Sam Hutchinson

[Tyto Alba]

1 hour ago, billyblack said:

That is continuity. Constantly getting hammered.

 

Good point.

[@owlstalk]

 

and no breach of contract 

 

what a surprise 

[toppOwl]

20 minutes ago, the mighty wednesday said:

Did Tommy Miller get dropped under Megson to avoid a contract extension? If I'm right I think Tommy Miller himself said that it was annoying but understandable on the club's part.

 

If I remember the Miller situation he’d played regularly under Irving, Megson talked to him about a new contract then had a change of heart and released him, not the same thing really.

[the mighty wednesday]

8 minutes ago, kristmace said:

 

Yep. He played 19 games that season then was dropped as 20 would have triggered an extension. 

 

I think he waived that clause in his contract os he could keep playing as he played 41 that year and then we released him. 

Now you say it that does ring a bell. Good attitude.

[toppOwl]

11 minutes ago, kristmace said:

 

Yep. He played 19 games that season then was dropped as 20 would have triggered an extension. 

 

I think he waived that clause in his contract os he could keep playing as he played 41 that year and then we released him. 

 

He played 34 in the last season he was there, don't let facts spoil a conspiracy though.

[billyblack]

25 minutes ago, toppOwl said:

 

If I remember the Miller situation he’d played regularly under Irving, Megson talked to him about a new contract then had a change of heart and released him, not the same thing really.

He wanted him to stay but couldnt afford it i seem to recall

[0114]

1 hour ago, toppOwl said:

 

At the time he'd made a random amount of appearances (something like 118) as soon as JL got the the Spanish archer he was back in, for a player to be playing regularly and then dropped near to a number of games that triggered a clause would definitely be a breach.

 

I've been through this a 1000 times before.

I know so I’m agreeing it was a rumour but it did have some substance as Westwood himself confirmed the manager told him it was financial. 
 

As for the breach of contract. That’s an absolute load of rubbish. Go look at Stewart Downing last year. Middlesbrough couldn’t play him in one more game because his contract would improve and they couldn’t afford it. In the end he had to sign another deal agreeing that he could play till the end of the season without activating the one year extension. So why on earth you believe that’s breach of contract I have absolutely no idea.

[alanharper]

2 hours ago, 0114 said:

Kieran Westwood was the rumour last year. When interviewed after Jos left he said himself when he spoke to Jos he said it was a financial decision but when he spoke to Chansiri he said it was not. Lot of mixed messages. Not saying that’s what’s happened but its not unrealistic, these things are quite common in contracts. 

 

Yes that must be it. Jos froze them out for financial reasons,  yet as soon as he got sacked they came back into the side and were virtually ever presents for the rest of the season. 

[cowl]

A clause in Hutchinson's contract that would trigger an extra year if he made a certain number of appearances is plausible, but I highly doubt it would be as low as 25.

 

I mean, given that when he's not been excluded or serving a suspension, the only other reason he wouldn't play is due to injury - so in a 50 game season, and also Hutchinson's history with injuries, that the threshold be only half the games seems very odd.

 

Maybe I'm giving the club too much credit in assuming they wouldn't agree to such a contract clause with a player with Hutchinson's injury record?

[Guest Grez Bez]

1 hour ago, toppOwl said:

 

He played 34 in the last season he was there, don't let facts spoil a conspiracy though.

 

You should watch this

 

 

[0114]

28 minutes ago, alanharper said:

 

Yes that must be it. Jos froze them out for financial reasons,  yet as soon as he got sacked they came back into the side and were virtually ever presents for the rest of the season. 

If you read further up rather than piping up half way and half informed you’ll know I agreed it was rumour from last year.
 

I just point out the rumour didn’t come from thin air as even Kieran Westwood in an interview stated when he asked Jos why he wasn’t playing he said it was financial. 

 

Obviously a lot of mixed messages at the time. You rightly point out something that had already pointed out and that I had agreed clearly wasn’t true.

[kristmace]

2 hours ago, toppOwl said:

 

He played 34 in the last season he was there, don't let facts spoil a conspiracy though.

 

Yep, 34 league games, 41 overall. 

 

Megson came out publicly and said why he wasn't picking him - Miller didn't play for about a month before he waived the clause. 

Miller has spoken about this publicly too... hardly a conspiracy. 

[toppOwl]

1 hour ago, Grez Bez said:

 

You should watch this

 

 

Not at over two hours I shouldn’t.

[toppOwl]

Ok folks I’ll hold my hand up and admit I was wrong, because this happened to one player from a time when we didn’t have a pot to urinate in it must mean that Hutch and Westwood have automatic clauses in their contracts that kick in after a totally random number of games (they probably draw it out of a hat) these same clauses then get dropped once a new manager is appointed and other long serving players who are regulars like Bannan, Nuihu, Palmer don’t have this magical clause in theirs at all.

 

We can’t be right all the time

[HOOTIE AND THE SHIT TU]

Under Jos

 

Two players claim they couldn't train in the week because of injury

 

Same two players declare themselves fit for games

 

Jos decides its not good for moral if he lets players pick and choose when they train/play, so he refuses to pick players

 

Rest of squad throw toys out because they can see their cushy lifestyle being threatened

 

Wednesdayites blame manager, club sack manager

 

Under Monk

 

Two players claim they couldn't train in the week because of injury

 

Same two players declare themselves fit for games

 

Monk decides its not good for moral if he lets players pick and choose when they train/play, so he refuses to pick players

 

Rest of squad throw toys out because they can see their cushy lifestyle being threatened

 

Wednesdayites blame manager, club sack manager

 

Repeat infinitum

 

 

 

 

[DJMortimer]

24 minutes ago, toppOwl said:

Ok folks I’ll hold my hand up and admit I was wrong, because this happened to one player from a time when we didn’t have a pot to urinate in it must mean that Hutch and Westwood have automatic clauses in their contracts that kick in after a totally random number of games (they probably draw it out of a hat) these same clauses then get dropped once a new manager is appointed and other long serving players who are regulars like Bannan, Nuihu, Palmer don’t have this magical clause in theirs at all.

 

We can’t be right all the time

 

These days it seems that being strident and aggressive is much more important than being accurate.

 

I have no insider knowledge at all, but I've always assumed that it was not uncommon to have clauses of that nature in a player's contract. Reading between the lines of them suddenly not playing in the first team on occasion does nothing to dispel that notion.

 

3 hours ago, the mighty wednesday said:

Did Tommy Miller get dropped under Megson to avoid a contract extension? If I'm right I think Tommy Miller himself said that it was annoying but understandable on the club's part.

 

I seem to recall Craig Armstrong being in that situation; although he made it easier by being crap anyway. Given the reputation of football, especially at the higher levels, I'd expect that such clauses were no less likely among big earners. Remember the way Wim Jonk ended his Wednesday career?

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, HOOTIE AND THE poo TU said:

Under Jos

 

Two players claim they couldn't train in the week because of injury

 

Same two players declare themselves fit for games

 

Jos decides its not good for moral if he lets players pick and choose when they train/play, so he refuses to pick players

 

Rest of squad throw toys out because they can see their cushy lifestyle being threatened

 

Wednesdayites blame manager, club sack manager

 

Under Monk

 

Two players claim they couldn't train in the week because of injury

 

Same two players declare themselves fit for games

 

Monk decides its not good for moral if he lets players pick and choose when they train/play, so he refuses to pick players

 

Rest of squad throw toys out because they can see their cushy lifestyle being threatened

 

Wednesdayites blame manager, club sack manager

 

Repeat infinitum

 

 

 

 

 

Why doesn't Monk drop these players who have chucked the toys out of the pram then?

 

It can't be all of them as many were not around under Jos - Borner, Iorfa, Harris, Murphy, Wickham, Da Cruz, Windass....

 

Pelupessy, Wildsmith and Dawson  are not likely to have thrown their toys out on this basis either are they? Monk has rightly been rightly full of praise for Fletcher and his work ethic so it can't be him either.

 

Doesn't leave many does it so why doesn't Monk just drop those who you reckon are acting like this for this reason? Results and performances wouldn't be any worse if he picked a few kids.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

 

These days it seems that being strident and aggressive is much more important than being accurate.

 

I have no insider knowledge at all, but I've always assumed that it was not uncommon to have clauses of that nature in a player's contract. Reading between the lines of them suddenly not playing in the first team on occasion does nothing to dispel that notion.

 

 

I seem to recall Craig Armstrong being in that situation; although he made it easier by being crap anyway. Given the reputation of football, especially at the higher levels, I'd expect that such clauses were no less likely among big earners. Remember the way Wim Jonk ended his Wednesday career?

 

The fact Craig Armstrong got anywhere near playing enough games to earn a contract extension tells you all you need to know about how bad things were at that time!

 

Do you think that Jos didn't pick Hutchinson and/or Westwood purely because he was told not to for contract reasons but then caretaker manager Lee Bullen was allowed to select who he wanted regardless of any contractual triggers? 

[DJMortimer]

Just now, hirstyboywonder said:

 

Do you think that Jos didn't pick Hutchinson and/or Westwood purely because he was told not to for contract reasons but then caretaker manager Lee Bullen was allowed to select who he wanted regardless of any contractual triggers? 

 

I still wonder if Luhukay was the sacrificial lamb for the chairman to try and start addressing the looming danger of the league's financial regulations. Maybe he was hoping some of the higher earners could be encouraged to seek a move? When it became clear this wasn't working the manager takes the blame and they can reverse course without too much pride being lost.

 

Speculative? Of course, but it is at least within the realms of possibility and made more sense than almost the entire first team being injured for three months.

[handworth52]

5 hours ago, SiJ said:

I just dont believe what Dom has put.

 

It runs contrary to what I was told by a club employee and it makes zero sense.

 

He's going to completely isolate a player because of a historical injury record, whilst persisting with Pelepussy cat who is utterly woeful. Our form is 2 wins in 15?

 

Either Monk/club are lying or he is a complete moron. Perhaps a bit of column a and column b. 

if giddings or anyone else is doing there jobs properly when they see monk on thurs or Friday need to get a proper answer . either monk answers properly or instead of 50% against him it will be 100% . has Hutchinson left the club? if he has why have you made that decision or has chansiri made it ? and why do you play pelepessy who has got to be the worst player ever to play in our midfield.