Jump to content


Owlstalk Subscriber
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by kirksandallowl

  1. Update:


    So @Grandad and his team installed this for our customer on Friday. 

    Our customer has been texting all weekend saying how delighted he is with the results and he wishes he’d done it sooner. 

    The service provided by Grandad and his team was excellent. 

    If you are anybody you know is struggling with poor internet access there really is no need. 

    • Like 2
    • Love 2
  2. 1 hour ago, SallyCinnamon said:

    Shaw will sign with Wednesday if we offer him a better deal.


    Depends how much we want to keep him here.

    Could have been all avoided if we started negotiations this time last year. 

    And how many thousands a week was he worth this time last year?

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  3. 47 minutes ago, Marro said:

    guarantee of being a regular starter next season.

    I don’t think any players contract will have that guarantee in it. 

  4. 2 hours ago, Emerson Thome said:

    The idea is you offer them a new contract after they have played 5-10 games, even if just an 18 month extension, as then the increase in wages won't be too much but you've safeguarded the future of the player at the club. This would have been in November/Early December, especially before he got into the last 6 months of the contract.

    Given Shaw himself said on the 4th of January that his agent was in negotiations with the club about his contract suggests this is not far from what actually happened. 

    • Like 1
  5. 1 minute ago, SallyCinnamon said:

    Completely missing the point. If we continue to let our best young talents run down their contract and lose them for nowt - what is the actual point? 

    What’s the point of the academy. What’s the point of developing young talent and investing time into them for years and years.


    What they go on to do is absolutely irrelevant. 

    You do realise that EPPP means the premier league can take you players for virtually fizz all anyway don’t you?

  6. 1 minute ago, SallyCinnamon said:

    What? Shaw was part of the first team squad at the end of last season. If he’s going to be involved you offer him a contract to ensure this scenario doesn’t play out. Instead we offered him one a couple of weeks before he was free to talk to other clubs.

    Your telling me not one coach at the club spotted his potential? Captaining the U’18s to a title is not enough evidence this lad might become quite a good footballer and could be an asset to us in the future? 

    How on earth anyone is defending this absolute fuckwittery is beyond me.

    Sean Clare thought he was worth more than the offer we made him, now struggling to get a game for Oxford. 

    George Hirst thought he was better than the offer we made him, now struggling to get a game for Rotherham. 

    Both of them, Hirst in particular, won massive plaudits at U18 level, should we have offered them more?

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  7. 1 minute ago, Bluesteel said:

    I don’t think anyone saw this coming, ideally he would’ve been signed on another year before he made a debut if he was part of Monks plans.


    Club should tie him down to protect themselves. 

    But whilst I am clearly in the minority, I think he owes us the club (regardless of what people think of the owner) for the years in the academy, professional opportunity and leaving for a few hundred thousand at the first whiff of interest would leave a bitter taste for me. None of this self depreciating “get yourself away ASAP” rubbish is appropriate in my view.



    The fact the club offered him a contract as soon as it became clear he could possibly make the grade says the have tried, unfortunately there is no loyalty in football once the agents get involved it is all about money. 

    can you imagine the meltdown on here if we had signed him on £10k a week 3 year deal after one good carabao cup game only for him never to play in the first team again. 

    • Love 1
  8. 4 hours ago, Siggijonsson said:

    A bit of a worse case scenario but if DC chose to walk away there is absolutely no guarantee a new (mega-rich) owner could be found who would pay the debts or the on going costs of running the club. Therefore given a straight chose what would you prefer:

    1. DC to continue (and the chaos this may continue to entail)

    2. Administration (and all this may entail - relegation, fire sale of assets etc, think Wigan and Bolton)

    Perhaps you could explain


    1. Who would put us into administration 

    2. How this would help us?

  9. 1 hour ago, SallyCinnamon said:

    Don’t think anyone is suggesting he hates Wednesday. We’re just face palming at the stupidity of our owner.  

    From his perspective we’ve failed to tie him down long term and he now has the chance to speak to other clubs. How have we let it get to this situation?


    All we’ve done this season is put an out of contract talented young player in the shop window for someone to sign for a fraction of what he could be worth if he was sold. 

    Tell me more about your business credentials Chansiri. I can let you off the hook it happening once, but three times since you bought the club? 

    Can I just ask, what did you see in Shaw before this season that made you think he was worth a new contract on “first team” wages?

    • Like 4
  10. You’ve got different journalists giving differing versions and the reality may be somewhere in the middle however imho contract length is irrelevant these days as most have severance clauses probably about 6 months pay. So even if it’s a 5 year contract you only get 6 months pay if sacked, I think that’s why a few recently have been described as 12 month rolling contracts. 

    • Like 2
  11. 17 hours ago, @owlstalk said:


    The power of Paxo


    In all seriousness Erik leaving should be ringing massive alarm bells 

    You could be right, but you could look at it another way in that this bloke was only there because he thought he could make some money out of us and DC saw through him and got shut. Dunno which is the right one though.  

  12. 1 minute ago, @owlstalk said:



    Sorry but all that does is prove the point that this insidious side of life is engrained when it shouldn't be

    The sooner we move away from having gambling, alcohol sponsors in football the better

    I can see them eradicating it like they have done with cigarette companies

    i don’t disagree but what about 


    Fast Food

    Cars (ICE not electric)

    Shopping (some people are addicted to buying stuff from Amazon ;-) )



    Moral arguments could be levelled against all the above, where do we draw the line, what would be left as an acceptable sponsor. 

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 2
  • Create New...