Guardian - George & David Hirst

[Bluesteel]

38 minutes ago, Kameron said:

Serves us right for turning down the original offer.

 

No it doesn’t, we should be able to fall back on compensation regardless. Not suffer by some manipulated bridge transfer.

 

Leciester can easily get their man and pay their way. The rich really shouldn’t be going out their way to shaft those less fortunate and the rules need to change.

[Bluesteel]

29 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:

I bet George and his dad have their reasons for being annoyed with the chairman and the club.

 

But what hurts me the most about all of it is that they have mugged the fans of in the process. Without the fans Wednesday are nothing. It's the fans who idolised David, he means so much to so many families and his name is passed on from generation to generation. It's the fans who wanted nothing more than George to succeed in a Wednesday shirt.

 

The way they've gone about it is to stick two fingers up at the chairman. But by doing so they've also disrespected thousands of people who once worshipped their family name. 

 

Thats the crux of it and in my view they couldve moved George anyway and won their “victory” without resorting to it.

 

Funnily enough he’d have probably been on the bench yesterday as would Clare.

Edited August 12, 2018 by Bluesteel

[Quist]

Well the FA could always refuse to register him. They are applying arbitary rules to us at the moment and we have not tried to do down any other club. Rule could easily be passed before next transfer window and it should not be just compensation but severe penalty as well.

[Stevelknievel]

9 minutes ago, Quist said:

Well the FA could always refuse to register him. They are applying arbitary rules to us at the moment and we have not tried to do down any other club. Rule could easily be passed before next transfer window and it should not be just compensation but severe penalty as well.

Wouldn’t it be the premier league that would register him, like the EFL do for us? 

 

If so there lies the issue, the Premier League don’t care one bit for anyone outside their league and in fact seem more likely to protect them. They have shown that with the TV money. 

 

Unfortunately, the FA are too weak and the Premier League have all the power. 

Edited August 12, 2018 by Stevelknievel

[Guest Willow Owl]

23 minutes ago, BIG D said:

Geoff Sheard?

He's on neg patrol as well Big D. 

 

[BIG D]

1 minute ago, Willow Owl said:

He's on neg patrol as well Big D. 

 

Nowt new there 

 

 

[Costello 77]

Why did Michael Jackson say shumown?

[sherlyegg]

7 minutes ago, KivoOwl said:

Hirst rejected the first offer, was then frozen out instead of being given a counter offer, him and his advisors decided they didn't want to stay at at a club that world treat him that way (exact same with Clare) and they've stuck the boot in with this move. 

 

Serves the club right. 

 

Can't agree with that Kivo. BTW I ain't a DC fan.

We did make a counter offer.

The chairman made a second offer in keeping with all other fringe players. Hirst, Doyen rejected it. So what if the chairman had given in? all other young players would want likewise.

Our wage bill is out of control as it is. We moan like fooook about some players at the club on huge wages and can't get rid, even though at the time of signing, looked good buys. Yet some are advocating give an untested what he wants.

Be very unwise to break the youth wage structure IMHO. Which incidentally is one of the best in the league.

We ain't Man.U et al.

He may go on to be worth £75M in just a couple of short years or he might end up at Notts County...who knows

 

[dorian gray]

29 minutes ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

No it doesn't.

 

Football clubs turn down offers for young players all the time; that doesn't mean they then deserve to be screwed out of the usual compensation by a Premier League club using a loophole to avoid paying a fair price.

it's smart business by leicester and not so smart by us, i don't want to see another loophole closed after we've been shafted yet again under the old rules, remember we were one of the NON parachute payment clubs, something that has been dragging this club down for almost two decades now, and **** knows how much longer? whilst now clubs are relegated with a king's ransom to spend. 

not many relegated clubs from the premier who didn't get parachute money survived without going into administration, some went into administration who'd had parachute money, whilst we've towed our ballacks off.

[Quist]

5 minutes ago, Stevelknievel said:

Wouldn’t it be the premier league that would register him, like the EFL do for us? 

 

If so there lies the issue, the Premier League don’t care one bit for anyone outside their league and in fact seem more likely to protect them. They have shown that with the TV money. 

 

Unfortunately, the FA are too weak and the Premier League have all the power. 

I do not know FA have overall control of Football and I would think Premier League teams should be embarrased by such shoddy tactics.

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

Just now, dnhc said:

it's smart business by leicester and not so smart by us, i don't want to see another loophole closed after we've been shafted yet again under the old rules, remember we were one of the NON parachute payment clubs, something that has been dragging this club down for almost two decades now, and **** knows how much longer? whilst now clubs are relegated with a king's ransom to spend. 

not many relegated clubs from the premier who didn't get parachute money survived without going into administration, some went into administration who'd had parachute money, whilst we've towed our ballacks off.

 

I can understand that point of view, but for the good of the game - particularly those smaller clubs who are most vulnerable to this sort of practice - I'd rather see the loophole closed.

 

It's plain wrong that Premier League clubs with the resources to game the system are being allowed to screw lower league clubs out of fair compensation for their academy players.

[dorian gray]

3 minutes ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

I can understand that point of view, but for the good of the game - particularly those smaller clubs who are most vulnerable to this sort of practice - I'd rather see the loophole closed.

 

It's plain wrong that Premier League clubs with the resources to game the system are being allowed to screw lower league clubs out of fair compensation for their academy players.

i agree, but i'm sick of trapdoors being nailed shut after we've fallen through them, as a club i think it's taken for granted we're a 'soft touch', and have been for decades.

[KivoOwl]

38 minutes ago, Willow Owl said:

Didnt happen that way though did it. We made several offers, one making him the highest paid academy player. Leicester found a loophole in the system and the H... T family and advisors used it to rip off the club. This had been done to death, but some will always believe it was the clubs fault despite the evidence. Get over it and move on. 

What evidence? The club's statements? 

[poite]

Personally I just don't really see what the problem is. 

 

We had a young player who looked promising but he made it very clear he didnt want to progress his career here. 

 

Leicester came in and offered us 2m for him and because we have a idiot in charge of the club he turned it down. After a few honest bids and no  success Leicester decide to wait until they can get him via another route becuse we were so stubborn over a player who didn't want to be at swfc. 

 

Leicester haven't done anything wrong in my opinion. They tried to do it the right way and we wouldn't let it. 

 

Chansiri yet again showing what an awful owner and businessman he really is by giving up 2m through stubbornness and ending up with nothing. 

 

 

Edited August 12, 2018 by poite

[Sonny]

1 minute ago, KivoOwl said:

What evidence? The club's statements? 

 

Where’s your evidence then?

[Bannofan]

2 minutes ago, Sonny said:

 

Where’s your evidence then?

 

You'll not get any, because Kivo acts like a 14 year old hormonal girl when it comes to academy players and his 'evidence' is probably  a few muttered words from Hirst Jnr as he desperately tries to avoid him. 

 

The whole situation is an example of player and family greed, coupled with a clear flouting of a loophole by Leicester. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, KivoOwl said:

Hirst rejected the first offer, was then frozen out instead of being given a counter offer, him and his advisors decided they didn't want to stay at at a club that world treat him that way (exact same with Clare) and they've stuck the boot in with this move. 

 

Serves the club right. 

 

Well, glad it's worked out for him. Do you think his career will be better served by spending however long it may be in the Belgian 2nd division? Least they stuck to Wednesday though eh!

[Guest Willow Owl]

15 minutes ago, poite said:

Personally I just don't really see what the problem is. 

 

We had a young player who looked promising but he made it very clear he didnt want to progress his career here. 

 

Leicester came in and offered us 2m for him and because we have a idiot in charge of the club he turned it down. After a few honest bids and no  success Leicester decide to wait until they can get him via another route becuse we were so stubborn over a player who didn't want to be at swfc. 

 

Leicester haven't done anything wrong in my opinion. They tried to do it the right way and we wouldn't let it. 

 

Chansiri yet again showing what an awful owner and businessman he really is by giving up 2m through stubbornness and ending up with nothing. 

 

 

He rejected the 2million as he is entitled to. He also believed the system and compensation would amount to more than that or H...T would sign a new deal. In the meantime Leicester found a loophole and they expoited it. He was never going to sign after that. Happened to Man Utd as well, are they also run by idiots? 

[owlmanc]

Hirst and Hirst must have had their reasons I doubt it was down to pure greed. We have seen how Chansiri has behaved in other areas. I guess there is two very different sides to it all. 

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

20 minutes ago, poite said:

Personally I just don't really see what the problem is. 

 

We had a young player who looked promising but he made it very clear he didnt want to progress his career here. 

 

Leicester came in and offered us 2m for him and because we have a idiot in charge of the club he turned it down. After a few honest bids and no  success Leicester decide to wait until they can get him via another route becuse we were so stubborn over a player who didn't want to be at swfc. 

 

Leicester haven't done anything wrong in my opinion. They tried to do it the right way and we wouldn't let it. 

 

Chansiri yet again showing what an awful owner and businessman he really is by giving up 2m through stubbornness and ending up with nothing. 

 

 

Wouldn't doing it the right way have been for Leicester to have signed George Hirst and paid the compensation due to Wednesday - like usually happens in signings involving academy players?

 

What they've done may be legal, but to quote Alex Ferguson from the original article, it's a “blatant manipulation of the system”, and it seems morally repugnant to me.