Guest Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 (edited) 58 minutes ago, Hillsborough Mole said: really?? I'd be absolutely amazed if that was true? Why would the club contuinue paying him if he was effectively on strike? Have you got any proof of this? As stated there has been conjecture on both sides, no one really know 100% what has happened. The club have been naive and have the approach has not protected the best interests of the player or the club but the Hirst camp equally have not covered themselves in glory and this conclusion looks like a purposeful dig at the Chairman at the expense of the club as a whole. https://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/football/sheffield-wednesday/sheffield-wednesday-dejphon-chansiri-resigned-to-losing-owls-starlet-george-hirst-1-8891786 The Star article (I know we shouldn't believe all the we read or indeed infer too far into what has been said) states that the club were given an ultimatum by his agents to sell him or else. Maybe this or else implied that he wouldn't play. It might have only been for a match - stating he was unavailable to train or play for a few days or 1 game. The club may then have reacted by not allowing him to play at all. How do we know the club didn't fine him at any point last season? None of us know the true ins and outs for sure but it seems implausible that either side is blameless in all of this. Edited June 25, 2018 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspector Lestrade Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 1 minute ago, hirstyboywonder said: As stated there has been conjecture on both sides, no one really know 100% what has happened. The club have been naive and have the approach has not protected the best interests of the player or the club but the Hirst camp equally have not covered themselves in glory and this conclusion looks like a purposeful dig at the Chairman at the expense of the club as a whole. The Star article (I know we shouldn't believe all the we read or indeed infer too far into what has been said) states that the club were given an ultimatum by his agents to sell him or else. Maybe this or else implied that he wouldn't play. It might have only been for a match - stating he was unavailable to train or play for a few days or 1 game. The club may then have reacted by not allowing him to play at all. How do we know the club didn't fine him at any point last season? None of us know the true ins and outs for sure but it seems implausible that either side is blameless in all of this. 4 Then you go ahead and tell us what happened Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 1 minute ago, Watson said: Then you go ahead and tell us what happened Not at all - just stated what has been part out there - there's far more to this that only those involved know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hillsborough Mole Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 4 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said: As stated there has been conjecture on both sides, no one really know 100% what has happened. The club have been naive and have the approach has not protected the best interests of the player or the club but the Hirst camp equally have not covered themselves in glory and this conclusion looks like a purposeful dig at the Chairman at the expense of the club as a whole. The Star article (I know we shouldn't believe all the we read or indeed infer too far into what has been said) states that the club were given an ultimatum by his agents to sell him or else. Maybe this or else implied that he wouldn't play. It might have only been for a match - stating he was unavailable to train or play for a few days or 1 game. The club may then have reacted by not allowing him to play at all. How do we know the club didn't fine him at any point last season? None of us know the true ins and outs for sure but it seems implausible that either side is blameless in all of this. No - you were quite specific That the players representatives had let the club know he wasnt available. Like I said - thats absolutely outrageous if true - although I'd be amazed if it was. Ive also never seen the ultimatum and I'd happily stand corrected - I just really can't be arsed to read through that bloody statement again. Did they really say that? because that would change my opinion massively (if it were true). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Xxxxxxxxcxcc Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Utah Owl said: Basically any club that's sticking to the rules (which probably means none of them). This will be really conflicting to some! Edited June 25, 2018 by Xxxxxxxxcxcc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspector Lestrade Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 2 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said: Not at all - just stated what has been part out there - there's far more to this that only those involved know. LOL really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 2 minutes ago, Hillsborough Mole said: No - you were quite specific That the players representatives had let the club know he wasnt available. Like I said - thats absolutely outrageous if true - although I'd be amazed if it was. Ive also never seen the ultimatum and I'd happily stand corrected - I just really can't be arsed to read through that bloody statement again. Did they really say that? because that would change my opinion massively (if it were true). It's something I remember being said months ago during the time he was not playing - not sure where it came from - can't be arsed to trawl around for proof...... You just keep keep making general sweeping statements slagging Wednesday fans off for having the temerity to be critical of the Hirsts in this debacle though eh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hillsborough Mole Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 2 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said: It's something I remember being said months ago during the time he was not playing - not sure where it came from - can't be arsed to trawl around for proof...... You just keep keep making general sweeping statements slagging Wednesday fans off for having the temerity to be critical of the Hirsts in this debacle though eh. Thats very defensive of you. Youve done nothing but have a go at me for months - and now you're making things up to suit your argument by suggesting that the player withdrew his labour. Thats defamatory. I'm absolutely sure he would not do that, and did not do that. Otherwise - you can be sure our Chairman would have ensured we all knew about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hillsborough Mole Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 11 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said: Not at all - just stated what has been part out there - there's far more to this that only those involved know. Go on then - tell us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 5 hours ago, BIG D said: How long do we have to wait? It's been 6 months now. Has it? You used to slag off GH. Then you claimed that somebody had told you what had gone off and you were sympathetic to GH. Now you're back slagging off the Hirsts. Poor trolling. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eastleigh Owl Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 11 minutes ago, Hillsborough Mole said: Thats very defensive of you. Youve done nothing but have a go at me for months - and now you're making things up to suit your argument by suggesting that the player withdrew his labour. Thats defamatory. I'm absolutely sure he would not do that, and did not do that. Otherwise - you can be sure our Chairman would have ensured we all knew about it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 5 hours ago, Kanye West said: Why would we give opportunities to a player that wanted away? We did right playing players that actually wanted to be there, it wouldn't have set a good precedent for the rest of the academy would it? Why not sell him instead of turning down big bids and purposely devalue him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 6 minutes ago, Hillsborough Mole said: Thats very defensive of you. Youve done nothing but have a go at me for months - and now you're making things up to suit your argument by suggesting that the player withdrew his labour. Thats defamatory. I'm absolutely sure he would not do that, and did not do that. Otherwise - you can be sure our Chairman would have ensured we all knew about it. That's factually incorrect. I can point to posts where I have agreed with you on plenty of subjects. I ahven't made anything up - I've suggested what was said by others - look it up if you're that bothered. I didn't say it was correct - just that both sides have conjecture on the issue. I'll tell you what has been widely reported. George Hirst wanted around 10K a week to sign a new contract. Having played 2 professional games the club deemed this too much but did offer him more than any other youth player in the clubs history. This was declined. George Hirst has chosen to take his career elsewhere and in doing so has made a move as such to harm the club. As of next week he will officially get what he wants - to no longer be part of SWFC - cheerio. Could the club have handled it better? Of course. Would it have made a difference in him staying, the way this has panned out I doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OWLERTON GHOST Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 1 hour ago, Spencerowl said: No Logged back off ................ 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 5 hours ago, DEH9 said: “I respect him (George) because he asked me to play,” said Chansiri. “I’m happy to step back and let him play.” That was kind of him. Did he not wonder why he'd been paying his wage for 6 months? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonny Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 8 minutes ago, Geoffrey said: Poor trolling. L0l Indeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errol Flashman Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 5 minutes ago, Geoffrey said: That was kind of him. Did he not wonder why he'd been paying his wage for 6 months? What?! Just a bloke. Being dragged along in a world that moves too quick for it's own good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eastleigh Owl Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 10 minutes ago, Geoffrey said: Has it? You used to slag off GH. Then you claimed that somebody had told you what had gone off and you were sympathetic to GH. Now you're back slagging off the Hirsts. Poor trolling. Absolutely, you need to give him a few tips. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Xxxxxxxxcxcc Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 6 minutes ago, Geoffrey said: That was kind of him. Did he not wonder why he'd been paying his wage for 6 months? I'm guessing he thought he was contractually obliged to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hillsborough Mole Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 21 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said: I ahven't made anything up - I've suggested what was said by others - look it up if you're that bothered. I didn't say it was correct - just that both sides have conjecture on the issue. Quote The 2nd line is conjecture, his side of the debate suggest he was frozen out, the club state his representatives withdrew the involvement of their client after a bid was turned down. ^^ Thats what you said - and it looks fairly conclusive to me... All I asked you to do was point out where the club have said this - as I would certainly reassess my position if you did because that would be scandalous. 21 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said: I'll tell you what has been widely reported. George Hirst wanted around 10K a week to sign a new contract. Widely reported by whom? Ive not seen any official reports that quantify what was being demanded. 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