place
Staying to take the money and just train
Go elsewhere possibly on a big pay cut to play.

And as for Aluko. We did tell him to get lost. Again, at the end of his career he'd rather do oxf*rd all earning his money.

I don't think Vic ever said any one could forced out of a contract. He was talking about making pragmatic decisions

But then a playing career is short and if a player finds themselves on a lucrative contract, in respect of what he could get from similar club/level, I can quite understand the mentality to stay to maximise earnings from the game for him and his family.

In Aluko’s case the regular change in management has meant he’s never actually out of favour for long so he’s always had another chance to impress and at this moment he must be considered a part of MBs plans for the season just because of the lack of numbers if nothing else. Although if another club did offer a deal to take him on loan (or permenently) this window I’m sure the club would listen.

Nameless wrote:

Snowflake Royal wrote:

Nameless wrote:
Does that work the other way too ?

If a club decides they no longer want a player should that player just go and find another club ?

Er, yeah. If they want to continue their career and play football.

But people defended Gunter and McLeary’s decision to sit tight and take the money. And should we be able to tell Aluko that he is no longer wanted and should leave ?
It seems that clubs should not ‘stand in the way’ of a player wanting to break their contract but if a club tried to push a contracted player out it might not be seen as acceptable...

From my POV as a supporter, if for example Bowen says player X wasn’t signed by me and he isn’t part of my plans, I’d expect him to try and shift the player.

Nameless wrote:

SouthDownsRoyal wrote:

Nameless wrote:
Does that work the other way too ?

If a club decides they no longer want a player should that player just go and find another club ?

For a player to be successful surely both the club must want the player and have them in their plans and the player must want to play for the club and be a part of the plans.

It must work both ways if a a club decides it doesn’t want a player then yes look to move the player on

So Gunter and McLeary should have left last summer ? Or Aluko should pack his bags ?
My point is players and clubs are linked contractually. If it is fine for a player to point to a contract and say I’m going nowhere and you have to keep paying me, then players should also accept they have a contract to play for x years and can’t just decide they fancy a move...

The reality of football and what it should be are 2 different things but what is more important is the perceived reality amongst players. Professional football is a pretty small, closed environment with many clubs often chasing the same player. If player A from say Crewe is aware that we are making a move for him and so are QPR (for example) he will likely know someone (or a friend of a friend) who plays at or who has played at both clubs. If word gets around that the club are "unfair" in their dealings with players i.e. making it hard for them to move on when a deal that is better for their career/bank balance comes along, it will be much harder for us to attract that player over the other club if their reputation in the game is of one that is happy to buy cheap and sell on when it suits all parties.

Undoubtedly (and again not arguing the wrongs/rights here) we seem to be a club who holds players to contracts unless stupid money is thrown are way - this will be noticed, by agents if no-one else and could begin to make things harder when it comes to recruitment.

Stranded wrote:

Nameless wrote:

SouthDownsRoyal wrote:
For a player to be successful surely both the club must want the player and have them in their plans and the player must want to play for the club and be a part of the plans.

It must work both ways if a a club decides it doesn’t want a player then yes look to move the player on

So Gunter and McLeary should have left last summer ? Or Aluko should pack his bags ?
My point is players and clubs are linked contractually. If it is fine for a player to point to a contract and say I’m going nowhere and you have to keep paying me, then players should also accept they have a contract to play for x years and can’t just decide they fancy a move...

The reality of football and what it should be are 2 different things but what is more important is the perceived reality amongst players. Professional football is a pretty small, closed environment with many clubs often chasing the same player. If player A from say Crewe is aware that we are making a move for him and so are QPR (for example) he will likely know someone (or a friend of a friend) who plays at or who has played at both clubs. If word gets around that the club are "unfair" in their dealings with players i.e. making it hard for them to move on when a deal that is better for their career/bank balance comes along, it will be much harder for us to attract that player over the other club if their reputation in the game is of one that is happy to buy cheap and sell on when it suits all parties.

Undoubtedly (and again not arguing the wrongs/rights here) we seem to be a club who holds players to contracts unless stupid money is thrown are way - this will be noticed, by agents if no-one else and could begin to make things harder when it comes to recruitment.

Isn’t that making huge assumptions based on partial knowledge of the Loader situation and guess work around Swift ?

Nameless wrote:

Stranded wrote:

Nameless wrote:
So Gunter and McLeary should have left last summer ? Or Aluko should pack his bags ?
My point is players and clubs are linked contractually. If it is fine for a player to point to a contract and say I’m going nowhere and you have to keep paying me, then players should also accept they have a contract to play for x years and can’t just decide they fancy a move...

The reality of football and what it should be are 2 different things but what is more important is the perceived reality amongst players. Professional football is a pretty small, closed environment with many clubs often chasing the same player. If player A from say Crewe is aware that we are making a move for him and so are QPR (for example) he will likely know someone (or a friend of a friend) who plays at or who has played at both clubs. If word gets around that the club are "unfair" in their dealings with players i.e. making it hard for them to move on when a deal that is better for their career/bank balance comes along, it will be much harder for us to attract that player over the other club if their reputation in the game is of one that is happy to buy cheap and sell on when it suits all parties.

Undoubtedly (and again not arguing the wrongs/rights here) we seem to be a club who holds players to contracts unless stupid money is thrown are way - this will be noticed, by agents if no-one else and could begin to make things harder when it comes to recruitment.

Isn’t that making huge assumptions based on partial knowledge of the Loader situation and guess work around Swift ?

But well established fact on Moore.

Snowflake Royal wrote:

Nameless wrote:

Stranded wrote:
The reality of football and what it should be are 2 different things but what is more important is the perceived reality amongst players. Professional football is a pretty small, closed environment with many clubs often chasing the same player. If player A from say Crewe is aware that we are making a move for him and so are QPR (for example) he will likely know someone (or a friend of a friend) who plays at or who has played at both clubs. If word gets around that the club are "unfair" in their dealings with players i.e. making it hard for them to move on when a deal that is better for their career/bank balance comes along, it will be much harder for us to attract that player over the other club if their reputation in the game is of one that is happy to buy cheap and sell on when it suits all parties.

Undoubtedly (and again not arguing the wrongs/rights here) we seem to be a club who holds players to contracts unless stupid money is thrown are way - this will be noticed, by agents if no-one else and could begin to make things harder when it comes to recruitment.

Isn’t that making huge assumptions based on partial knowledge of the Loader situation and guess work around Swift ?

But well established fact on Moore.

The Moore situation was quite a bit different. We didn’t refuse to sell him, he didn’t want to go. He told us if we matched the offer in terms of wages he would stay, which we did. That may have not been a good decision but it’s not the same as turning down offers for a a player who wants to leave.

Wasnt it widely reported at the time that he'd handed in a transfer request, and we offered him a 5 year deal on big money to keep him?

Simon's Church wrote:Wasnt it widely reported at the time that he'd handed in a transfer request, and we offered him a 5 year deal on big money to keep him?

He handed in the request because he had told the club he didn’t want to go and would stay if they matched his wage offer. He had not had an answer and the request was to try and bring the matter to a conclusion.

Nameless wrote:

Stranded wrote:

Nameless wrote:
So Gunter and McLeary should have left last summer ? Or Aluko should pack his bags ?
My point is players and clubs are linked contractually. If it is fine for a player to point to a contract and say I’m going nowhere and you have to keep paying me, then players should also accept they have a contract to play for x years and can’t just decide they fancy a move...

The reality of football and what it should be are 2 different things but what is more important is the perceived reality amongst players. Professional football is a pretty small, closed environment with many clubs often chasing the same player. If player A from say Crewe is aware that we are making a move for him and so are QPR (for example) he will likely know someone (or a friend of a friend) who plays at or who has played at both clubs. If word gets around that the club are "unfair" in their dealings with players i.e. making it hard for them to move on when a deal that is better for their career/bank balance comes along, it will be much harder for us to attract that player over the other club if their reputation in the game is of one that is happy to buy cheap and sell on when it suits all parties.

Undoubtedly (and again not arguing the wrongs/rights here) we seem to be a club who holds players to contracts unless stupid money is thrown are way - this will be noticed, by agents if no-one else and could begin to make things harder when it comes to recruitment.

Isn’t that making huge assumptions based on partial knowledge of the Loader situation and guess work around Swift ?

Of course it is, that is the point of this particular board. I don't think it is beyond the realms of possibility but of course it might equally be the biggest load of bollocks I've ever written.

Stranded wrote:

Nameless wrote:

Stranded wrote:
The reality of football and what it should be are 2 different things but what is more important is the perceived reality amongst players. Professional football is a pretty small, closed environment with many clubs often chasing the same player. If player A from say Crewe is aware that we are making a move for him and so are QPR (for example) he will likely know someone (or a friend of a friend) who plays at or who has played at both clubs. If word gets around that the club are "unfair" in their dealings with players i.e. making it hard for them to move on when a deal that is better for their career/bank balance comes along, it will be much harder for us to attract that player over the other club if their reputation in the game is of one that is happy to buy cheap and sell on when it suits all parties.

Undoubtedly (and again not arguing the wrongs/rights here) we seem to be a club who holds players to contracts unless stupid money is thrown are way - this will be noticed, by agents if no-one else and could begin to make things harder when it comes to recruitment.

Isn’t that making huge assumptions based on partial knowledge of the Loader situation and guess work around Swift ?

Of course it is, that is the point of this particular board. I don't think it is beyond the realms of possibility but of course it might equally be the biggest load of bollocks I've ever written.

Would be good to have someone who really knew how things work to drop by and put us all to rights on stuff with think we’re clued up on ! You’d think one of the players might keep an eye out, maybe it should be the job if the captain to sort out the nonsense us fans talk on social media...

Latest rumour is Swift the the Villa in a deal worth £6 to 8 million. Depending on how much of that is up front it’s got to be worth serious consideration at least. Guess I know what the club response will be if that bid does materialise though.

Sutekh wrote:Latest rumour is Swift the the Villa in a deal worth £6 to 8 million. Depending on how much of that is up front it’s got to be worth serious consideration at least. Guess I know what the club response will be if that bid does materialise though.

I will drive him there for that sort of money.

Sutekh wrote:Latest rumour is Swift the the Villa in a deal worth £6 to 8 million. Depending on how much of that is up front it’s got to be worth serious consideration at least. Guess I know what the club response will be if that bid does materialise though.

Presumably Dean Smith was the manager when Swift wentto Brentford so there could be something in this.

£8 million, cash up front and I would think that isgetting close to a deal we should accept
I’d still play hardball though and look for someone else to show their hand.
Might even tell them we’ll take £6 million plus Grealish....

Good shout ... Grealish would definitely give us something up front but I think some players are probably ahead of him including Aluko.

Sutekh wrote:Latest rumour is Swift the the Villa in a deal worth £6 to 8 million. Depending on how much of that is up front it’s got to be worth serious consideration at least. Guess I know what the club response will be if that bid does materialise though.

If Dai wants promotion. Little point in selling the family silver.

Lower West wrote:

Sutekh wrote:Latest rumour is Swift the the Villa in a deal worth £6 to 8 million. Depending on how much of that is up front it’s got to be worth serious consideration at least. Guess I know what the club response will be if that bid does materialise though.

If Dai wants promotion. Little point in selling the family silver.

Dai won't get what he wants because he's a oxf*rd moron.

Snowflake Royal wrote:

Lower West wrote:

Sutekh wrote:Latest rumour is Swift the the Villa in a deal worth £6 to 8 million. Depending on how much of that is up front it’s got to be worth serious consideration at least. Guess I know what the club response will be if that bid does materialise though.

If Dai wants promotion. Little point in selling the family silver.

Dai won't get what he wants because he's a oxf*rd moron.

He speaks very highly of you, by all accounts.

Pepe the Horseman wrote:

Snowflake Royal wrote:

Lower West wrote:
If Dai wants promotion. Little point in selling the family silver.

Dai won't get what he wants because he's a oxf*rd moron.

He speaks very highly of you, by all accounts.

Like he gives a single oxf*rd about any of us.