Jos Luhukay talks about George Hirst and Sean Clare contracts

[Geoffrey]

Just now, BIG D said:

No that kid who’s legging it for a few quid more. Even though it’s his ‘dream to play for my club’

 

 

And how long before someone else is legging it for a few quid?

[Hughthecone]

11 minutes ago, Geoffrey said:

And how long before someone else is legging it for a few quid?

And how long is a piece of string.Who knows.

Edited March 29, 2018 by Hughthecone

[james o connor]

7 hours ago, matthefish2002 said:

If they have better offers elsewhere then I don't blame them and I would probably do the same.

When rubbish like abdi and fletcher are on 30 - 40 grand a week no wonder players who actually contribute feel the deserve more ..... shame talent is going elsewhere whole we are stuck with dross 

[jonnyowl]

1 hour ago, KivoOwl said:

One is a lifelong Wednesday fan and the other is a businessman after making a bit of money. It isn't rocket science.

I think you have to differentiate between George Hirst the lifelong Wednesday fan and George Hirst the professional footballer wanting a career and make some money along the way!

[1963owl]

51 minutes ago, Mrmason69 said:

I think we all know that clare isn't injured. He's getting the Wednesday jackboot treatment for refusing a new contract. 

I'll say the same thing about clare as I said about Hirst 

If clare wants a future he needs to get away from Wednesday. They have frequently demonstrated their contempt for their players rights and dignity over the past two years. 

I don't like bullies and Wednesday are a club that think it has the right to bully players who exercise their rights to have an opinion and say no. 

Clare and Hirst need to get away from Hillsborough. 

I think they already know that. 

ffs

[prowl]

2 hours ago, Walt said:

Whatever the reason we’ve got fans who think it’s justified in stopping a kid from playing football over a contract dispute, what a sad indictment.

As far as we know ‘player wants X and club are only prepared to offer Y’ 

Happens all the time, in all forms of employment but especially football because of the short term contracts. How many clubs will right now be negotiating with players over new contracts and will have come to an impasse? I’d say quite a few, how many of them will have acted in the shameful way we have in stopping a player from playing? It’s pathetic.

I understand what you are saying and I agree with you. I also have some sympathy with the clubs position. If the club makes a series of offers and the player refuses them all, makes it clear he wants to leave (I'm not saying this was the situation), the club can either continue to invest in training and playing that player or concentrate resources on those who intend to stay at the club. Say there are 2 strikers one wants away but the other doesn't, why play the one who wants to leave rather than the one who is going to stay. In effect you would be continuing to develop the leaver to the detriment of the stayer.

 

Again I'm not saying this is the situation here, I've no inside information, I'm just playing devils advocate.

[Rebowl Yell]

FFS people talking about Mr C vs GH in terms of who is the better Wednesday fan. Well let’s see here, one has put millions of pounds into the club, made us ultra competitive in the championship and got us within a whisker of the Premier league and the other one banged a few goals in behind the scenes in the u18’s but allegedly isn’t Wednesday enough to accept a contract at his ‘boyhood’ club?

 

Oh yeah I can see who the biggest fan is.

[BIG D]

37 minutes ago, Geoffrey said:

And how long before someone else is legging it for a few quid?

 

I prefer young players to prove their worth to the club rather than think they’ve made it because they’ve scored goals for the U18s

[SettleForADraw]

8 hours ago, cowl said:

 

 

George Hirst not allowed to play at all for the club until only last month and even then only for the U23s.

 

I'm still utterly disgusted at Chansiri for this. And then he talks about us being a family!

I think Chansiri tried handling the Hirst saga the same as Forestieri. Guess it doesn't work quite the same with an 18 year old who's only got a year left compared with someone in their late 20's on a long contract. Ah well.

[SiJ]

2 hours ago, Owl 44 said:

Quick. Shove a contract under his nose before he fully comes round.

 

1 hour ago, Mrmason69 said:

I think we all know that clare isn't injured. He's getting the Wednesday jackboot treatment for refusing a new contract. 

I'll say the same thing about clare as I said about Hirst 

If clare wants a future he needs to get away from Wednesday. They have frequently demonstrated their contempt for their players rights and dignity over the past two years. 

I don't like bullies and Wednesday are a club that think it has the right to bully players who exercise their rights to have an opinion and say no. 

Clare and Hirst need to get away from Hillsborough. 

I think they already know that. 

There he is again.

 

Another OT serial liar.

 

@Mrmason69 - care to comment?

 

Have we fabricated the kid in a hospital bed? A false flag. 

 

 

[Owl 44]

 

46 minutes ago, SiJ said:

 

There he is again.

 

Another OT serial liar.

 

@Mrmason69 - care to comment?

 

Have we fabricated the kid in a hospital bed? A false flag. 

 

 

It's really doing my head in this season. Everything players and journalists say is twisted and the club are constantly lying according to some. So far, everything these theorists and ITKs have said has been proven to be absolute bull yet they still keep making these stories up.

[owlsup]

Really can’t be bothered to read a full thread in this again. However, I think the devil is in the detail here (of which nobody really knows for sure).

 

My guess is it is the fact it’s a ‘new deal’. I don’t know when the original contracts were negotiated or by whom. But we’ve spent years moaning about lack of sell on clauses costing us millions and players on huge fixed wages. 

 

The time one has come to renew and we’ve been a bit more savvy and offered more money but with more clauses and stricter bonus schemes to protect the club - especially with FFP tearing its head. 

 

Some players will be happy with it and some will spit the dummy out as they see a harder stance (and a lot more work then they envisaged). 

 

Perhaps I’m wrong but I’d be intrigued to see each contract and terms and how they have changed over the years. 

 

 

[Jeffjohnsonmyhero]

I served my Apprenticeship  I was put on full money , As soon as a player has made a debut and been good enough to play in the first team ,They should be on money that befits the first team . If our young players are supposed to come through the ranks and play for 25% on what the senior players are on ,That is never right. Clare developed right ,In this silly money football will be worth £5 million no problem . Speculate to Accumulate  Hirst and Clare could fetch this club in a lot of money in 2-3 yrs .

[the mighty wednesday]

3 hours ago, OWLERTON GHOST said:

Frozen out!!

I wouldn't use Butterfield to cover for an ice cube .

Nor would use the Traffic Cone that's David Jones either !!!

I'm not saying we should have used Butterfield or Jones. I am saying why would Chansiri allow Jos to overrule his alleged decision to freeze Clare out when he has not allowed him to use George Hirst.

It doesn't make sense to take a tough stance then backtrack on it just because Wallace is out for the season when Butterfield and Jones are available. Although we know Butterfield is not worth his place in the side I'm not entirely sure that Chansiri would understand this enough to overturn his own decision to freeze Clare out and allow him to play for the first team again.

It makes more sense to assume that he wasn't frozen out at all.
 

Edited March 29, 2018 by the mighty wednesday

[Utah Owl]

7 hours ago, Buxtongent said:

Both these lads have been offered contracts , as have other youngsters who have signed.

The contracts are there to be signed. I can only assume they won't sign because they consider them unattractive. This brings up two points - 

1. Is it more than first team players are getting?

2. Is it less than first team players are getting?

If the first, then they obviously do not want to stay, and , if so, should NOT be considered for selection.

If the second, is this because the club do not consider them ready for regular first team selection. Don't forget, both these players have yet to prove themselves at first team level., and as such, to pay them even FT rates is a gamble by the club.

 

And making Doyen the scapegoat is a little naive. A  similar situation exists at Derby with other other Agents.

 

I've heard through the grapevine they were offered 2k per week on a 2 or 3 year deal with no option to review (no idea if true but have no reason to doubt it and believe this has been mentioned on one or more of the other numerous threads on this subject). So, who is holding who to ransom and would it have been too much to ask to offer them a performance related deal with a review option after 12 /18 months?

 

Given the total mess up that DC has made of this season and what should have been a massive celebration of our history, it has his mishandling the situation all over it. 

[OWLERTON GHOST]

2 minutes ago, the mighty wednesday said:

I'm not saying we should have used Butterfield or Jones. I am saying why would Chansiri allow Jos to overrule his alleged decision to freeze Clare out when he has not allowed him to use George Hirst.

It doesn't make sense to take a tough stance then backtrack on it just because Wallace is out for the season when Butterfield and Jones are available. Although we know Butterfield is not worth his place in the side I'm not entirely sure that Chansiri would understand this enough to overturn his own decision to freeze Clare out and allow him to play for the first team again.
 

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news mate 

That lad in the hospital bed on the previous page or so is the very Clare who's "frozen out "..

He's not going to play for Wednesday for the forseeable if ever at all ,

Night mate early start n that 

UTO....

[the mighty wednesday]

3 hours ago, OWLERTON GHOST said:

If he ain't injured .

He sure has some weird sleeping habits 

He's obviously some kind of lightweight dilettante and is too scared to wear the proper gimp mask his girlfriend got him for Christmas.

[jomaco]

Who's Sean Flair?

[Westfield Owl]

12 hours ago, Buxtongent said:

 

George Hirst was never going to sign for us.  His father had no intention of it . From the man himself in front of witnesses.

 

Go on.  Spill the beans.

 

9 hours ago, Bannofan said:

Nobody knows the details of the contracts that the lads have been offered. Not the U23 groupies, your mate down the pub, or that bloke who sells the 50-50 tickets .

 

Hirst jnr and Hirst snr ( legend turned shxt stirrer) might hint at stuff, as may the club, but it dont mean owt. 

 

Might as well have flogged young George in January, absolutely pointless carrying this farce on for a whole summer. 

 

 

How is David Hirst a sh*t stirrer?  Spill the beans.

[robswfc]

4 hours ago, Utah Owl said:

I've heard through the grapevine they were offered 2k per week on a 2 or 3 year deal with no option to review (no idea if true but have no reason to doubt it and believe this has been mentioned on one or more of the other numerous threads on this subject). So, who is holding who to ransom and would it have been too much to ask to offer them a performance related deal with a review option after 12 /18 months?

 

Given the total mess up that DC has made of this season and what should have been a massive celebration of our history, it has his mishandling the situation all over it. 

 

Lol, don’t know which vine you have access to but perhaps a few sour grapes on it?

 

From Chansiris statement (I’ll post it again because it’s pretty obvious  most on haven’t read it: 

 

“Our offer broke our current salary structure for the Development Squad on a level never previously matched. We have policies in place to ensure continuity throughout the squad and fairness to all players at pre-first team level.

The reason we broke our structure was based on appreciation of the promising signs that George was showing and in recognition of his hard work and achievements for the Under-23s and England team at youth level. Our policy is based on basic salary but as with all development players is enhanced with bonuses subject to the player participating in first team matches. 

Our offer to George was declined by the player’s advisors and when we asked them to submit a proposal to us, we found they were requesting the basic salary of an established first team player at our club, plus completely unrealistic bonuses, clauses and add-ons. We therefore had no choice but to decline this proposal, not because of the money, but in the interests of fairness and squad morale.

Although negotiations were proving difficult I did not close the door because that is never my style as chairman. More discussions were held over a period of time and we increased our offer to make this contract by far the most lucrative of its kind in our club’s history.”

 

https://www.swfc.co.uk/news/2017/december/ask-the-chairman---part-13/

 

To me Chansiri has gone out of his way to provide transparency here and I find it hard to argue with this.   Are people saying he’s lying? Or they want us to break the wage structure for a kid who is totally unproven at championship level?

 

Hirsts obviously think a prem club is going to offer him what our established first teamers get paid. They may be right, but what will they do if a big offer doesn’t materialise now he’s not played for a year?