|
Post by Big Dave on May 30, 2014 17:37:36 GMT
To me it looks as though we are having a domino effect. One rat has left the ship and the others then look to jump too.... So JJ gone, Brunt likely and maybe Lockyer. I expect Lee Brown to go also. Smudge will only go for a decent fee. I like your analogy. It's easy to stop the domino effect by just stopping one single domino falling...
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 30, 2014 17:13:35 GMT
I suppose what I am questioning is whether our scouting system for senior players is "fit for purpose"? Darrell must have a very good knowledge at the moment of the higher echelons of the Non League Game - and that is solely what we are relying on. I have this horrible feeling that he does not have a proper scouting system to support him. I have this horrible feeling that he does not have any proper scouting system to support him.
|
|
|
Films
May 30, 2014 8:18:44 GMT
Post by Big Dave on May 30, 2014 8:18:44 GMT
I saw X-men Days Of Future Past a couple of nights back and despite not having seen any of the other x-men movies I enjoyed it.
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 30, 2014 8:03:02 GMT
www.westerndailypress.co.uk/Bristol-Rovers-striker-Brunt-tracked-clubs/story-21164440-detail/story.htmlBristol Rovers striker Ryan Brunt is being eyed up by a trio of League One clubs.
Walsall, Leyton Orient and Chesterfield are among the outfits understood to be interested in the Birmingham-born forward, who was 21 earlier this week. Brunt managed only 13 league and cup appearances for Rovers last season and failed to find the net before his season was ended in November by a knee problem, which eventually required surgery. But he scored five times in 18 outings after joining on a three-year deal from Stoke City in January 2013 and was pivotal in helping the side move away from the relegation zone in that campaign. Brunt was at the Memorial Stadium earlier in the week in a bid to build up his fitness, and is also to pay for a trip to America to receive specialist treatment before the players report back on June 30. The target-man, who had a spell with Bristol City's academy as a youngster before joining Stoke City, spent six months on loan at Leyton Orient two seasons ago, netting three times in eight league starts with a further ten appearances from the bench. Chesterfield, who lifted the League Two title last season, were keen on landing the striker shortly before he joined Rovers and are now set to rekindle their interest. Walsall boss Dean Smith is also believed to have Brunt on his radar and may look to bring the player back to his roots in the Midlands. Rovers, meanwhile, are to hand a trial to Concord Rangers striker Lewis Taaffe. Read more: www.westerndailypress.co.uk/Bristol-Rovers-striker-Brunt-tracked-clubs/story-21164440-detail/story.html#ixzz33BSoAI2i
Read more at www.westerndailypress.co.uk/Bristol-Rovers-striker-Brunt-tracked-clubs/story-21164440-detail/story.html#yxBOL4DLbrEey0TH.99
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 29, 2014 21:44:34 GMT
You know it will only go on legal fees, boardroom bickies and PR Gurus. PR Gurus? Seriously?
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 29, 2014 8:14:46 GMT
So we're still the only team from Bristol to win at the Kassam stadium this season....?!?
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 29, 2014 7:52:08 GMT
How much did Sheff Utd receive? According to Wikipedia
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 28, 2014 17:14:03 GMT
I also doubt a fee will be received, but I also think that's unacceptable for us to not receive a fee for a 25-year-old midfielder (with two years left on his contract) who was in the PFA League Two team of the year and who finished as the 5th highest goalscorer in our league. Pretty sure many have said he had an escape clause though I have nothing to back that factually Then I just amend my statement to say if there is a (relegation) escape clause in his contract that was stupid. He is an asset to this company (but as I stated often on the OF, his value to the team in certain matches last season was debatable...) Either way, an asset with value
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 28, 2014 16:55:27 GMT
Must have needed to count all the boobs in your profile pic. And of course to work out the probability of you nailing one of them! Sadly it was for work (enjoyable work obviously), but I did love every minute of it...
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 28, 2014 16:52:34 GMT
Whilst I don't want to hijack the thread, what does Exeter's Assistant Manager/Tranmere's manager see in him that no one on the staff at Rovers did?
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 28, 2014 16:45:49 GMT
Somehow doubt a fee will be be paid. Just glad to get his wages off the list, I guess I also doubt a fee will be received, but I also think that's unacceptable for us to not receive a fee for a 25-year-old midfielder (with two years left on his contract) who was in the PFA League Two team of the year and who finished as the 5th highest goalscorer in our league.
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 28, 2014 15:44:59 GMT
So we've damaged our rep for a few quid - even worse. What can Wycombe afford to pay? A fiver a month? I was outraged when Tan threatened to take Palace to court over 'leaked' teamsheet but this is just as bad. A shameless BoD and an agent with an axe to grind I wish I trusted the board enough to assume it is about the money...the trouble is, I suspect in their heads 'success' is home and away against Burton, Mansfield and Newport AFC next season... BTW, I have posted this same sentence twice, and I might post it again....doesn't mean it's not true each time...
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 28, 2014 15:43:14 GMT
Well now, we all hate the club at the moment, now everyone else does too! You couldn't make it up. Are we going to go to court and say, "we were s*** m'lord, but only 3rd from bottom s***" If the board think this will make it all ok then they are nuts. Fact is we should never have been in a position that this made any difference in the first place. This is for the money, which we may have a case for. Don't panic, the board do not think we will stay a football league club. That argument will just give us the best chance of being paid compensation. I wish I trusted the board enough to assume it is about the money...the trouble is, I suspect in their heads 'success' is home and away against Burton, Mansfield and Newport AFC next season...
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 28, 2014 15:14:59 GMT
I understand it enough to know that (at our level) it's basically rubbish and only works as an 'early warning system' for clubs who are likely to go into administration. In general it means league two clubs can only spend 55% of 'turnover' on wages - the definition of 'turnover' is the biggest failing in the system. In this specific case, I think Rovers are claiming that the sell-on fee (that was effectively part of the 'third-party' ownership issue) was i) against the rules and ii) used in the turnover figure allowing Wycombe to sign players they couldn't otherwise have afforded. Possibly. *edit* and don't forget league two doesn't have FFP, it has SCMP...completely different set of rules...
I thought it was made pretty clear that it had been used to pay Mr Hayes, their main debtor though either direct to him (wrong) or via Wycombe (not wrong)
However it is paid, Wycombe (probably) owe money to lots of other people. The agreement/contract that the specific income from one player goes to a certain debtor (rather than the club and therefore it's debtors as a whole) is the reason it's called third-party interest/investment/ownership and also why it is against the rules.
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 28, 2014 14:14:52 GMT
Q. Given the way it is run, if BRFC 1883 Ltd was a 'normal' business selling a 'normal' product it would have gone bust many years ago, as would many other football clubs. What are the board doing to make sure this doesn't happen to us, and what part have they played in recent years to make sure all football clubs in the top three/four/five tiers are run in a sustainable way?
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 28, 2014 14:02:00 GMT
SOUTHEND United manager Phil Brown... “Last year we had about seven or eight strikers playing for us and between them all they got 24 goals,” said Brown. lol what a nightmare!
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 28, 2014 13:34:43 GMT
I understand it enough to know that (at our level) it's basically rubbish and only works as an 'early warning system' for clubs who are likely to go into administration. In general it means league two clubs can only spend 55% of 'turnover' on wages - the definition of 'turnover' is the biggest failing in the system. In this specific case, I think Rovers are claiming that the sell-on fee (that was effectively part of the 'third-party' ownership issue) was i) against the rules and ii) used in the turnover figure allowing Wycombe to sign players they couldn't otherwise have afforded. Possibly. *edit* and don't forget league two doesn't have FFP, it has SCMP...completely different set of rules...
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 28, 2014 13:17:39 GMT
Ah, the innocence of youth...
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 28, 2014 11:24:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on May 28, 2014 10:56:54 GMT
After a good night's sleep and a little time to reflect I do not feel at all comfortable about the club's action. I would much prefer for us to prepare for life in the Conference with our "eyes clearly on the ball". Then there is the thought if the positions had been reversed would Wycombe have taken action against us? Perhaps a Wycombe fan would like to answer that one. After a poor nights sleep (non-Rovers' related) I am happy with the club's action but feel they've got the media/PR side of it badly wrong...any other club would have probably done the same, but wouldn't look like whiny little brats so early in the legal process...
|
|