Max Power Posted 27 July 2016 Posted 27 July 2016 3 minutes ago, Lineker's Left Foot said: Enquiry to Liverpool... Danny Ings??? Like this shout. Would be good in the Okazaki role
Thracian Posted 27 July 2016 Posted 27 July 2016 23 hours ago, norwichfox said: Really getting p155ed off with the assassination attempts the media are carrying out on our club, to quote NP why don't they all F.O.A.D. It's actually disgraceful and the price you pay for the media being so firmly encamped in London and Manchester
The Doctor Posted 28 July 2016 Posted 28 July 2016 On 26/07/2016 at 21:36, st albans fox said: I'm concerned that 'you sir, are an ostrich'. would you say that there was nothing in the vardy situation? clearly something is afoot. tbh, we should have had this put to bed weeks ago. no reason not to have stuck in a knockout contract proposal before the end of May. Our dithering and possible penny pinching could well cost us the player although it could mean we will be looking at the largest annual profit for a non 'big four club'. Besides that he'd just finished the first year of a long term contract so wasn't coming near the end? If a player is happy to stay - and I trust Claudio when he says riyad is - then there's absolutely no reason to offer a new mega contract in response to paper talk - all you do is waste the wage budget and get other players wanting a bit more
st albans fox Posted 28 July 2016 Posted 28 July 2016 1 hour ago, The Doctor said: Besides that he'd just finished the first year of a long term contract so wasn't coming near the end? If a player is happy to stay - and I trust Claudio when he says riyad is - then there's absolutely no reason to offer a new mega contract in response to paper talk - all you do is waste the wage budget and get other players wanting a bit more that really is ostrich stuff doc. putting off the inevitable generally results in the situation becoming worse. do you really think there was any possibility that mahrez' agents wouldn't be looking for more money ???
The Doctor Posted 28 July 2016 Posted 28 July 2016 1 hour ago, st albans fox said: that really is ostrich stuff doc. putting off the inevitable generally results in the situation becoming worse. do you really think there was any possibility that mahrez' agents wouldn't be looking for more money ??? Do you really think there's no possibility that mahrez has control over his agent? It is an act of monumental stupidity to throw around bumper contracts in response to paper talk - which is why no club worth their salt does it.
st albans fox Posted 28 July 2016 Posted 28 July 2016 3 hours ago, The Doctor said: Do you really think there's no possibility that mahrez has control over his agent? It is an act of monumental stupidity to throw around bumper contracts in response to paper talk - which is why no club worth their salt does it. Paper talk? There wasn't much going on in May. Too busy with the euros. You know what your staff are worth and you make efforts to secure them so that they don't go looking elsewhere and become unhappy/frustrated in your employment. A happy staff member is generally a productive one. throw in the fact that footballers have agents and it's a guaranteed situation that riyad would be looking for an enhanced contract. Same with at least half a dozen others. To think otherwise is naive at best and negligent at worst. we won the league 'on the cheap'. No way were the agents going to allow that to lie. Of course we could tell the players under contract that they can have a small uptick and get on with it. That would have already cost us vardy and generated an unhappy camp. The new signings would be on a big always compared to the others. Once we decided to try and secure vardy, we should have recognised straight away the need to target Kante and mahrez with the same deals. To wait was to run a risk.
The Doctor Posted 28 July 2016 Posted 28 July 2016 32 minutes ago, st albans fox said: Paper talk? There wasn't much going on in May. Too busy with the euros. You know what your staff are worth and you make efforts to secure them so that they don't go looking elsewhere and become unhappy/frustrated in your employment. A happy staff member is generally a productive one. throw in the fact that footballers have agents and it's a guaranteed situation that riyad would be looking for an enhanced contract. Same with at least half a dozen others. To think otherwise is naive at best and negligent at worst. we won the league 'on the cheap'. No way were the agents going to allow that to lie. Of course we could tell the players under contract that they can have a small uptick and get on with it. That would have already cost us vardy and generated an unhappy camp. The new signings would be on a big always compared to the others. Once we decided to try and secure vardy, we should have recognised straight away the need to target Kante and mahrez with the same deals. To wait was to run a risk. He signed a new contract on a decent wedge 12 months ago. There was no real need to offer a new contract, he had and still has plenty of time left to run on his current contract. We offered vardy a new contract in February because his old contract expired next summer iirc, the new one then came in response to an offer from Arsenal to keep hold of him. Offering everyone bumper money because of a bid for one player is also monumentally stupid. Go read what happened to Portsmouth and stop acting the fool, as if not throwing money at everyone because of one player means the sky is falling.
st albans fox Posted 28 July 2016 Posted 28 July 2016 34 minutes ago, The Doctor said: He signed a new contract on a decent wedge 12 months ago. There was no real need to offer a new contract, he had and still has plenty of time left to run on his current contract. We offered vardy a new contract in February because his old contract expired next summer iirc, the new one then came in response to an offer from Arsenal to keep hold of him. Offering everyone bumper money because of a bid for one player is also monumentally stupid. Go read what happened to Portsmouth and stop acting the fool, as if not throwing money at everyone because of one player means the sky is falling. Sorry - didn't realise you had the club budget figures to hand. My apologies. After vardy's offer became common knowledge we offered Riyad 80 k and ngolo 100k. We have probably now offered Riyad 100k at least. in your world, Riyad should be happy to be on 55k. In my world, we should have realised back end May, as soon as we decided to go to 100k on vardy what was going to happen and acted accordingly (and perhaps saved money in the long run).
Mezeker Posted 29 July 2016 Posted 29 July 2016 2 hours ago, FireFox said: So.... Balotelli? i know people don't want him but im with it. There are only too many times you can **** up; he is at a crossroads, talented people do amazing things when their back is against the wall.
MattCan Posted 29 July 2016 Posted 29 July 2016 5 hours ago, st albans fox said: Sorry - didn't realise you had the club budget figures to hand. My apologies. After vardy's offer became common knowledge we offered Riyad 80 k and ngolo 100k. We have probably now offered Riyad 100k at least. in your world, Riyad should be happy to be on 55k. In my world, we should have realised back end May, as soon as we decided to go to 100k on vardy what was going to happen and acted accordingly (and perhaps saved money in the long run). It is a shame that Mahrez has been so cheaply paid. It is about time to fix that.
st albans fox Posted 29 July 2016 Posted 29 July 2016 1 hour ago, MattCan said: It is a shame that Mahrez has been so cheaply paid. It is about time to fix that. He was well paid for what we thought we were. But we are champions of England and he is the POTY.
foxile5 Posted 29 July 2016 Posted 29 July 2016 On 28/07/2016 at 12:48, HighPeakFox said: Owners', for the record... It's a plural, doesn't need an apostrophe. For the record. Or would be Owners' if it were referring to something, such as the owners' asset Riyad Mahrez.
Steven Posted 29 July 2016 Posted 29 July 2016 On 7/28/2016 at 13:48, HighPeakFox said: Owners', for the record... A meeting of the Owners today to discuss ...... is not the same as The Owners meeting today to discuss ?
HighPeakFox Posted 29 July 2016 Posted 29 July 2016 41 minutes ago, foxile5 said: It's a plural, doesn't need an apostrophe. For the record. Or would be Owners' if it were referring to something, such as the owners' asset Riyad Mahrez. Quote Interesting. I read the original as 'Owner is / owners are', and if so the apostrophe is needed. So I suppose it depends on whether the OP meant the implicit is/are!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.