Guest Deleted member Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 32 grand a week and he is out of pocket ? are you trolling? Well if hes paid £40k for a box he isnt going to use - of course hes out of pocket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orlando_Trustful Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Could easily be true. Our boxes are hardly selling like hot cakes so we could have easily given him one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athelwulf Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Forget Rhodes and McCormack. They were never realistic without parachute or PL money. Vydra and Hooper were different. Reading are getting fleeced good and proper for Vydra, and I couldn't have stomached that deal either. As for Hooper, who knows? But our deal for Hooper was a loan, as I understand it, so we can always go back in next week. I still think we'll get that striker even if we don't get Hooper. Frankly, we can't afford not to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdan2003 Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 I call fact Not bullshit You're a striker, being paid £32k a week. You're playing for a Premiership club, but they've made it clear they want you out on loan as you're not getting a game this season. You've bought and paid for a box for the season for family and friends to watch you play in the Premiership. You've been told a deals been agreed with Wednesday, you're happy enough to go and play there - the money is the same. Norwich refuse to refund your box. Wednesday refuse to provide a box for your family and friends to prevent you being out of pocket, even though you've explained the situation to them, and said as long as you get a box for your family and friends so you arent out of pocket, you're happy. Wednesday have agreed to pay your wages in full (to Norwich) for the loan period, and agreed to pay a loan fee (to Norwich) as well. You're getting nothing out of the deal (other than the inconvenience of spending 8 months living away from your home and the chance to play in a division you've just played your heart out to get out of.... Whats so hard to understand? Why should he be out of pocket? If it was true, and I don't believe it for a minute, I'd have expected Wednesday to give him one....I mean what's 32k more on a multimillion pound deal. It's not like the boxes are in demand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heppers Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 We had the Fox in the box Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StudentOwl Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 32 grand a week and he is out of pocket ? are you trolling? I'll assume that your birthday is '99, so you haven't had a proper full-time job. (Sorry if I'm wrong on that assumption!) Say your parents earn £500 a week. How would they feel if they were told that they had work at a job a few miles further up the road from where they work now. They'll get no more money than what they currently earn. On top of that, they have to pay an extra £900 or so (about two week's wages) for something that they already have at their current work and would like to have at their new place of work. They also have a choice whether to stay where they currently are, or move. They're doing exactly the same thing at both jobs- the only difference is that the new place they could work has more in the way of casual Friday's (Game time) and they can leave two hours earlier (Again, game time). Would they go for it? Probably not, and you wouldn't blame them either. Unusual analogy, but you can see in the above scenario why they probably wouldn't bother going to the new place because the costs outweigh the benefits. Yeah sure, Hooper's fecking loaded- but it's still a cost of almost two week's wages to get something he already has and would like... and no-one can blame you for not wanting to blow two week's wages on something you've already got. Add on the fact that he probably thought, with a few days of the transfer window left, he might end up somewhere else (As he nearly did), you can't blame him. You can dislike him for it, I'm infuriated about it, but you can't necessarily BLAME him for it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cersei Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Could easily be true. Our boxes are hardly selling like hot cakes so we could have easily given him one. He could have had 5 and it would have made no difference but we might have had a decent striker for the first time in..... far far far far too long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyto Alba Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 He's never a box to box player....not even a fox in the box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountain Owl Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 This dunt make sense. Over half the box,s are still available at Hillsborough due to the price increase/structure. Or have we just refused to give him one on principle. Last season I believe Kieran Westwood had a box but he paid for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Hunt Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 If thats the case which i cannot see is true, then i am glad we did not sign him . We are talking about a weeks wages for a box to him . Enjoy your box at Carrow rd . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatzooma Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Who cares, move on and grow up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StudentOwl Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 (edited) If thats the case which i cannot see is true, then i am glad we did not sign him . We are talking about a weeks wages for a box to him . Enjoy your box at Carrow rd . Would you be happy to throw a week's wages at something for no real marginal benefit? EDIT: "no real marginal benefit" For sake of fairness I'm leaving that in, but that has to be the dumbest sentence fragment I've written in a long long time. Nonsensical. Edited September 1, 2015 by StudentOwl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M Royds Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 If he's not getting a refund on the box he should let some undesirables use it. I'm sure Norwich will soon refund him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athelwulf Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Whatever the reason we can try again next week to get him on loan. If that fails then we'll simply loan somebody else. Like I said earlier, we can't afford not to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roaminowl Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Hard not to when he's been right on almost everything Wednesday related this transfer window. Spot on. I'm looking forward to seeing Gary Hooper and Kenwyne Jones starting up front for us against Burnley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lees Tom Cat Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 We should send him a cardboard box with hillsborough drawn on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SallyCinnamon Posted September 1, 2015 Author Share Posted September 1, 2015 Engage your brain. Refer to Bruce's post above. Transfers are complex business. Fees agreed, maybe even 7 figure ones. Wages agreed, a percentage on our part (100%?) agreed to pay to the tune of tens of thousands a week. Then at the last minute Hooper says "Oh can I have a free box? No? Sod it then". It's absolute drivel and a direct contradiction of stuff Nixon himself has previously said. So if Nixon has been right about almost everything to do with us this summer, he's 50% wrong on one of his two statements about a deal for Hooper. Which is it? I agree it sounds like a load of rounduns. You said how do people take him seriously. I do take him seriously because he has broken a number of transfers throughout the summer- Wednesday related and for other clubs too. He's on the money most of the time and has been the most reliable source throughout the window. (Apart from Saxondale of course ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluesteel Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 I call fact Not bullshit You're a striker, being paid £32k a week. You're playing for a Premiership club, but they've made it clear they want you out on loan as you're not getting a game this season. You've bought and paid for a box for the season for family and friends to watch you play in the Premiership. You've been told a deals been agreed with Wednesday, you're happy enough to go and play there - the money is the same. Norwich refuse to refund your box. Wednesday refuse to provide a box for your family and friends to prevent you being out of pocket, even though you've explained the situation to them, and said as long as you get a box for your family and friends so you arent out of pocket, you're happy. Wednesday have agreed to pay your wages in full (to Norwich) for the loan period, and agreed to pay a loan fee (to Norwich) as well. You're getting nothing out of the deal (other than the inconvenience of spending 8 months living away from your home and the chance to play in a division you've just played your heart out to get out of.... Whats so hard to understand? Why should he be out of pocket? It's not a big amount of money though so it seems farcical that one of the parties wanted to stump up. Surely if he really wanted regular football that would come first. What if we didn't have any free boxes left? We probably do with the cost of them but it all seems so pedantic. He's minted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cersei Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 If the deal was basically done and then he casually said can I have one of your many empty boxes and someone said no way mate unless you cough up. He could have thought sod this. It may make him a bit cheeky but jesus christ look where we are now over a chuffing empty box. An empty box with a bomb site outside of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluesteel Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 I agree it sounds like a load of rounduns. You said how do people take him seriously. I do take him seriously because he has broken a number of transfers throughout the summer- Wednesday related and for other clubs too. He's on the money most of the time and has been the most reliable source throughout the window. (Apart from Saxondale of course ) Nixon knows who is interested in who, but I think he adds tabloid gossip into the detail where there are big gaps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now