BREAKING - George Hirst Gone

[Beholder]

20 minutes ago, londonowl said:

 

No way was the offer £2m cash up front. I'm going for £800k plus add-ons. If GH amounts to the sum of nothing, then what we have lost is £800k minus the £180k we will be getting. 

 

I know I'm making the figures up but why do people keep saying we have lost 'at least £2m'? If GH turns into a world beater, we've lost a shed load more, if he goes the way of a thousand other prospects, we've lost a few hundred grand which DC can probably find down the back of the sofa if he feels that it was all about principles. 

The subject of how good George is hasn't been discussed really. 

 

Im working on the assumption he is gonna be a premier league standard player like his father was. 

 

I think it's a safe assumption but you may disagree. 

 

All I know is this thread will feel like a drop in the ocean compared to the amount of future threads that will appear after ever goal he scores for Leicester and England. 

 

 

[Daizan10]

1 hour ago, cowl said:

 

Precisely. It's inexplicable.

 

We could all just give DC the benefit of the doubt, and say he must have had a good reason for it, but I've genuinely no such faith in DC's motives here.

I think he has the right motives. Its just the latest in a line of silly mistakes. Kat Mierre seems to have put halt to a lot of the ones we made this time last year. Hopefully the GH saga is the last one we have to see. 

[Guest Hillsborough Mole]

4 minutes ago, londonowl said:

 

Equally amazing though that so many fans are putting the boot into Chansiri for the same reasons.

 

Reality is, if anyone who does know exactly what has happened and decides to share it on the forum, it is lost in a sea of ITK'ers who have declared that this, that or the other has happened.

 

No disrespect Kivo, I know you know your onions but your version of what happened is the exact opposite of some others so as a casual poster with absolutely no knowledge of anything, your info gets the treated the same as anyone else. With a pinch of salt.

 

Has anybody really 'put the boot into Chansiri' on this?

 

I can't see much evidence of it (if at all).  If anything I think this whole thread has been more sympathetic to his naivity, which looks to have cost him.

[Errol Flashman]

12 minutes ago, Hillsborough Mole said:

 

Is there a reason why you keep insisting this will happen?

 

 

Yeah.

 

I keep being told I don't know the truth. 

I keep being told not to belive the Chairman's version.

 

So aye. I look forward to hearing the other side.

If someone was calling me a disruptive abusive knobber I'd be itching to clear me name. 

 

I'd be hammering away at a statment to clear me name well in advance of all ties being cut ready for the day I could tell my version. 

 

It seems a more obvious way than telling 4 blokes on a footy forum to spread the word of me innocence  and hoping theyre reyt convincing.

Edited June 25, 2018 by DEH9

[Mr Farrell]

Just now, Hillsborough Mole said:

 

Has anybody really 'put the boot into Chansiri' on this?

 

I can't see much evidence of it (if at all).  If anything I think this whole thread has been more sympathetic to his naivity, which looks to have cost him.

 

Agree, although I worry more about the ego and petulance than naivity.

 

Banning players from playing when you dont get your own way is crazy isn't it ?

[cowl]

1 minute ago, Daizan10 said:

I think he has the right motives. Its just the latest in a line of silly mistakes. Kat Mierre seems to have put halt to a lot of the ones we made this time last year. Hopefully the GH saga is the last one we have to see. 

 

Generally, I'd agree in respect of DC's motives - i.e. he's determined for this club to succeed.

 

I'm far less convinced of the purity of his motives in relation to Hirst though. It's hard to shake the feeling that his approach to Hirst during August last year had been almost entirely emotional.

[BIG D]

13 minutes ago, KivoOwl said:

Amazing that so many Wednesday fans are siding with Chansiri over the Hirst family without hearing the latter's side of the story. David deserves more respect than that.

 

Fact is, the first contract offer to George was rejected, and he was immediately frozen out of the picture - no new offer, no negotiation, no training with the first team, no matches with the U23s. How would you advise your son if a club did that to him after the first round of contract talks? You'd want him out of there ASAP.

 

Same happened with Thorniley, same happened with Clare. It is no coincidence that Clare has followed Hirst out the door - they don't want to stay at a club that is so unprofessional. Clare's departure in particular was not at all financially motivated.

Until the club learns how to keep hold of its best young prospects it will keep losing them.

[Guest Hillsborough Mole]

1 minute ago, DEH9 said:

 

Yeah.

 

I keep being told I don't know the truth. 

I keep being told not to belive the Chairman's version.

 

Really? Where??

 

I can't see anybody saying that you shouldn't believe the Chairmans version at all? 

 

I'm beginning to smell an agenda - you've been a member of this site since 11/Sep/2012 - a total of 2103 days. In all of that time you've contributed 780 posts - around 1 every 3 days on average (But only 8 posts in total since 11/Sept 2017)

 

Since the news came out on Friday youve posted 175 times on the matter - most of them slating David & George - and yet your username would suggest that he's some kind of hero of yours. And you're prepared to write off all of that? Based on what??

 

I'm sorry if I'm barking up the wrong tree. I just find it weird that you've appeared and been by far the most prolific poster on the subject.

 

Anyway. welcome to Owlstalk

[londonowl]

7 minutes ago, Hillsborough Mole said:

 

Has anybody really 'put the boot into Chansiri' on this?

 

I can't see much evidence of it (if at all).  If anything I think this whole thread has been more sympathetic to his naivity, which looks to have cost him.

I guess we see things differently. I think the chairman is getting a pretty rough time. He may well deserve it but I don't have any facts so can't say.

[Daizan10]

5 minutes ago, cowl said:

 

Generally, I'd agree in respect of DC's motives - i.e. he's determined for this club to succeed.

 

I'm far less convinced of the purity of his motives in relation to Hirst though. It's hard to shake the feeling that his approach to Hirst during August last year had been almost entirely emotional.

Yeah, he does seem to have got too involved. Like he did when he offered season ticket refunds. He cares too much is what i would say. Definately needs to stop listening to the fans - buying Rhodes and offering refunds: fans don't know what they want. 

Edited June 25, 2018 by Daizan10

[vulva]

14 minutes ago, KivoOwl said:

Amazing that so many Wednesday fans are siding with Chansiri over the Hirst family without hearing the latter's side of the story. David deserves more respect than that.

 

Fact is, the first contract offer to George was rejected, and he was immediately frozen out of the picture - no new offer, no negotiation, no training with the first team, no matches with the U23s. How would you advise your son if a club did that to him after the first round of contract talks? You'd want him out of there ASAP.

 

Same happened with Thorniley, same happened with Clare. It is no coincidence that Clare has followed Hirst out the door - they don't want to stay at a club that is so unprofessional. Clare's departure in particular was not at all financially motivated.

Until the club learns how to keep hold of its best young prospects it will keep losing them.

No interest in any of that. All rumours from oddballs that hang around the training ground. Players are mercenaries, and if you want loyalty buy a dog. 

 

What I'm interested in how Leicester have acted in this. Having our pants pulled down is just business, but this is far more than that. Absolutely stinks, and the SWFC/Hirst issue should not stop them acting in a proper manner. The FA simply have to get involved here, and can not stand by and allow the Premier League clubs make an utter mockery of the rules. That's the main story here, not players, agents or parents. Couldn't give a rats ass about that lot.

 

This city is infested with gobshite ex players, from both sides, who strut around this city, shooting their mouths off. Personally, I wish they'd all **** off back where they came from. 

[Archie irvine]

On 22/06/2018 at 16:30, torres said:

To Nigel Pearson's team

 

Therefore no compo

Yeah so now leister's got him for nowt when they could have got 2 mil for him, tipical Wednesday

[Guest Hillsborough Mole]

2 minutes ago, londonowl said:

I guess we see things differently. I think the chairman is getting a pretty rough time. He may well deserve it but I don't have any facts so can't say.

 

I don't think he deserves it.

 

hes never run a football club in his life, never employed footballers, and dealt with their agents.

 

I reckon theres a whole world of difference between managing the type of ego that goes along with earning £millions a year - and telling a trawler load of fisherman living on the poverty line that they can't return to port until the holds are full of tuna

Edited June 25, 2018 by Hillsborough Mole

[SalisburyOwl]

From the information that we have seen, which has only been from Mr C, George Hirst was offered a substantial contract which was turned down.  The counter offer was totally unrealistic (for reasons unknown) and no negotiations were entered into following from that.  In any other walk of life if that situation arises 3 things can happen; you either get paid off and told to get out, or you're put on gardening leave (which is basically the same as the first option but with payment made over a longer period), or you're told to suck it up and get on with your job.  Mr C chose to put George on gardening leave.  If it wasn't a football club nobody would complain about that approach

[SallyCinnamon]

Worth pointing out it was made very clear to the club that Hirst won't be signing a new deal.

 

To play the devils advocate, why should Wednesday continue to develop George and play him when he has no interest in being at the club? Surely time and effort should be put into those young players who want to be here. 

[londonowl]

2 minutes ago, Hillsborough Mole said:

 

I don't think he deserves it.

 

hes never run a football club in his life, never employed footballers, and dealt with their agents.

 

I reckon theres a whole world of difference between managing the type of ego that goes along with earning £millions a year - and telling a trawler load of fisherman living on the poverty line that they can't return to port until the holds are full of tuna

 

You may be right but DC has never had any active involvement in his family business. Not going to open an old debate but there's no actual evidence that he has had any involvement in any business, except maybe a property company renting property to TUF.

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

2 hours ago, Geoffrey said:

Poor attempt. Getting parachute payments is not bending the rules. There's plenty of teams in the Championship not on parachute payments. Is it morally acceptable for us to try and gain an unfair advantage over them?

We weren't screwed out of a fee. We turned down several bids before the petty training embargo and he might never play for Leicester.

 

If a chairman has the money to invest in their club and is happy do so without racking up debts, I don't see why they should be prevented from doing so. I have no problem with our chairman finding another way to invest the money which the current rules prevent him from doing by other means.

 

On your second point: maybe you're right and Hirst's move to a second division Belgian side who share an owner with Leicester City has nothing whatsoever to with Leicester City.

 

To me, it looks like a way for them to avoid paying what would normally be paid to the club who developed him and invested time, money and energy into the early years of his footballing development, and it sets a dangerous precedent which may see lower division clubs falling victim to this kind of practice more often.

 

Banning Hirst from playing may seem petty, but if he'd told the chairman he wouldn't be staying with the club beyond this season, I can understand the logic of giving the nod to players who may have a future here ahead of one who's already decided he'll be leaving no matter what.

[Guest Hillsborough Mole]

Just now, londonowl said:

 

You may be right but DC has never had any active involvement in his family business. Not going to open an old debate but there's no actual evidence that he has had any involvement in any business, except maybe a property company renting property to TUF.

 

Yes, agreed, I was using the example figuratively

[Guest Hillsborough Mole]

1 minute ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

 

Banning Hirst from playing may seem petty, but if he'd told the chairman he wouldn't be staying with the club beyond this season, I can understand the logic of giving the nod to players who may have a future here ahead of one who's already decided he'll be leaving no matter what.

Like Sean Clare?

[cowl]

1 minute ago, SallyCinnamon said:

Worth pointing out it was made very clear to the club that Hirst won't be signing a new deal.

 

To play the devils advocate, why should Wednesday continue to develop George and play him when he has no interest in being at the club? Surely time and effort should be put into those young players who want to be here. 

 

If that was actually DC's view, then why on earth didn't he sell him to Leicester?