Random Task Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 He did add to one of his tweets that he thinks Hooper was basically using a t to buy time, presumably to see what other options he has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kameron Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 If it was a loan deal, why take him now? Take him in a weeks time and save 32K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saxondale Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 A row over a free box at Hillsborough. According to Nixon. Tha what Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIG D Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Nothing to gain for Nixon if he's making it up. It would cause him problems in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meggoisgod Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Hooper sounds like a fkn tool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
***HIRSTY*** Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 I expect a loan deal with a tent pitched in the NW corner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluesteel Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 (edited) If you're paying that kind of money then you'd hope they want to actually play football and fancy the move. I think we'll find someone in the loan window Edited September 1, 2015 by Bluesteel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roaminowl Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 If it was a loan deal, why take him now? Take him in a weeks time and save 32K. We can't loan him for the whole season in a weeks time though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s29wfc Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Can loan till January though can't we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Shutt is God 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? Why should he be out of pocket .....The poor bugger only earns in a week a decent yearly wage for the people who pay money to watch the games. If it is true...and I am not saying I believe it is....It just shows how ridiculous the money is in football. 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 cricket box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyto Alba Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 I don't really believe it, but if the box situation was a dealbreaker, I'd question his character and would rather take him on loan with a view to buying him in Jan if it works out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roaminowl Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Can loan till January though can't we? Not sure. I heard 93 days max (but don't quote me on it), so that would mean signing them towards the end of the window to get close. I don't when the window opens and closes though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Shutt is God Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 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 £32,000 a WEEK. Not anything like £500 and utterly not comparable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodytheowl Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 (edited) 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? Why on Earth wouldn't we give him a box? They're 3/4 empty and unsold at the moment aren't they? Just makes absolute 0% sense. I heard someone say it was because Chansiri had set a goals scored target that had to be met to meet his full wage over the loan term. I'm not 100% sure of that at all though either of course. TBH think we'd pretty much let him set his own terms apart from a wage increase. Edited September 1, 2015 by goodytheowl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19owl08 Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 A row over a free box at Hillsborough. According to Nixon. Tha what More proof Nixon talks poo poo. He said he could not stress enough that it wasn't Swfc at fault but Norwich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Theboylangers Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Av heard we're gonna build a special box for him on the Kop. Might inconvenience a few fans when they get moved from their season tickets behind the goal but it will help the loan deal go through when the window opens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ever the pessimist Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 I suspect that Norwich would be able to shift boxes quite well being in the premier league so refunding hooper would not be a big deal to them. Plus they would be saving £32k a week so refunding him a box (at most 2 weeks wages?) would be a drop in the ocean. Only way I can see it as true is that Norwich deliberately said no to stall the move hoping they would subsequently receive an offer to buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southportdc Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 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. Exactly. So it makes zero sense for us to do that, and also doesn't make any sense in the narrative Nixon previously put forwards, which undermined the source for the whole story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAL Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Obviously, Fulham wouldn't give him a box either then. 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