EGBFitness Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 You think a government office would take any notice of an application for something that may never happen. Or they give him a work permit for us and last minute he signs for Chelsea. They will have investigated the criteria then knowing he fits it apply. Then untill the permit is given they have to wait for it to be processed like anyone would have too. No the applying for an application isn't what I was saying! The context in what I mean by the quote was that surely before we agree a club record and agree contract we would of assessed the risk involved with applying for his application knowing it would of had a chance of being initially turned down if reports are true. For a club like Chelsea they would be happy to make the transfer and if was turned down after appeal they would loan him out for a few years until granted but is a higher risk for us as we could be breaking our club record and he may not even be eligible to play
Babylon Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 No the applying for an application isn't what I was saying! The context in what I mean by the quote was that surely before we agree a club record and agree contract we would of assessed the risk involved with applying for his application knowing it would of had a chance of being initially turned down if reports are true. For a club like Chelsea they would be happy to make the transfer and if was turned down after appeal they would loan him out for a few years until granted but is a higher risk for us as we could be breaking our club record and he may not even be eligible to play IF the permit doesn't get granted he can't sign for us, or Chelsea to get loaned out. He just goes back to his club and we sign someone else. Of course we have assessed whether he will get one or not. There is no guarantee, because it's purely down to opinion. But as I said, Pearson thinks we have a very good chance considering his record.
davieG Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 I suspect it was less to do with money and more to do with his demeanor and ability to sell the club yhus convincing them we were a great option rather than a so so one which we've apparently had to go with Kramaric and succeeded.
foxoffderby Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 As well as dealing with contracts of current and potential signings I think his role was also to make sure we adhere to FFP rules.
Monsell1976 Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 I would say all involved the owners, Pearson, and director of football. My opinion is they all sat down, the owners said what do we need, Pearson said we don't need that much, after he publicly said he would give the squad a shot at the premier league, terry said who do you want if I can get them at the right price. Then I'm guessing between the lot of them figures were discussed, and the owners, Pearson and terry set a budget for what they were prepared to pay for a player and wages. I cannot believe buisness people like the owners would let Robinson have a say on what we spend, he probably negotiated a deal, with the budgets in mind, and when it got to the figures set, the owners would have said offer more or pull out.
foxes_rule1978 Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 The fact he got the boot meant the owners felt he didn't do his job anywhere near the expected level. Giving that job was dealing with transfers then yes he was the obstacle and that has now been removed
foxfanazer Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 He directs football.... Sneaky Russians (Borris the Bullet Dodger): Reminded me of this
Dickov22 Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 I'm not saying that they might not of looked into it but some clubs wouldn't go through with a transfer if they know it's a 50/50 chance of gaining a work permit It isn't 50/50 so your point is invalid
EGBFitness Posted 9 January 2015 Posted 9 January 2015 It isn't 50/50 so your point is invalid http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11712/9637160/premier-league-rob-dorsett-says-it-is-50-50-whether-andrej-kramaric-is-granted-a-work-permit lol
Carlos88LCFC Posted 9 January 2015 Posted 9 January 2015 http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11712/9637160/premier-league-rob-dorsett-says-it-is-50-50-whether-andrej-kramaric-is-granted-a-work-permit lol Its not 50-50. No where in that article is their anything about the case we have put forward or any quotes from anyone who is 'ITK' saying its 50-50. Pearson said something along the lines of "we are very confident it will be ok"... Very confident is not 50-50.
EGBFitness Posted 9 January 2015 Posted 9 January 2015 Its not 50-50. No where in that article is their anything about the case we have put forward or any quotes from anyone who is 'ITK' saying its 50-50. Pearson said something along the lines of "we are very confident it will be ok"... Very confident is not 50-50. Sky Sports News HQ reporter Rob Dorsett writes: Sky sources suggest it's 50-50 whether or not Kramaric will be granted a visa allowing him to work in the UK. It's a very complicated, very political process, with no guarantee of success. For Kramaric, there are added complications.- this is from that article. I think Rob Dorsett is going to be a little bit more 'ITK' than a lot of people posting on here. Yes it is sky sports and they are going to add a little drama too it but then on the other side of the coin Pearson is of course going to say in a press conference that they are very confident. The link to the article was because my comment was apparently 'invalid' because no one has suggested it's 50-50
MooseBreath Posted 9 January 2015 Posted 9 January 2015 A 42-year-old goalkeeper and a big money foreign striker yet to even join never mind prove himself. Talk about the "quality we are targeting" might be just a little but premature, no? Robinson may well still have the last laugh here.
foxfanazer Posted 9 January 2015 Posted 9 January 2015 A 42-year-old goalkeeper and a big money foreign striker yet to even join never mind prove himself. Talk about the "quality we are targeting" might be just a little but premature, no? Robinson may well still have the last laugh here.Thought Chelsea had hijacked the deal?
MooseBreath Posted 9 January 2015 Posted 9 January 2015 Thought Chelsea had hijacked the deal? What's that got to do with anything?
5waller5 Posted 9 January 2015 Posted 9 January 2015 What's that got to do with anything? The point being that you can't have it both ways .... Chelsea hijacking the deal would infer that he's a quality player. Whilst you are saying that TR may have the last laugh as we have only signed an old keeper and an unproven risk.
FireFox Posted 9 January 2015 Posted 9 January 2015 Sky Sports News HQ reporter Rob Dorsett writes: Sky sources suggest it's 50-50 whether or not Kramaric will be granted a visa allowing him to work in the UK. It's a very complicated, very political process, with no guarantee of success. For Kramaric, there are added complications.- this is from that article. I think Rob Dorsett is going to be a little bit more 'ITK' than a lot of people posting on here. Yes it is sky sports and they are going to add a little drama too it but then on the other side of the coin Pearson is of course going to say in a press conference that they are very confident. The link to the article was because my comment was apparently 'invalid' because no one has suggested it's 50-50 Lmao if you honestly believe this. "Sky sources" or Rob Dorsett are/is ITK? How? From what I understand the permit has yet to be denied so there is yet to be the appeal, and so what are there as sources to say it is 50-50? It is pure speculation at best, pure bs most likely, trying to make some drama. Plus the article is full of other bs that "Sky sources" say Chelsea "snared" him but did not pursuing because of this supposed problem? And yet Kramaric would also be much more likely to get the permit if it was Chelsea he signed with?
Carlos88LCFC Posted 9 January 2015 Posted 9 January 2015 Lmao if you honestly believe this. "Sky sources" or Rob Dorsett are/is ITK? How? From what I understand the permit has yet to be denied so there is yet to be the appeal, and so what are there as sources to say it is 50-50? It is pure speculation at best, pure bs most likely, trying to make some drama. Plus the article is full of other bs that "Sky sources" say Chelsea "snared" him but did not pursuing because of this supposed problem? And yet Kramaric would also be much more likely to get the permit if it was Chelsea he signed with? Don't think SSN can come to terms with a player not chasing the money and forgetting about the love for the game. Kramaric has all the attributes, technically and mentally to be a star... Can't believe Bony has gone for 30m and we pick this guy up for 7.5 with add ons.
MooseBreath Posted 9 January 2015 Posted 9 January 2015 The point being that you can't have it both ways .... Chelsea hijacking the deal would infer that he's a quality player. Whilst you are saying that TR may have the last laugh as we have only signed an old keeper and an unproven risk. That Kramaric is unproven at this level isn't my opinion it's just a fact. Plenty of clubs in positions similar to ours have signed big money foreign striker who have flopped. I'm not saying I think that will happen, I hope that it doesn't, I'm just saying that it's a bit premature to conclude that Robinson was holding us back while we don't know if these signings are any good yet.
filbertway Posted 9 January 2015 Posted 9 January 2015 Don't think SSN can come to terms with a player not chasing the money and forgetting about the love for the game. Kramaric has all the attributes, technically and mentally to be a star... Can't believe Bony has gone for 30m and we pick this guy up for 7.5 with add ons. Bony came over to the prem for £12million and proved himself a top performer at this level to be fair. If Kramaric does the same I dare say he'd be going for a fee in that area as well.
Carlos88LCFC Posted 9 January 2015 Posted 9 January 2015 That Kramaric is unproven at this level isn't my opinion it's just a fact. Plenty of clubs in positions similar to ours have signed big money foreign striker who have flopped. I'm not saying I think that will happen, I hope that it doesn't, I'm just saying that it's a bit premature to conclude that Robinson was holding us back while we don't know if these signings are any good yet. We know Scwartzer (spell check) is good. This guys goal scoring record at league, Europa cup & International level speaks for itself. - If Chelsea were sniffing around, I can't remember Mouriniho buying many flops, and before you say Shevchenko.. .That wasn't him!
Carlos88LCFC Posted 9 January 2015 Posted 9 January 2015 Bony came over to the prem for £12million and proved himself a top performer at this level to be fair. If Kramaric does the same I dare say he'd be going for a fee in that area as well. Wilfred Bony(26) - 9 goals in 20 appearances in a team that's top half of the league. Leonardo Ulloa(28) - 7 goals in 20 playing in a team that's bottom of the league in his first season with the club & division. Ulloa has to be worth around 25 million now then!!
filbertway Posted 9 January 2015 Posted 9 January 2015 Wilfred Bony(26) - 9 goals in 20 appearances in a team that's top half of the league. Leonardo Ulloa(28) - 7 goals in 20 playing in a team that's bottom of the league in his first season with the club & division. Ulloa has to be worth around 25 million now then!! 17 in 34 last campaign and 9 in 20 this. If Ulloa hits and maintains a 1 in 2 strike rate over 18 months I think we'd probably be able to ask for a decent wedge if a top club were after him. Obviously you'd have to take into account the fact he'd be 29/30 by the time that came around so it'd probably be a lower fee.
The Doctor Posted 9 January 2015 Posted 9 January 2015 Sky Sports News HQ reporter Rob Dorsett writes: Sky sources suggest it's 50-50 whether or not Kramaric will be granted a visa allowing him to work in the UK. It's a very complicated, very political process, with no guarantee of success. For Kramaric, there are added complications.- this is from that article. I think Rob Dorsett is going to be a little bit more 'ITK' than a lot of people posting on here. Yes it is sky sports and they are going to add a little drama too it but then on the other side of the coin Pearson is of course going to say in a press conference that they are very confident. The link to the article was because my comment was apparently 'invalid' because no one has suggested it's 50-50 Simple question - is Rob Dorsett more in the know the club over the clubs transfer dealings? No. So it's not 50-50, it's far more weighted toward us.
Nod.E Posted 9 January 2015 Posted 9 January 2015 Could have been an agreement with him and the club to pay him off in order to allow this narrative to transpire.I.e. Top: "Do you like money?"TR: "Go on.."Top: "Right. I will need you to leave the club. Name your price."TR: "Okay, why?"Top: "The fans are getting on our manager's back. All of this negativity is creating an atmosphere at the club. If we get rid of you, it will look like we blame you for our performance this season. Fans will then begin to think you were the reason we didn't make signings over summer, and will be more sympathetic of Pearson's plight. We need the players to be confident and, at the moment, the fans are not helping. Sacking you will buy Pearson time with the fans, and we need him at this club. He has done a brilliant job, and frankly, we wouldn't have a clue who to appoint as his successor. We only knew to go for Pearson due to his previous success with Leicester! We need to buy big this January, and if we do so, you will be the scapegoat and take attention away from the players and Pearson. We appreciate you have done a good job but we are confident that we can manage with you."TR: "Fair enough. If you need me, I'll be in the Bahamas."Top: "Cheers lad."Sounds slightly far-fetched but I genuinely believe this could be a great piece of PR.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.