Jump to content

The reason Hooper didn't sign...


Recommended Posts

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?

This makes me sick, that you can justify his actions, if true.

Out of pocket?

Out of f*cking pocket!?

How do you figure that, if he's on £32,000?

My heart goes out to him, seriously.

Are you telling me that if it's true, he couldn't have made a small compromise for the sake of his own career?

Nothing out of the deal? How do you figure that? It's better if he plays for us every week rather than being sat on Norwich's bench. Think about it logically for a moment.

If you're not trolling, that is an absolute joke of post, that's just another smack in the face to the working man. Fans have been asked to pay between £30-40 to watch us, and many of them have kids, yet you think his decision was justified?

Both you and Hooper should be ashamed.

Edited by Robdylan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if hes paid £40k for a box he isnt going to use - of course hes out of pocket.

Get real.

In the grand scheme of things, he wouldn't be out of pocket. What's he on per year? £40,000 would be nothing for the sake of your career. It's just over a month's wages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest shawie99

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

Never assume anything pal it makes an ass off u and me.Im 50 0dd and never been out of work. Unusual anology? You could say so .Try telling any average bloke that 32k a week is compararable with 500 quid a week.

I thought the whole story just didnt add up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With Wolfswinklel going out and Grabban staying put, Hooper is left in no man's land.

Just seen Norwich have signed some striker from the Russian league too, so Hooper likely be around 4th choice striker...

Makes no sense, will undoubtedly go out on loan soon, hopefully we can make a move then.

And probably doesn't give a fliers on 32k per week.................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Let's be real, your analogy is beyond ridiculous.

There's literally a world of difference between earning £500 per week and earning £32,000 per week.

How on earth can the costs outweigh the benefits? Dear me.

If the story is true, it's an absolute joke.

His options are:

To sit on the sidelines for Norwich, becoming increasingly frustrated that he's not playing, knowing that his family and friends are in the exec boxes yet aren't able to watch him.

Or

To play regular football for a team with genuine Premiership aspirations, whilst also putting himself in the shop window, which can only further his career.

A footballer's career is very short.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's be real, your analogy is beyond ridiculous.

There's literally a world of difference between earning £500 per week and earning £32,000 per week.

How on earth can the costs outweigh the benefits? Dear me.

If the story is true, it's an absolute joke.

His options are:

To sit on the sidelines for Norwich, becoming increasingly frustrated that he's not playing, knowing that his family and friends are in the exec boxes yet aren't able to watch him.

Or

To play regular football for a team with genuine Premiership aspirations, whilst also putting himself in the shop window, which can only further his career.

A footballer's career is very short.

Like I say, he probably thought/assumed that he'd be in demand before the end of the transfer window (which he was with Fulham). 

Also, even if he doesn't play for the next 9 months and gets released from Norwich at the end of the season- his chances are still fair to good that he'll be offered a contract at a bottom half Prem club or a top half Champ club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...