crafty fox Posted 13 January 2011 Posted 13 January 2011 "quote" from sky sports news....£3.5m for charlie adam is a disgrace........followed by blackpool offer £500.000 for barnsley midfielder adam hammill .what a piss taker !!
sdb Posted 13 January 2011 Posted 13 January 2011 I think Hammill had a £500k release clause tho. And Adam is worth more tbf. But I see your point.
filbertway Posted 13 January 2011 Posted 13 January 2011 "quote" from sky sports news....£3.5m for charlie adam is a disgrace........followed by blackpool offer £500.000 for barnsley midfielder adam hammill .what a piss taker !! Yeh he should have offered more than the release clause required. That'd show them.
Ozwin Posted 13 January 2011 Posted 13 January 2011 Adam isn't worth much more than £3.5m seeing as his contract is out this summer. It's a case of let him go and make some money or have a better chance of staying up and getting nothing for him.
sdb Posted 14 January 2011 Posted 14 January 2011 Adam isn't worth much more than £3.5m seeing as his contract is out this summer. It's a case of let him go and make some money or have a better chance of staying up and getting nothing for him. Didn't realise that his contract was up EoS. They won't get much more than that then, although there's a bidding war by the sounds of it, and with some pretty desperate clubs involved.
Mack Posted 14 January 2011 Posted 14 January 2011 Adam was nothing special at Rangers. He's had a purple patch with Blackpool, with him able to walk in the summer I'd take the 3.5 and move on.
Guest BlueBrett Posted 14 January 2011 Posted 14 January 2011 Why can't we sign Hammill? Someone have a word with Sven. Really good player and plus I'd love to gazump Holloway.
Bugg Posted 14 January 2011 Posted 14 January 2011 I reckon Adam may be like DJ in that he thrives when he is the big fish in the small pond, If he went to a bigger club I can imagine that he wouldn't be as successful.
Mack Posted 14 January 2011 Posted 14 January 2011 I reckon Adam may be like DJ in that he thrives when he is the big fish in the small pond, If he went to a bigger club I can imagine that he wouldn't be as successful. Spon on. Holloway is the same.
Muzzy Izzn't Posted 16 January 2011 Posted 16 January 2011 He's still banging on about this and went on about Villa's bid in his post match interview today, I think he's cracking up. Maybe Villa should get Carlos Cuellar to talk to Charlie being former Rangers boys and all.
jonycarr Posted 18 January 2011 Posted 18 January 2011 Blackpool, Premier League, Football Search the dictionary definition of hypocrisy, and you will find it is consistent with recent comments Ian Holloway on players who could move in and out of Blackpool.
Finnegan Posted 27 January 2011 Posted 27 January 2011 I don't really see what's so bad about that. He got stung constantly at Plymouth by the board not letting him keep his best assets. He obviously went to Blackpool apprehensive of a similar situation and made sure early on that he'd be compensated if it happened again. And he's right to be insisting for more money for Charlie Adam. He's under contract and he's a vital part of Blackpool's Premier League campaign, prices in January are always inflated and that reflects the fact that a lot of clubs aren't willing to sell whilst they've got a settled side. And when you consider some of the teams linked to Adam and their budgets then, to be honest, Holloway is right to be asking for more. I would be.
Simmo86 Posted 27 January 2011 Posted 27 January 2011 Wonder if he's getting a cut of Laczko's transfer to Sampdoria! Blokes a clown!
Mack Posted 27 January 2011 Posted 27 January 2011 I don't really see what's so bad about that. He got stung constantly at Plymouth by the board not letting him keep his best assets. He obviously went to Blackpool apprehensive of a similar situation and made sure early on that he'd be compensated if it happened again. And he's right to be insisting for more money for Charlie Adam. He's under contract and he's a vital part of Blackpool's Premier League campaign, prices in January are always inflated and that reflects the fact that a lot of clubs aren't willing to sell whilst they've got a settled side. And when you consider some of the teams linked to Adam and their budgets then, to be honest, Holloway is right to be asking for more. I would be. When you are going to publicly slate managers and clubs for 'insulting' offers it kind of helps if you declare your own personal financial interest at the same time. And when a journo finds out and quizzes him over it he just gets lippy... shock! The bloke is a joke, likes the sound of his own voice far too much, and because of the current purple patch his team are on gets far too much airtime.
Finnegan Posted 27 January 2011 Posted 27 January 2011 Ian Holloway is hardly some con-man out to make a quick profit. And 2m for a Prem club's star player IS insulting. I can appreciate you have an obvious bias after his time here and I do understand that his interviews just annoy some; but this I just don't see a problem with.
ScouseFox Posted 27 January 2011 Posted 27 January 2011 Well he's going to resign now they've been fined for fielding a weakened team against Villa, isn't he?
Part Of The Crowd Posted 27 January 2011 Posted 27 January 2011 Holloway's bonus for staying up is larger than any money he will get out of the Charlie Adam transfer, Adam is a key part to them staying up, it's financially better for him to keep Adam than sell him. Apart from the fact that £4m for a player in form and captain of a mid-table Premiership side is rather low.
Jackirius Posted 27 January 2011 Posted 27 January 2011 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/b/blackpool/9378679.stm See you later then Holloway, keep your word.
Mack Posted 27 January 2011 Posted 27 January 2011 Holloway's bonus for staying up is larger than any money he will get out of the Charlie Adam transfer, Adam is a key part to them staying up, it's financially better for him to keep Adam than sell him. Apart from the fact that £4m for a player in form and captain of a mid-table Premiership side is rather low. He'll back himself to sell adam, replace him with someone and still keep them up. He'll be guaranteed wedge from the Adam sale, and still have a great shot at the staying up bonus. Anyway doesn't matter now, he said he would quit if sanctions were imposed over his team selection at Villa, now they have been fined he can jog on. Or was that just more Hollowords??
Edmund Posted 28 January 2011 Posted 28 January 2011 How do the F.A determine what team is classed as a weakened team? I mean where do you draw a line? Say you played 6 reserves and five regular starters what happens then? Every player of the club should be classed on the same level regardless of how many games they've played. Not only is it an insult to the players but it makes a mockery of having a squad.
Mack Posted 28 January 2011 Posted 28 January 2011 I can fully understand why the Premier League enforce this guideline. I many a foreign league smaller clubs can been seen 'opening their legs' for far more sinister reasons than why Blackpool rested their first team. The integrity of the league must be maintained, if clubs start throwing away games on purpose then it will become even more one sided for the select big few clubs than it is already. There is also a huge worldwide betting industry around the premier league, and the league is like because it is 'clean', something that most other leagues cannot boast. Whatever Hollowords wants to say he rested his first team, just as McCarthy did the season before, as a tactic rather than an experiment. Clubs have an agreed responsibility with the league not to do that.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.