Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 12:26:53 GMT
The club have to do what's in their best interests, not the player's. DC has seen Bodin up close for a month and whilst he liked some of what he saw, he hasn't felt the player has shown he is worthy of a year's deal. DC has a budget to adhere to and he doesn't want to use a significant chunk of it on a player who may not offer enough to the first team squad. Very smart management in my book and it is exactly the type of thing we were clamouring for under previous managers. We offered him a short-term deal as that is all he is worth thus far, and Bodin had the option to take it or leave it. To be fair to the player, he has decided to take it (for whatever reason, not our problem that he didn't have any other offers) and must now back himself to play well and earn an extension in November. I hope he does, because he has shown something different to what we already have and has a very good work ethic, but this is a calculated move from the club and exactly how we need to be in the transfer market from now on. Jumping in gung-ho and offering long contracts to the first players we see is a thing of the past thanks to DC, and that is obviously a good thing. I cannot believe that some people still want to moan. 1 year is not a long contract. Neither is it gung ho considering he has been with us for a few weeks on trial.
|
|
|
Post by BishopstonBRFC on Aug 1, 2015 12:31:23 GMT
The club have to do what's in their best interests, not the player's. DC has seen Bodin up close for a month and whilst he liked some of what he saw, he hasn't felt the player has shown he is worthy of a year's deal. DC has a budget to adhere to and he doesn't want to use a significant chunk of it on a player who may not offer enough to the first team squad. Very smart management in my book and it is exactly the type of thing we were clamouring for under previous managers. We offered him a short-term deal as that is all he is worth thus far, and Bodin had the option to take it or leave it. To be fair to the player, he has decided to take it (for whatever reason, not our problem that he didn't have any other offers) and must now back himself to play well and earn an extension in November. I hope he does, because he has shown something different to what we already have and has a very good work ethic, but this is a calculated move from the club and exactly how we need to be in the transfer market from now on. Jumping in gung-ho and offering long contracts to the first players we see is a thing of the past thanks to DC, and that is obviously a good thing. I cannot believe that some people still want to moan. 1 year is not a long contract. Neither is it gung ho considering he has been with us for a few weeks on trial. It is if he breaks down and has an injury after two months. If money's that tight then imo it'd be too much of a risk giving him a year with his recent injury record.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Aug 1, 2015 12:31:35 GMT
Stupid comments how can anybody judge a player against Championship and above teams, let's at least give him a chance, Trotman proved last season some good players can be picked up on ST contracts.
As far as SteveK suggesting we need a loanee to cover LB surely that be madness if he's only out for 2 or 3 games max, when TL can cover. Anyway what player is going to sign for a month at this time of season knowing he's little chance of dislodging LB long term.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 12:32:46 GMT
Good deal for us, can't understand some of the fans moaning! Can't judge a player properly in training or friendlies, this gives us a chance to look at him properly. Plus he will have to give it his all to try and earn a longer deal. For years fans have wanted players to fight for the shirt and when we try and make them, they moan about it! Only risk for us, is he finds form, plays some blinders and then leaves in 3 months for more money elsewhere. Better than signing him for a year and him not making it though. Not moaning, just commenting. People are rather quick to form groups when there is no need. What's the point of a trial then? If judgements can't be made it is a waste of time eh? Like you said he might have a great 3 months then tale off. I don't see the purpose of getting 3 wingers on trial only to offer 3 months to 1 of them? They are all good enough to play for us. They will all play league football unlike monkhouse......
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 12:34:42 GMT
1 year is not a long contract. Neither is it gung ho considering he has been with us for a few weeks on trial. It is if he breaks down and has an injury after two months. If money's that tight then imo it'd be too much of a risk giving him a year with his recent injury record. Could say the same about Sinclair. Nobody has mentioned his injury? Happy that he signed though.
|
|
|
Post by BishopstonBRFC on Aug 1, 2015 12:35:14 GMT
Good deal for us, can't understand some of the fans moaning! Can't judge a player properly in training or friendlies, this gives us a chance to look at him properly. Plus he will have to give it his all to try and earn a longer deal. For years fans have wanted players to fight for the shirt and when we try and make them, they moan about it! Only risk for us, is he finds form, plays some blinders and then leaves in 3 months for more money elsewhere. Better than signing him for a year and him not making it though. Not moaning, just commenting. People are rather quick to form groups when there is no need. What's the point of a trial then? If judgements can't be made it is a waste of time eh? Like you said he might have a great 3 months then tale off. I don't see the purpose of getting 3 wingers on trial only to offer 3 months to 1 of them? They are all good enough to play for us. They will all play league football unlike monkhouse...... If they were all good enough to play for us then wouldn't we have signed more than one? Also, DC offered Monkhouse a deal so to him he was good enough for League football.
|
|
|
Post by Jon the Stripe on Aug 1, 2015 12:35:43 GMT
Seems to me DC doesn't see him as a great addition to the squad but due to our budget we're gonna struggle to get a decent sized squad so we'll sign him short term to boost the body count because frankly we can't afford to attract the type of player we're after at this present time
|
|
|
Post by BishopstonBRFC on Aug 1, 2015 12:36:16 GMT
It is if he breaks down and has an injury after two months. If money's that tight then imo it'd be too much of a risk giving him a year with his recent injury record. Could say the same about Sinclair. Nobody has mentioned his injury? Happy that he signed though. True. But Sinclair is a proven player in a Rovers shirt but Bodin isn't.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 12:46:43 GMT
Could say the same about Sinclair. Nobody has mentioned his injury? Happy that he signed though. True. But Sinclair is a proven player in a Rovers shirt but Bodin isn't. Sinclair is not a proven player in league football, Bodin is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 12:50:01 GMT
Not moaning, just commenting. People are rather quick to form groups when there is no need. What's the point of a trial then? If judgements can't be made it is a waste of time eh? Like you said he might have a great 3 months then tale off. I don't see the purpose of getting 3 wingers on trial only to offer 3 months to 1 of them? They are all good enough to play for us. They will all play league football unlike monkhouse...... If they were all good enough to play for us then wouldn't we have signed more than one? Also, DC offered Monkhouse a deal so to him he was good enough for League football. I reckon it was cash rather than ability which decided the fate. All last year's players got offered contracts, monkeys was obviously not enough to make him want to stay=DC didn't want him=not good enough.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 12:55:02 GMT
Maybe DC thinks he's ok,but will not give him longer until he proves his fitness in competitive games,because if he breaks down we can not afford to get in a replacement if he's sat on a years contract. If that is the case then it seems a sensible arrangement to me
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Aug 1, 2015 12:56:22 GMT
If they were all good enough to play for us then wouldn't we have signed more than one? Also, DC offered Monkhouse a deal so to him he was good enough for League football. I reckon it was cash rather than ability which decided the fate. All last year's players got offered contracts, monkeys was obviously not enough to make him want to stay=DC didn't want him=not good enough. That's a weird equation. According to that, if you don't want to stay then you're not good enough.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 13:11:11 GMT
I reckon it was cash rather than ability which decided the fate. All last year's players got offered contracts, monkeys was obviously not enough to make him want to stay=DC didn't want him=not good enough. That's a weird equation. According to that, if you don't want to stay then you're not good enough. That's right. He didn't want the offer because DC offered him a deal based on his assessment. If he was good enough DC would have offered him more meaning he would have assessed him as good enough. There he is in non league.
|
|
|
Post by Jon the Stripe on Aug 1, 2015 13:13:35 GMT
Due to lack of success off the pitch and financial constraints due to decisions awaiting a conclusion which are all beyond the teams/supporters control how about auctioning off Box One each home game this season - pretty sure that would subsidise one extra players wages - would also show the BoD are gonna put up with some inconvenience just like the rest of the club is - after all apparently we're "all in it together"
|
|
|
Post by Gas Go Marching In on Aug 1, 2015 13:13:44 GMT
True. But Sinclair is a proven player in a Rovers shirt but Bodin isn't. Sinclair is not a proven player in league football, Bodin is. Is he? Just because he has played in the football league doesn't make him proven?
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Aug 1, 2015 13:16:28 GMT
That's a weird equation. According to that, if you don't want to stay then you're not good enough. That's right. He didn't want the offer because DC offered him a deal based on his assessment. If he was good enough DC would have offered him more meaning he would have assessed him as good enough. There he is in non league. No. You're just making up meanings for words.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 13:20:47 GMT
Sinclair is not a proven player in league football, Bodin is. Is he? Just because he has played in the football league doesn't make him proven? Ok he's unproven then. Happy?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 13:22:31 GMT
That's right. He didn't want the offer because DC offered him a deal based on his assessment. If he was good enough DC would have offered him more meaning he would have assessed him as good enough. There he is in non league. No. You're just making up meanings for words. Why isn't monkhouse with us? If DC had wanted him do you think he'd be here?
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Aug 1, 2015 13:27:21 GMT
No. You're just making up meanings for words. Why isn't monkhouse with us? If DC had wanted him do you think he'd be here? DC offered him a contract, but that's irrelevant to your weird equation. According to your weird equation Raheem Sterling isn't good enough for Liverpool. Monkhouse may or may not be good enough, that's a matter of opinion, but trying to make it an objective truth by proving it through your equation, is bullshit. Your equation doesn't prove anything; it's nonsense. It's perfectly possible for someone to be good enough for a level of football but refuse a contract at that level.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 13:40:44 GMT
Why isn't monkhouse with us? If DC had wanted him do you think he'd be here? DC offered him a contract, but that's irrelevant to your weird equation. According to your weird equation Raheem Sterling isn't good enough for Liverpool. Monkhouse may or may not be good enough, that's a matter of opinion, but trying to make it an objective truth by proving it through your equation, is bullshit. Your equation doesn't prove anything; it's nonsense. It's perfectly possible for someone to be good enough for a level of football but refuse a contract at that level. It's my opinion. Keep your rudeness to yourself.
|
|