Jump to content

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, Inspector Lestrade said:

Yeah right

It’s true. Rhodes has been capable of scoring in every match but was only allowed to score against Forest. 
 

In fact, the reason he was dropped this season was because he scored without permission. Chansiri was livid and that’s why Monk was sacked. 

  • Haha 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

In the last season and a quarter, he's made 11+17 appearances. Obviously a long way from being ever present, but hardly indicative of someone not being played because of such clauses. Maybe the reason he hasn't featured much is a lot more straightforward and is also consistent with much of the last five years despite being at three clubs under several managers?

 

As for 'hitting form', either side of the City Ground miracle, Rhodes' form for Wednesday (between 30th December 2017 and the present day) is 19+21 appearances and 2 goals.

 

Hat tricks don’t count 😃😃😂

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Emilianenko said:

Hat tricks don’t count 😃😃😂

 

Go on then, add it fanboy if it makes you happier. His record for us in the last three years then 'improves' to 20+21 appearances and 5 goals.

 


 

  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, SolihullOwl79 said:

I believe there is a clause in his contract related to appearances and goals scored. 

 

If he goes past either figure then a sum of money has to be paid to Boro and it's not peanuts. 

 

This is why Monk didn't play him. 

If the appearance bit was true then it makes even more sense to bring him on to amble about for 5 minutes like we do if it’s going to cost a couple of mill. He’s also only played 71 games in that time. Why would there be a clause that says he only needs to play less than half the games available during his contract for more money to be due. That doesn’t make sense

 

Likewise with the goal one, it was a 4 year contract. You‘d assume any trigger would be at least 50 goals if not more. He’s scored 12 for us so can’t see him triggering anything to do with that.

 

So I can’t see it as being relevant 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

 

Go on then, add it fanboy if it makes you happier. His record for us in the last three years then 'improves' to 20+21 appearances and 5 goals.

 


 

Fanboy lol.

Funnier than his hat-tricks not counting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A quick look on wiki, and since he signed a full contract (so not including loan spell) he’s made 53, and scored  9 goals.

 

So unless his contract has had a clause where we have to pay Boro a substantial fee after he scores 10 goals over a 4 year period, you’re obviously talking our your arse.

  • Love 1
  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SolihullOwl79 said:

I believe there is a clause in his contract related to appearances and goals scored. 

 

If he goes past either figure then a sum of money has to be paid to Boro and it's not peanuts. 

 

This is why Monk didn't play him. 

Signed for £10m. With £8m paid upfront and £2m after 6 months. 

 

Only reason £2m was after was due to fact that a buyer for houses he had as part of boro deal needed to be sold. 

 

Believe me. He is not on any type of clause at all. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SolihullOwl79 said:

Lol football manager has a clause of the same in FM21. They do tend to get most contractual issues correct! 

 

And there we have it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, DJMortimer said:

In the last season and a quarter, he's made 11+17 appearances. Obviously a long way from being ever present, but hardly indicative of someone not being played because of such clauses. Maybe the reason he hasn't featured much is a lot more straightforward and is also consistent with much of the last five years despite being at three clubs under several managers?

 

As for 'hitting form', either side of the City Ground miracle, Rhodes' form for Wednesday (between 30th December 2017 and the present day) is 19+21 appearances and 2 goals.

 


We know what you think of Rhodes from your posts in similar threads.

 

Which of the partnerships we’ve seen in the last nine games has impressed you more than the Windass-Rhodes partnership we saw v Cardiff and Watford?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mark1948 said:

I have to play Santa every Christmas because of a Claus in my contract.


Ouch

 

I prefer....

 

Bernie the Brown Nose Reindeer - the one behind Rudolf but his brakes don’t work.

 

and of course...

 

Two snowmen in a garden. One says to the other “Can you smell carrots?”

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, SolihullOwl79 said:

I believe there is a clause in his contract related to appearances and goals scored. 

 

If he goes past either figure then a sum of money has to be paid to Boro and it's not peanuts. 

 

This is why Monk didn't play him. 

If its goals scored it wont be an issue anyway

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, JackSWFC said:

A quick look on wiki, and since he signed a full contract (so not including loan spell) he’s made 53, and scored  9 goals.

 

So unless his contract has had a clause where we have to pay Boro a substantial fee after he scores 10 goals over a 4 year period, you’re obviously talking our your arse.

How do you know he's not got a 20 goal a season clause in his contract? 

 

By limiting him to 10-20 mins per match reduces the possibility of him him getting thst target. When first signed it wasn't a problem with the money being splashed around. Such is the poor foresight of our chairman, he offset the expected future outlay to be afforded from premier TV money. However, such is the financial dire straits now, he cannot afford to pay the agreed clause and therefore he isn't picked. 

 

Same with Westwood. He equalled club record clean sheets in two seasons. Clause in his contract identifying substantial bonus if acheived again. Club finances dictate he cannot be played due to costs. Manager to weak to stand up to this drops him. And Rhodes, Hutch etc. Big Bruce comes in won't stand for it and plays them regardless. He buggers off, Weak Monk comes in and drops them again. 

 

A huge benefit of (hopefully) of Tp is his character will be too strong to tow Chansiri line.

 

We shall see hey! 

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SolihullOwl79 said:

How do you know he's not got a 20 goal a season clause in his contract? 

 

By limiting him to 10-20 mins per match reduces the possibility of him him getting thst target. When first signed it wasn't a problem with the money being splashed around. Such is the poor foresight of our chairman, he offset the expected future outlay to be afforded from premier TV money. However, such is the financial dire straits now, he cannot afford to pay the agreed clause and therefore he isn't picked. 

 

Same with Westwood. He equalled club record clean sheets in two seasons. Clause in his contract identifying substantial bonus if acheived again. Club finances dictate he cannot be played due to costs. Manager to weak to stand up to this drops him. And Rhodes, Hutch etc. Big Bruce comes in won't stand for it and plays them regardless. He buggers off, Weak Monk comes in and drops them again. 

 

A huge benefit of (hopefully) of Tp is his character will be too strong to tow Chansiri line.

 

We shall see hey! 

So DC would rather risk relegation costing millions rather than pay an imaginary bonus ?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t understand the Rhodes thing either. Agreed he’s not pulled up any trees since he’s been here but his movement and positional play looked decent in those early games this season.


There really is no way he should be 5th choice of the options we have, that would be as stupid as playing Reach and Harris on the wrong wings .........

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, the monk said:

So DC would rather risk relegation costing millions rather than pay an imaginary bonus ?

He clearly hasn't got a clue what he's doing, why else have we ended up with 6 point deduction. He gambled everything on the first two seasons under Carlos. Throwing money at it. It was spent badly and now there is no ability to spend similar because we're overspending on wages. There's something like another 12-14 players out of contract in the summer. That's when our wage costs go right down. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DoorDoor said:

scored 3 against forest last season dropped next game, scored opening game this season dropped next game, most of his apperences are from the bench and he still has the best goals to game ratio this season

 

Your post has a couple of errors. He started the next league match following his hat trick against Forest last season. He started the next league match following his goal in the opening game this season. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
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...