|
|
Post by peterparker on May 5, 2019 6:32:45 GMT
Practically speaking, what should the club have done? Taylor? Bodin? Lockyer? Well it’s hard for me to say, because I don’t negotiate contracts in football, however that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t criticize a bad job. With Taylor & Lockyer we should have opened negotiations earlier. Taylor was out of contract going from L2 to L1. We only offered him a contract once promoted. Even then he nearly went to Oxford. If we came at him half way through L2 season he wouldn’t risk saying no IMO. TL we should never sign someone like him on an 18 month contract. How on earth TN gets 2/3 years but TL gets 18 months is beyond pathetic. Would you agree? How do you know he wasnt offered longer. Perhaps its the only length deal he would sign |
|
|
|
Post by mrpirate on May 5, 2019 6:34:25 GMT
I’m surprised Lockyer stayed with us for as long as he has. We’ve had a good eight years’ service from him - in some of our most troubling times he stuck with us when I’m sure there were opportunities to go.
We’re a mediocre league one club - we’ll always lose our best players, that’s life. We’ll find another Tom Lockyer, and on a few years we’ll sell him or he’ll go somewhere else.
I’m thankful for his loyalty, wish him all the best, and hope he goes somewhere to improve the standard he plays and works out whether he can hack it at a higher level. I reckon he can - mid to lower championship
|
|
|
|
Post by bovrilsorters on May 5, 2019 6:34:41 GMT
I have already wished Tom well on this thread and defended the club who were virtually powerless to stop this happening now, but in hind sight was it the best move for the club to offer him the extension 18 months ago, knowing that he would pass the 24 years of age during the extension period and be in a position to leave on a free ? In theory yes this makes sense. However in order to attain a fee for an out of contract under 24 you must offer a new contract on at least equivalent terms. So if we offered TL extended deal on same terms and he accepted (which could have been the case) then not much could have done. For what it's worth, I think the club should have sold him when could have got a fee last summer. As a good 'clubman' I reckon TL will have always been fairly transparent with management over his plans and it was probably clear that if we didn't go up he would be off... |
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on May 5, 2019 6:57:52 GMT
I have already wished Tom well on this thread and defended the club who were virtually powerless to stop this happening now, but in hind sight was it the best move for the club to offer him the extension 18 months ago, knowing that he would pass the 24 years of age during the extension period and be in a position to leave on a free ? In theory yes this makes sense. However in order to attain a fee for an out of contract under 24 you must offer a new contract on at least equivalent terms. So if we offered TL extended deal on same terms and he accepted (which could have been the case) then not much could have done. For what it's worth, I think the club should have sold him when could have got a fee last summer. As a good 'clubman' I reckon TL will have always been fairly transparent with management over his plans and it was probably clear that if we didn't go up he would be off... Yeah but if we sell someone when their contracts running down a bit then we get less money for them. Let's face it, whoever we sell, for whatever money, whenever we do it, a load of people who have no clue how the contract negotiations went, are gonna say it's the club's fault. Also, we should face in football, partly coz of the ludicrous prize structure in the EFL, and partly coz of the player power (which is a decent thing on balance, I think) if you're a decent league 1 player, but not decent enough to go straight to the prem or championship on a £5M, there is every incentive to run down you contract, and not a lot of incentive to keep signing for the same team at the same level. If you can then get into the championship, or a better-paying L1 team like, I guess, Sunderland, then you hit the jackpot. Players, not that great, say, worth half a million quid, going on a free, that's essentially, half a million quid in their pocket. Job done. Funny this all went off even before the last game of the season. Whatever happens it's gonna be a long summer with people complaining every day we don't sign someone, then really complaining when we sign someone. And complaining when somebody leaves, or complaining when somebody doesn't leave. The only non-complaint we're gonna get is when Payne goes. No one is going to worry how much that cost us to get done. |
|
|
|
Post by bovrilsorters on May 5, 2019 7:04:22 GMT
In theory yes this makes sense. However in order to attain a fee for an out of contract under 24 you must offer a new contract on at least equivalent terms. So if we offered TL extended deal on same terms and he accepted (which could have been the case) then not much could have done. For what it's worth, I think the club should have sold him when could have got a fee last summer. As a good 'clubman' I reckon TL will have always been fairly transparent with management over his plans and it was probably clear that if we didn't go up he would be off... Yeah but if we sell someone when their contracts running down a bit then we get less money for them. Let's face it, whoever we sell, for whatever money, whenever we do it, a load of people who have no clue how the contract negotiations went, are gonna say it's the club's fault. Also, we should face in football, partly coz of the ludicrous prize structure in the EFL, and partly coz of the player power (which is a decent thing on balance, I think) if you're a decent league 1 player, but not decent enough to go straight to the prem or championship on a £5M, there is every incentive to run down you contract, and not a lot of incentive to keep signing for the same team at the same level. If you can then get into the championship, or a better-paying L1 team like, I guess, Sunderland, then you hit the jackpot. Players, not that great, say, worth half a million quid, going on a free, that's essentially, half a million quid in their pocket. Job done. Funny this all went off even before the last game of the season. Whatever happens it's gonna be a long summer with people complaining every day we don't sign someone, then really complaining when we sign someone. And complaining when somebody leaves, or complaining when somebody doesn't leave. The only non-complaint we're gonna get is when Payne goes. No one is going to worry how much that cost us to get done. True, whatever the club do you can't please everyone! Think the main positive to take us that TL has been a key part of a defensive record that has ultimately kept us up this season which us worth more than ant transfer fee we may have got! |
|
|
|
Post by Qatar Gas on May 5, 2019 7:05:35 GMT
Small clubs like bristol rovers cannot afford to risk having players on long contracts,the simple truth is that 2 year deals at rovers and endless clubs like ours operate in this way. Tom lockyer has been an outstanding defender for rovers and i wish him well in the future. When DC came in and changed the way we did contracts, it meant no more journeymen on 3/4 year deals which in turn made us a better team. The problem which we are now seeing is that this is affecting our best players and now almost all of them who have left have gone cheaply because their contracts have been coming to an end. Whilst I would still rather we sign new players on no more than 2 year deals, the strategy should be looked at and changed for our best players. Offer them 3/4 year deals then at least when the bigger teams come in for them, they would have to pay more. |
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on May 5, 2019 7:06:46 GMT
Yeah but if we sell someone when their contracts running down a bit then we get less money for them. Let's face it, whoever we sell, for whatever money, whenever we do it, a load of people who have no clue how the contract negotiations went, are gonna say it's the club's fault. Also, we should face in football, partly coz of the ludicrous prize structure in the EFL, and partly coz of the player power (which is a decent thing on balance, I think) if you're a decent league 1 player, but not decent enough to go straight to the prem or championship on a £5M, there is every incentive to run down you contract, and not a lot of incentive to keep signing for the same team at the same level. If you can then get into the championship, or a better-paying L1 team like, I guess, Sunderland, then you hit the jackpot. Players, not that great, say, worth half a million quid, going on a free, that's essentially, half a million quid in their pocket. Job done. Funny this all went off even before the last game of the season. Whatever happens it's gonna be a long summer with people complaining every day we don't sign someone, then really complaining when we sign someone. And complaining when somebody leaves, or complaining when somebody doesn't leave. The only non-complaint we're gonna get is when Payne goes. No one is going to worry how much that cost us to get done. True, whatever the club do you can't please everyone! Think the main positive to take us that TL has been a key part of a defensive record that has ultimately kept us up this season which us worth more than ant transfer fee we may have got! Yeah good point. That's essentially priceless. |
|
|
|
Post by gas2 on May 5, 2019 7:19:21 GMT
Bosman has destroyed football clubs in the lower league ffs get brexit sorted then we might be able to complete with the others
|
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on May 5, 2019 7:28:55 GMT
Bosman has destroyed football clubs in the lower league ffs get brexit sorted then we might be able to complete with the others All he got was basically fairness in how player contracts work. Brexit isn't going to reverse Bosman, is it? |
|
|
|
Post by yategasman on May 5, 2019 7:32:23 GMT
I’m only hoping TL does better than MT BB & EH if he goes to a Championship club!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2019 7:46:22 GMT
Practically speaking, what should the club have done? Taylor? Bodin? Lockyer? Well it’s hard for me to say, because I don’t negotiate contracts in football, however that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t criticize a bad job. With Taylor & Lockyer we should have opened negotiations earlier. Taylor was out of contract going from L2 to L1. We only offered him a contract once promoted. Even then he nearly went to Oxford. If we came at him half way through L2 season he wouldn’t risk saying no IMO. TL we should never sign someone like him on an 18 month contract. How on earth TN gets 2/3 years but TL gets 18 months is beyond pathetic. Would you agree? Do you not think Tom Lockyer may have wanted nothing more than 18 months at the time? Perhaps he never wanted to be tied down long term when he has aspirations to play at a higher level and enhance his chances with Wales. Perhaps he had in mind to leave at age 24 if Rovers hadn't progressed and regardless of what you say the board could do nothing about it. Perhaps whilst looking at his Rovers exit he also (rightly) would have wanted to maximise a future income and signing on fee by letting his contract run down? |
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on May 5, 2019 7:47:13 GMT
Bosman has destroyed football clubs in the lower league ffs get brexit sorted then we might be able to complete with the others Um no. I assume you understand the principle of a Bosman. Player fufils contract, thus he is free to leave. Why/how should the employer demand a fee for there services when they are no longer employed |
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on May 5, 2019 7:54:46 GMT
He extended his deal in January 2018, surely we wouldn't be stupid enough to have given him an 18 month contract extension? www.bbc.com/sport/football/42649584Tom signed a deal in April 2016 & January 2018. If it turns out the TL is out of contract then I will be absolutely furious with this board. Wael and Starnes both told me before the game that he goes for nothing. All they could say was, that’s football...... That’s Bristol Rovers, is what they should have said |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2019 7:55:58 GMT
Shambles. Let a key player, probably one with some value leave for free. So amateur it's unbelievable. Bit disappointed in Tom too if I'm honest, the club make no money. TL and his agent have used the rules of football to their advantage. He's done nothing wrong and neither have the club. If a player is intent on running down his contract then there is nothing the club can do and certainly nothing to do with being "amateurish". We are amateurish on many other levels though ! What has Tom done to disappoint you? If you think he should have only left when under contract earning us a fee at the expense of his own future income and signing on fee you are not living in the real world. He's been a fantastic servant to the club and should always have the respect of every gashead if/when he ever visits us in the future. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2019 7:57:52 GMT
I think last summer was the time to sell if he wasn’t going to sign a new deal. Any later and the fee would have been low with the contract running down. Imagine if we’d sold him for £100k in Jan then got relegated. It’s Peterborough’s policy to list everyone with a year to go who won’t sign.
For what it’s worth, I prefer DCs policy of short contracts. Losing Bodin, Harrison etc. cheaply is better than having to pay off the likes of Kenneth and Gill. I only hope he stuck to his policy of short contracts when he signed Nichols and Payne
|
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on May 5, 2019 7:59:37 GMT
Well it’s hard for me to say, because I don’t negotiate contracts in football, however that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t criticize a bad job. With Taylor & Lockyer we should have opened negotiations earlier. Taylor was out of contract going from L2 to L1. We only offered him a contract once promoted. Even then he nearly went to Oxford. If we came at him half way through L2 season he wouldn’t risk saying no IMO. TL we should never sign someone like him on an 18 month contract. How on earth TN gets 2/3 years but TL gets 18 months is beyond pathetic. Would you agree? How do you know he wasnt offered longer. Perhaps its the only length deal he would sign I don’t, but that doesn’t mean they did. Considering at that time we weren’t offering long contracts out, is there any reason to believe we tried? No. Look at the end of the day if you think it’s acceptable that we are the only club who keeps losing their best player for free/peanuts then be my guest, enjoy living in the bubble of “that’s football” & “there is nothing we can do” while we sleep walk back into the conference. In 2 years we will look back at the squad of Lockyer, Brown, Taylor, Bodin, Harrison & Sercombe whilst they’ll all be in the championship/top end L1 & think ‘how did we let that squad go’? I’ll tell you how, because we managed contracts poorly and in total got £1.5m. What a farce |
|
|
|
Post by tinner on May 5, 2019 8:00:06 GMT
Wael and Starnes both told me before the game that he goes for nothing. All they could say was, that’s football...... That’s Bristol Rovers, is what they should have said Yes that’s right, I bet Bradford, Walsall, Scunthorpe and Plymouth all have their player contract stuff well sorted.....damn you Rovers! |
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on May 5, 2019 8:03:39 GMT
Well it’s hard for me to say, because I don’t negotiate contracts in football, however that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t criticize a bad job. With Taylor & Lockyer we should have opened negotiations earlier. Taylor was out of contract going from L2 to L1. We only offered him a contract once promoted. Even then he nearly went to Oxford. If we came at him half way through L2 season he wouldn’t risk saying no IMO. TL we should never sign someone like him on an 18 month contract. How on earth TN gets 2/3 years but TL gets 18 months is beyond pathetic. Would you agree? Do you not think Tom Lockyer may have wanted nothing more than 18 months at the time? Perhaps he never wanted to be tied down long term when he has aspirations to play at a higher level and enhance his chances with Wales. Perhaps he had in mind to leave at age 24 if Rovers hadn't progressed and regardless of what you say the board could do nothing about it. Perhaps whilst looking at his Rovers exit he also (rightly) would have wanted to maximise a future income and signing on fee by letting his contract run down? Perhaps, but a servant of 8 years - there’s no reason to believe he would say no to 2 1/2 years. We weren’t offering those contracts out, so let’s not make out that we tried it, because chances are we didn’t. As someone else just said, we should have looked to move him on in the summer & used the funds to replace him. However, our transfer policy & contract management is a joke and now we’re left penniless & moaning that we don’t have money to sign good players in the summer. We put ourselves in this position. It’s not football, it’s bloody Bristol Rovers |
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on May 5, 2019 8:04:58 GMT
That’s Bristol Rovers, is what they should have said Yes that’s right, I bet Bradford, Walsall, Scunthorpe and Plymouth all have their player contract stuff well sorted.....damn you Rovers! As does everyone above us in that case... Not sure what you’re trying to get at |
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on May 5, 2019 8:11:30 GMT
there’s no reason to believe he would say no to 2 1/2 years. There's no reason to believe we didn't offer him that. |
|
