Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Babylon

George Hirst

By Babylon, in Transfer Talk

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
Foxxed

Foxxed

Posted
Posted (edited)

So the Owls invested in his development, refused our bid, refused his pay increase, then ruined one of his most important seasons when he refused a new contract.

 

Then he opts for a full season in the Belgium second with Pearson. Now the Owls feel they should be compensated because he'll come back to an English club, very probably us, at some point?

 

Sounds like we're big club cooking our books (since if he was off elsewhere I bet we'd make a counter offer) and removing the incentive for English youth development since clubs get sod all back for it.

 

But if we're going to do what I dislike, doing it to a team that tried to ruin the development of a young English international makes it slightly more palatable. And maybe they should have taken our two million rather than get ****ed by a loophole.

 

Edit: Sorry, sorry: Was he any good? :ph34r:

Edited by Foxxed
  • Like 3
norwichfox

norwichfox

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Spudulike said:
  • How did he get on ?? Any good :dunno:

 

8 hours ago, Bob Weasel Fox said:

Any good? :dunno:

 

8 hours ago, Miquel The Work Geordie said:

 

Was he any good?

 

4 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

Was he any good?

 

58 minutes ago, Kinowe Soorie said:

Was he any good?

 

36 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

So the Owls invested in his development, refused our bid, refused his pay increase, then ruined one of his most important seasons when he refused a new contract.

 

Then he opts for a full season in the Belgium second with Pearson. Now the Owls feel they should be compensated because he'll come back to an English club, very probably us, at some point?

 

Sounds like we're big club cooking our books (since if he was off elsewhere I bet we'd make a counter offer) and removing the incentive for English youth development since clubs get sod all back for it.

 

But if we're going to do what I dislike, doing it to a team that tried to ruin the development of a young English international makes it slightly more palatable. And maybe they should have taken our two million rather than get ****ed by a loophole.

 

Edit: Sorry, sorry: Was he any good? :ph34r:

 

Not sure, but I'm just wondering if he played well, even though he's not our player (yet)...

Foxy-Lady

Foxy-Lady

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Foxxed said:

 

Sounds like we're big club cooking our books (since if he was off elsewhere I bet we'd make a counter offer) and removing the incentive for English youth development since clubs get sod all back for it. 

 

 

 

In this instance, Sheff Wed got what they deserved (ie nothing) as result of their own actions..............but this type of transfer behaviour sets a very worrying precedent for future development of young English talent at lower league clubs as they may simply stop investing time and money if they see their best talents being allowed to move "abroad" for minimal compensation.  

 

Personally, I don't think its a good thing for the future of young English player development in general, irrespective of which team you support but that's just my opinion

Foxxed

Foxxed

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Foxy-Lady said:

In this instance, Sheff Wed got what they deserved (ie nothing) as result of their own actions..............but this type of transfer behaviour sets a very worrying precedent for future development of young English talent at lower league clubs as they may simply stop investing time and money if they see their best talents being allowed to move "abroad" for minimal compensation.  

 

Personally, I don't think its a good thing for the future of young English player development in general, irrespective of which team you support but that's just my opinion

Kind of agree. They knew he wasn't happy, they knew he wanted to leave, they know premier league clubs are interested, they know premier clubs often have foreign sister clubs, they know they'll get sod all back if he goes abroad. Sounds like their directors messed up. They can get mad with a billionaire businessman and his club for acting in their financial interest if they want but I have little time for people who rail against a rotten system rather than trying to change it.

  • Like 1
lcfc278

lcfc278

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Foxxed said:

Kind of agree. They knew he wasn't happy, they knew he wanted to leave, they know premier league clubs are interested, they know premier clubs often have foreign sister clubs, they know they'll get sod all back if he goes abroad. Sounds like their directors messed up. They can get mad with a billionaire businessman and his club for acting in their financial interest if they want but I have little time for people who rail against a rotten system rather than trying to change it.

Was he any good?

themightyfin

themightyfin

Posted
Posted

Was it just not a case of them wanting to keep the player and not get screwd over by a big team by taking a bid they didn't think was enough?

Remember Mahrez? It works both ways we are sounding  hypocritical here IMO.

brucey

brucey

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, themightyfin said:

Was it just not a case of them wanting to keep the player and not get screwd over by a big team by taking a bid they didn't think was enough?

Remember Mahrez? It works both ways we are sounding  hypocritical here IMO.

They rejected a lowish bid for Hirst with 1 year left of his contract. Then banished him from the club entirely and didn't even let him play with the reserves, in hopes of making him sign a new deal.

 

We rejected a lowish bid for Mahrez with 2.5 years left of his contract. Then, despite certain FT posters wanting to banish him to the reserves, we accepted that lowish bid once there was 2 years left. As we knew there was no way he was signing a new deal, and that if we continued rejecting the bids, he would eventually leave for free just as Hirst had.

 

Not sure how that's remotely similar.

  • Like 4
elvisfmcfly

elvisfmcfly

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, themightyfin said:

Was it just not a case of them wanting to keep the player and not get screwd over by a big team by taking a bid they didn't think was enough?

Remember Mahrez? It works both ways we are sounding  hypocritical here IMO.

was He any good?

  • Haha 1
themightyfin

themightyfin

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, brucey said:

They rejected a lowish bid for Hirst with 1 year left of his contract. Then banished him from the club entirely and didn't even let him play with the reserves, in hopes of making him sign a new deal.

 

We rejected a lowish bid for Mahrez with 2.5 years left of his contract. Then, despite certain FT posters wanting to banish him to the reserves, we accepted that lowish bid once there was 2 years left. As we knew there was no way he was signing a new deal, and that if we continued rejecting the bids, he would eventually leave for free just as Hirst had.

 

Not sure how that's remotely similar.

Seems like they had the balls to stand up to the player and the bigging club to me. 

Fair play to them.

That's the only difference I see.

Edited by themightyfin
Gerard

Gerard

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, themightyfin said:

Seems like they had the balls to stand up to the player and the bigging club to me. 

Fair play to them.

That's the only difference I see.

 

 

They weren't pragmatic like we were.

 

They had a £2m bid and refused it and banished the player with one year left on his deal.

 

With Mahrez we probably weren't happy with the money we got but were pragmatic enough to make the best out of a bad situation. 

 

For all their "balls to stand up to the player" they're now a £2m transfer fee light and had to pay the player a year's wages for doing nothing. We had similar people on here calling for Mahrez to be banished to the reserves. All very well showing bravado when it's not your money but we would have kept Mahrez to his contract and lost £60m but we made the best out of the situation that presented to us. Sometimes you have to play the crap hand your dealt as best you can.

 

 

  • Like 4
Foxxed

Foxxed

Posted
Posted (edited)

The Owls should have their EU MPs propose a cross border compensation scheme. One where the EU punishes non EU countries if their teams do the same thing. :ph34r:

 

Seriously though, I don't know why the FA's compensation scheme doesn't kick in when Hirst is sold back to an English club. An oversight?

 

Edited by Foxxed
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...