Jump to content

Jos Luhukay talks about George Hirst and Sean Clare contracts


Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Ginner said:

 

I'm sure you don't know what he's demanding, but you will ofcourse know that he was really well thought of whilst on loan at Gillingham. 

 

It's well assumed and rumoured how our youth players were seemingly ignored by CC. And we have no way of knowing how closely the club were following Sean under the previous regime. 

 

So maybe Sean was already making plans to move away from SWFC,  and you could view it that giving him a couple of games in the first team, whilst it was down to the bare bones, was too little too late from the club from his perspective.

 

Maybe he's just keeping his options open. Mybe we should all see how it pans out, then offer our ill informed opinions? 

How dare you come on here spouting common sense !!!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, ThisCityIsOurs88 said:

 

I get the feeling he thinks he’s better than he actually is. For me I’d let either of them go if they don’t want to be here. I’d be more gutted about Hirst though. 

Is that because his dad is David Hirst. Clare as played  league football  so how can anyone compare them at this stage. Hirst hasnt proved that step up yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, prowl said:

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.

Both parties were happy to sign the current contract and should honour it, that means by playing fair on both sides even if that means they come to some agreement and go their separate ways.

Bottom line is we have a player that the manager can not pick for his team (if he should so wish) because the owner says so. A team that is struggling for players in the position that said player plays in. A team that is on the periphery of a relegation battle. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, CLswfc said:

Is that because his dad is David Hirst. Clare as played  league football  so how can anyone compare them at this stage. Hirst hasnt proved that step up yet. 

 

No, it’s the amount of goals he scores at youth level, something which we have lacked for a long time - an out and out consistent goal scorer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, robswfc said:

 

“Our offer broke our current salary structure for the Development Squad on a level never previously matched."

 

 That is relevant if you can tell us the previous top salary and whether that player had represented his country over 20 times.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, SettleForADraw said:

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.

One player refused to travel to play for Wednesday so was rewarded with a new improved contract. The other wanted to play for Wednesday but was prevented from training with his peers.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, BIG D said:

 

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

After supporting GH for a while you've gone full circle again. Just why did his father leave his ambassadorial role at the club?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, robswfc said:

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: 

 

They don't read it because they dont want facts stopping their own prejudiced views on certain subjects.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Geoffrey said:

One player refused to travel to play for Wednesday so was rewarded with a new improved contract. The other wanted to play for Wednesday but was prevented from training with his peers.

One has a proven scoring record for the club in the championship, the other one doesn't. One is arguably the club's best player, the other one isn't.

 lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours 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 don’t think you understand real life and people’s motivations. 

 

To 99.99% if people football comes second to money and the things that come with it.

 

Sad but true

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Geoffrey said:

After supporting GH for a while you've gone full circle again. Just why did his father leave his ambassadorial role at the club?

 

Just to be clear I’ve no idea why his Father left. If you have then open your trap and tell us. I’ll support a player for as long as he wants to play for us. If a player shows no desire to sign a new deal then I literally do not care what happens to his career. I’d love him to sign, everyone would. If he decides he would rather play for someone else then he can bugger off. 

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...