Jump to content

Contract it is.......


Recommended Posts

On 09/11/2018 at 19:38, RUMBELOWS91 said:

Which tells us Jos is a puppet.

Or he doesn't want to be burdened with Westwood's wages limiting future transfer opportunities

Put it this way, if I was contracted as a football manager for two years, and I had a player on my book who I wasn't 100% about and his wages would pay for two new players I could use to improve the squad, and the current contract arrangements dictate that if I don't play him he leaves after Year One but if I do he stays for the full two years... I wouldn't play the bloke. 

 

You're calling Jos a puppet, but if this news about the appearances resulting in a renewed contract are true, then the fact is this: Unless not playing Westwood results in our relegation, not playing him so we get him off the wage bill sooner is better for our long-term sustainability. That isn't a subjective opinion, that's just objective fact. 

 

After years of going for the short-term high-risk option (which ultimately has failed), you're now calling the man who is finally forward-thinking and considering the medium and long-term picture by taking a more sustainable approach a puppet? The mind boggles. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

Or he doesn't want to be burdened with Westwood's wages limiting future transfer opportunities

Put it this way, if I was contracted as a football manager for two years, and I had a player on my book who I wasn't 100% about and his wages would pay for two new players I could use to improve the squad, and the current contract arrangements dictate that if I don't play him he leaves after Year One but if I do he stays for the full two years... I wouldn't play the bloke. 

 

You're calling Jos a puppet, but if this news about the appearances resulting in a renewed contract are true, then the fact is this: Unless not playing Westwood results in our relegation, not playing him so we get him off the wage bill sooner is better for our long-term sustainability. That isn't a subjective opinion, that's just objective fact. 

 

After years of going for the short-term high-risk option (which ultimately has failed), you're now calling the man who is finally forward-thinking and considering the medium and long-term picture by taking a more sustainable approach a puppet? The mind boggles. 

So instead of making excuses and lying why cant he just tell us the truth that he sees no future with westwood and if we play him it will trigger another contract that we cant afford ?

His credibility would shoot up...maybe there is more to it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, gypsyowl said:

Not sure what people’s problem with hinchcliffe is, everything he said is true, truth hurts 

Spot on.

I mentioned in another thread peoples hang ups with how he was here over 20 years ago is pathetic really.

He spoke a lot of sense the other night for me .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TaxiMark said:

So instead of making excuses and lying why cant he just tell us the truth that he sees no future with westwood and if we play him it will trigger another contract that we cant afford ?

His credibility would shoot up...maybe there is more to it?

I'm not sure it would be appropriate for our manager to be discussing the various contract clauses our players have. Perhaps one of the local journalists should ask for the details about Penney's new contract, the weekly wage, whether there's an appearance bonus and if so what the exact figure is etc. This sorta stuff normally doesn't get divulged. A contract is, almost universally, a private matter between club and player (and agent). Sharing this information, especially having that information shared by a manager that wasn't involved in any way in the contract negotiations, would be awfully unprofessional. 

 

Ya know, I will concede Jos could simply be a puppet and doing what he's told and there could be more to it. But I've also got to concede that if the appearance-based extension clause is true and I wasn't personally sure of a player, I wouldn't play him irregardless of what my chairman told me. If the chairman's interests coincide with mine, well then even better.

And considering Jos left a job because he was tired of interference from his chairman, I think it's strange to automatically call him a puppet when, as I say, it's objectively a sustainable thing to do (unless it leads to our relegation...).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

I'm not sure it would be appropriate for our manager to be discussing the various contract clauses our players have. Perhaps one of the local journalists should ask for the details about Penney's new contract, the weekly wage, whether there's an appearance bonus and if so what the exact figure is etc. This sorta stuff normally doesn't get divulged. A contract is, almost universally, a private matter between club and player (and agent). Sharing this information, especially having that information shared by a manager that wasn't involved in any way in the contract negotiations, would be awfully unprofessional.

Na...he doesnt have to go into detail or tell us about every other players terms etc but seeing as everyone is talking about such a senior decent player has been left out to rot then personally I feel the fans have a right to know seeing as weve stumped up 700 quid for a ST?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like a form of constructive dismissal to me - I would ponder the legalities if I was Westwood (of course taking into consideration whether or not it's actually true).

 

More concerning would be what kind of numpty would agree such a contract clause that would kick in years down the line? I guess football's a law in to itself. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Grez Bez
On 09/11/2018 at 19:38, RUMBELOWS91 said:

Which tells us Jos is a puppet.

 

He's just doing what his boss tells him as does everyone in the world.

 

A manager only looks after team selection nowadays, it's not the 70's. The structure is that of a Business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TaxiMark said:

Na...he doesnt have to go into detail or tell us about every other players terms etc but seeing as everyone is talking about such a senior decent player has been left out to rot then personally I feel the fans have a right to know seeing as weve stumped up 700 quid for a ST?

Can't and won't argue with that. 

Though this is coming from the same administration that didn't tell fans about a transfer embargo until, what, 6 months after season tickets went on sale? 

 

I think Jos is trying to maintain professional, and the main issues run much deeper and higher up than he. I can understand the frustrations from all, but I still think it's unfair and unfounded to call him a puppet. I just haven't seen any evidence to suggest he is that isn't as easily explained by him trying to be professional and keeping things "in-house" as it were. A great deal of assumed malice... and there has been since day one. I think it's an occupational hazard. Unknown foreign manager... oh he must be a puppet. If it were Dingle Mick or Big Sam there wouldn't be any of that because of their rep. Never mind that Jos' rep on the continent is similar to that of Mick and Sam. Anyway, this is getting incoherent... point is, I'm (perhaps unwisely) giving Jos the benefit of the doubt until I see actual evidence of his puppetry. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

Can't and won't argue with that. 

Though this is coming from the same administration that didn't tell fans about a transfer embargo until, what, 6 months after season tickets went on sale? 

 

I think Jos is trying to maintain professional, and the main issues run much deeper and higher up than he. I can understand the frustrations from all, but I still think it's unfair and unfounded to call him a puppet. I just haven't seen any evidence to suggest he is that isn't as easily explained by him trying to be professional and keeping things "in-house" as it were. A great deal of assumed malice... and there has been since day one. I think it's an occupational hazard. Unknown foreign manager... oh he must be a puppet. If it were Dingle Mick or Big Sam there wouldn't be any of that because of their rep. Never mind that Jos' rep on the continent is similar to that of Mick and Sam. Anyway, this is getting incoherent... point is, I'm (perhaps unwisely) giving Jos the benefit of the doubt until I see actual evidence of his puppetry. 

Good points raised as ever but dont you think he could've stopped this now huge snow ball by just being honest and brief by just stating there is a contractual issue rather then just make excuses ?

Jos being professional as you say has just come back to create a huge disruption from the fans and media.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would Michael Brown and Sky know this yet none of our local media do? 

 

All a bit bizarre really. Sky generally get their information from other journos. And I don’t think any of them have said anything about this? 

 

To be fair, the Westwood contract thing makes sense. But let’s not jump to conclusions, perhaps Jos has the choice to play him if he wants to (but would have to keep him for another couple of years?). I wouldn’t be shocked either way, but folk need to step back and realise they haven’t a flippin clue what’s actually going on behind the scenes. 

 

By the way - would anyone be happy for Westwood to get another contract if this supposed clause was triggered? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, StudentOwl said:

Or he doesn't want to be burdened with Westwood's wages limiting future transfer opportunities

Put it this way, if I was contracted as a football manager for two years, and I had a player on my book who I wasn't 100% about and his wages would pay for two new players I could use to improve the squad, and the current contract arrangements dictate that if I don't play him he leaves after Year One but if I do he stays for the full two years... I wouldn't play the bloke. 

 

You're calling Jos a puppet, but if this news about the appearances resulting in a renewed contract are true, then the fact is this: Unless not playing Westwood results in our relegation, not playing him so we get him off the wage bill sooner is better for our long-term sustainability. That isn't a subjective opinion, that's just objective fact. 

 

After years of going for the short-term high-risk option (which ultimately has failed), you're now calling the man who is finally forward-thinking and considering the medium and long-term picture by taking a more sustainable approach a puppet? The mind boggles. 

I'm calling him a puppet because he should just come out and tell how it is if it's contractual and not say he's  injured or suddenly the third best keeper at the club.

 

Edited by RUMBELOWS91
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LSOwls said:

 

He's just doing what his boss tells him as does everyone in the world.

 

A manager only looks after team selection nowadays, it's not the 70's. The structure is that of a Business.

Spinning a yarn about injuries is not just looking after team selection.

 

This is why we've had 2 appointments of managers we've never heard of who have no experience in the division imo- because others wouldn't be prepared to push such rubbish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RUMBELOWS91 said:

I'm calling him a puppet because he should just come out and tell how it is if it's contractual and not saying  injured or suddenly the third best keeper at the club.

 

Brown has said on national TV that it's a contract issue... although there were a few on here who'd sussed it.

We're not much better off for knowing really are we?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 09/11/2018 at 19:38, RUMBELOWS91 said:

Which tells us Jos is a puppet.

we are all puppets to some extent IF we work for someone.

if what's been said is true, then i can understand the club NOT releasing it, as it shows how much 'up to the hilt we are'.

with a vital transfer window up and coming, we don't need the world to know we haven't an inch of room for manoeuvre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Costello 77 said:

Brown has said on national TV that it's a contract issue... although there were a few on here who'd sussed it.

We're not much better off for knowing really are we?

I think we're worse off now it's come out like this.

 

The Chairman pretty much shouted me down at the fans forum (as did quite a few others in attendance) when I asked him the question.

 

Doesn't do much for anyone's credibility if it turns out (some) of the rumours that were flatly denied were true all along.

Edited by RUMBELOWS91
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dnhc said:

we are all puppets to some extent IF we work for someone.

if what's been said is true, then i can understand the club NOT releasing it, as it shows how much 'up to the hilt we are'.

with a vital transfer window up and coming, we don't need the world to know we haven't an inch of room for manoeuvre.

If Michael Brown knows them I'm pretty sure it's common knowledge within the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RUMBELOWS91 said:

I think we're worse off now it's come out like this.

 

The Chairman pretty much shouted me down at the fans forum (as did quite a few others in attendance) when I asked him the question.

 

Doesn't do much for anyone's credibility if it turns out (some) of the rumours that we're flatly denied were true all along.

I can see your point.. put like that.

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...