Mountain Owl Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 15 minutes ago, Burnsie said: Apparently we did offer a deal, but he wanted first team wages.... He's not first team.... At least 5 strikers in front of him Depends what kind of first team wage. We have FF, Fletcher and Rhodes who reportedly are on in excess £30k a week and then on the other side of the scale I would imagine Palmer, Fox, Hunt etc are probably on a third of that level. We have taken loads of gambles (mostly failed) with players on reportedly extortionate levels of wages yet a home grown player with obvious potential we are not prepared to do that. This will come back to bite us I just know it will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspector Lestrade Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 25 minutes ago, Mountain Owl said: This is bad from every point of view. The lad has obvious potential not just at championship level but also as a future international as indicated by his inclusion in England sides. We have to presume wednesdsy have offered a poor contract and so that has led to a stalemate situation. Considering the money we have wasted on dross signings Matias, Abdi, Urby and others to not offer the lad a much better contract is criminal. He might not make it however he might and in a few years he could be looking at sale value of £20m +, who knows? I also think if he had been at bumhole lane Wilder would have had him in and around the first team squad. I sometimes shake my head at the disbelief how our club is being run. Your head would have fallen off a few seasons ago then. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eastleigh Owl Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 Did I read somewhere that he wanted to go to rovrum but we wouldn't let him until he'd signed his contract? Fair play to the club, same as the hospitality set up, well done DC. Too many people in the past have got away with murder, at last we have a Chairman who puts the club where it belongs, and that is in front of any individual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airborne_rat_of_s6 Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 15 minutes ago, Eastleigh Owl said: Did I read somewhere that he wanted to go to rovrum but we wouldn't let him until he'd signed his contract? Fair play to the club, same as the hospitality set up, well done DC. Too many people in the past have got away with murder, at last we have a Chairman who puts the club where it belongs, and that is in front of any individual. Sell him to roverum. That’ll learn him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 10 hours ago, torryowl said: gerr im sold and move on ...... This^^^^^^^^^^^Sick to back teeth of listening to folk go on about a youngster who happens to be David Hirsts frigging son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 55 minutes ago, Earlsfieldowl said: They will probably get him too - we are historically hopeless at dealing with these situations. Its a shambles So you would be happy for the club to pay a 15/20k a week because he is David Hirsts son. Ok. Then we would be a shambles pal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachyderm Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 can we get Vardy back for him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRightSide Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 how many times... he won't go on loan as it could jeopardize the big contract he's been told he can get. If he goes on loan and gets crocked, or goes on loan and struggles that 20 grand a week is potentially gone. so he wants that contract before he goes on loan - Chansiri is refusing to being held to ransom. zero to do with first team football. It's all about money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 1 hour ago, McRightSide said: how many times... he won't go on loan as it could jeopardize the big contract he's been told he can get. If he goes on loan and gets crocked, or goes on loan and struggles that 20 grand a week is potentially gone. so he wants that contract before he goes on loan - Chansiri is refusing to being held to ransom. zero to do with first team football. It's all about money. Have you got any evidence to back this up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
optimisticowl Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 1 hour ago, McRightSide said: how many times... he won't go on loan as it could jeopardize the big contract he's been told he can get. If he goes on loan and gets crocked, or goes on loan and struggles that 20 grand a week is potentially gone. so he wants that contract before he goes on loan - Chansiri is refusing to being held to ransom. zero to do with first team football. It's all about money. I reckon that you sum up the matter well, I know someone with strong club connections, who probably knows as much as the rest of us. However I wouldn’t even consider asking a mate of some 30 years standing to betray a confidence that he might or might not be privi to. Everything in football following the abolition of the £20.00 p/w maximum wage rule has been about money, and always will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
33 Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 Never mind Somebody from the otther side of the planet knows better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earlsfieldowl Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 (edited) 11 hours ago, CLswfc said: So you would be happy for the club to pay a 15/20k a week because he is David Hirsts son. Ok. Then we would be a shambles pal. Yes I'm sure that’s the only reason we’d be paying it. Christ No one knows how good or bad he will turn out to be but early indications are he has some talent. historically we have let players leave who go on and do well elsewhere - thats my point. Edited November 15, 2017 by Earlsfieldowl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Snooty Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 8 hours ago, Beanie Rook said: If George Hirst wanted to play for Wednesday, he'd have signed his contract. Simple as that. Young lads these days don't make all their own decisions though. Not like young Zico going in and Charlton saying "Sign that and get out" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StudentOwl Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 10 minutes ago, Earlsfieldowl said: Yes I'm sure that’s the only reason we’d be paying it. Christ No one knows how good or bad he will turn out to be but early indications are he has some talent. historically we have let players leave who go on and do well elsewhere - thats my point. And I think everyone else's point is that if we pay some promising 19 year old with about 45 minutes of first-team football say £15k a week, then it upsets the entire wage structure of the club. Soon all the best youngsters at the club will be pushing for 5 figure weekly salaries, and the more senior players that will be on wages around that (eg Palmer, Fox etc) will be demanding an increase in wages that reflect their first-team status compared to the overpaid kid. So your point is that we should keep Hirst. Other people's point is that we shouldn't keep Hirst if the wage demands are as high as some are hypothesising they might be because they understand it will cause a lot of feathers to be ruffled in more important players for the here and now, as well as dictate what future wages players may demand. We all want the kid to stay but we can't do it to the detriment of the club, and some people seem to refuse to accept that maybe, just maybe what he's currently demanding would be to the detriment to the club. And unfortunately no, the "We pay Matias X" and "We paid Urby Y" doesn't fly. 100+ senior football appearances for the pair of them is incomparable to the 45 minutes Hirst has. He has to get the reputation in senior football to earn that contract. IF (and it is an 'if', as it's all conjecture at the moment) the issue from all this is him asking for excessive wages, then he's trying to get the billy big bucks based on what his reputation might be rather than what it is. Which is pretty much Mark Corrigan's tactic here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauchief Owl Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 The only way to see if Hirst is the real deal at this time is to put him on the bench and, if match conditions allow, put him on for 20 mins or so. He needs to add bulk but he is tall and reasonably pacy and above all scores goals. If he produces the goods, give him the deal. Otherwise get rid, the situation is just causing endless arguments and quite frankly it needs sorting. At present everyone loses! I just do not understand why he isn't playing in some capacity for the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
owlmanc Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 (edited) 22 hours ago, abdiwonderland said: 6ft 3 meaning he is good in an aerial battle. If he didn't weight 7 stone that would probably be true. Wish he would stay, hope he does. Not overly bothered if he doesn't. Can't he have something his dads been eating Edited November 15, 2017 by owlmanc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
owlmanc Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 (edited) 12 hours ago, CLswfc said: So you would be happy for the club to pay a 15/20k a week because he is David Hirsts son. Ok. Then we would be a shambles pal. No but we can pay Emanuelson and McGuigan £20k+ a week no problem. Edited November 15, 2017 by owlmanc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Snooty Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 6 minutes ago, owlmanc said: No but we can pay Emanuelson and McGuigan £20k+ a week no problem. Not saying it's right....but at the time of signing McGugan was a proven Championship player with over 200 League games under his belt. And Urby, wee wee tail up as it was, had played most of his career in Serie A playing Championship football and being a full International for Holland. They had proven pedigree. All went to sh*te of course.. As it equally could with young Hirst... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
owlmanc Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 1 minute ago, Lord Snooty said: Not saying it's right....but at the time of signing McGugan was a proven Championship player with over 200 League games under his belt. And Urby, wee wee tail up as it was, had played most of his career in Serie A playing Championship football and being a full International for Holland. They had proven pedigree. All went to sh*te of course.. As it equally could with young Hirst... It also could go the way of vardy (and with better scouting Cahill) both Owls desperate to play for the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Snooty Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 1 minute ago, owlmanc said: It also could go the way of vardy (and with better scouting Cahill) both Owls desperate to play for the club. Possibly. But I doubt that Stocksbridge were offfering Vardy huge sums of money when we released him. It's still taken him ten years to convince any decent sized club to take a chance on him in Championship Leicester. Cahill was pretty late in the game wasn't he? Certainly don't remember us having him on the books. 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