Crowd Funding

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?




Not only do I not want to give a single penny of my hard-earned to an already-rich useless tit, I also don't feel that we should pay for the incompetence of those who run the club.

We buy season tickets, match day tickets, pies, merchandise and shit beer. We're already paying our way. I'm not paying again to get rid of Hammond just because I we want rid.
 
I say NO to this absurd notion. I'm all for making him train alone, where he might get the idea that he has outstayed what little welcome he ever had.
 
Notts Blade 123 said:
Does nobody think we should give him a chance, maybe Wilder will get the best out of him...
Click to expand...

url
 
Whilst I really don't want Hammond in our squad for next season, don't you think the treatment of him by our fans is now bordering on embarrassing?

Some of the stuff being said is way OTT.

Yes he was extremely poor, yes he was paid far too much (not his fault) and we definitely don't want him next season. But he's not the first player of this ilk we've had recently!

Some of the vile stuff spouted isn't fair IMO, he seems to have become the figurehead for all that has frustrated us during the past 5 seasons.

Think we need to show a bit more class.
 
HeCanDoMagic said:
Whilst I really don't want Hammond in our squad for next season, don't you think the treatment of him by our fans is now bordering on embarrassing?

Some of the stuff being said is way OTT.

Yes he was extremely poor, yes he was paid far too much (not his fault) and we definitely don't want him next season. But he's not the first player of this ilk we've had recently!

Some of the vile stuff spouted isn't fair IMO, he seems to have become the figurehead for all that has frustrated us during the past 5 seasons.

Think we need to show a bit more class.
Click to expand...

I agree mate, he was made the offer to come in last season, his agent would have been involved, so if we have ended up with a bad deal it is because his agent has had our trousers down. Adkins pursued him for ages (like he did with Dan Burn), almost to the point that we all thought he was going to be a real god send. The reality was the opposite, but that is no different from someone getting employed at any place in the country and not being fit for the task, it happens.

At 33, no one should have expected him to be as fast as Linford Christie, but he did stand up and be counted in the tackle, more than any other midfield player.

The fact that we had foolishly agreed to him having the option of making a decision to stay, says all you need to know.

If you worked in a bank, and they said "well, you are getting made redundant in summer, however if you want to stay for another year, that's you choice", what would you do?

What this shows, to me, is that Adkins was not thinking straight, surely we had Hammond in for a few training sessions before he came on board? Did anyone see that his legs had gone?

The guy will be an expensive bench warmer at this rate. Not ideal.

Hammond could also be the person (among many) that McCabe eluded to when he told the fan forum that he was going to have to pay people off in summer, because no one would come in for them.
 
Almosthuman No it's not a joke, I believe Adkins was completely clueless in his approach with him... If Wilder plays him just in front the back four like a Dier type of character which allows fullbacks to push forward he may be okay... Obviously I may be completely wrong but I don't think he was the worst player I've seen at BTTL, why do we always need a scapegoat????
 
Notts Blade 123 said:
Almosthuman No it's not a joke, I believe Adkins was completely clueless in his approach with him... If Wilder plays him just in front the back four like a Dier type of character which allows fullbacks to push forward he may be okay... Obviously I may be completely wrong but I don't think he was the worst player I've seen at BTTL, why do we always need a scapegoat????
Click to expand...

Because we're paying thousands a week and he's shite. Other players were shite too I'll grant you that. Let him train with the kids or whatever, he shouldn't be anywhere near the first team IMHO.
 
We shouldn't pay up his contract, either utilize him if we ever in need or let him rot in the reserves. Paying up his contract is just seems a waste of money.
I'm personally hoping he wants to still play football and is willing to find a new club.
 
Notts Blade 123 said:
Almosthuman No it's not a joke, I believe Adkins was completely clueless in his approach with him... If Wilder plays him just in front the back four like a Dier type of character which allows fullbacks to push forward he may be okay... Obviously I may be completely wrong but I don't think he was the worst player I've seen at BTTL, why do we always need a scapegoat????
Click to expand...

Had to just double check it was a thread about Hammond before replying, I genuinely thought I might have got it wrong and you were fighting the case for another released player (Maybe Flynn, even though i'm still glad he's gone).

Although Adkins was clueless, Hammond cannot blame Adkins for his completely shite performances. This wasn't a case of utilizing him in the wrong position, he was shite in his preferred position Plus... there are no justifying the number of personal errors he made, the stupid fouls, getting booked all the time, allowing opposition to walk past him, all the misplaced passes and times he conceded possession cheaply and his piss poor work rate.

He isn't a scapegoat, I am never in favor of such things however in my opinion Hammond is one of the poorest players i've ever witnessed (Not just at blades) and he has genuinely cost us points this season and also a replay with Man United dues to him losing his head).

This isn't to defend the rest of the shite team who I am also glad to see the back of however if we are looking for a player in the role you mentioned there will be countless better options that are younger, cheaper and want it more.

Hammond has show his colors in recent weeks starting with not coming out for the lap and culminating with him extending his contract with us which shows no self respect whatsoever.
 



I would suspect that the clause allowing Hammond the option to a contract, was dependant on appearances during his loan spell?

I imagine that's why Adkins rarely, if ever, left him out of the side, irrespective of form. It would be interesting to know how many games triggered the clause and when he reached that point?

It seems to me that this was a typical football 'old pals' arrangement with Adkins looking after his mate, bit like Warnock did at Leeds with Brown, Tongue and Kenny. :(
 
Has anyone checked the stats of our results when Hammond played or didn't play. Would be interesting to see how many wins we had and how many goals we conceded when he was or wasn't in the squad.
This is a job for Silent Blade me thinks.....
 
Living In a Fantasy World said:
We shouldn't pay up his contract, either utilize him if we ever in need or let him rot in the reserves. Paying up his contract is just seems a waste of money.
I'm personally hoping he wants to still play football and is willing to find a new club.
Click to expand...
Let him find a club that wants him and do a deal to pay up some of the difference in wages.
We could pretty much finish his career, if he doesn't play for a year at his age he'll struggle to get his 'match fitness' back. It's up to him whether he wants to take a year's wage off us and retire or try to find a club that will give him two years and maybe some coaching experience. He'd do a job for someone in L2.
 
I'll chip in 50p to pay him up if I can bounce it off the fuckers head from halfway up the kop :mad:
 
TomJonesBlade said:
Not only do I not want to give a single penny of my hard-earned to an already-rich useless tit, I also don't feel that we should pay for the incompetence of those who run the club. .
Click to expand...

Are you now critisism the board for being ambitious?

I remember at the time many predicting we were in dream land trying to get a PL player to join us.
There was no way the board would be ambitious enough to sign him up.

In the past the board used to talk about unreasonable demands from agents for failed purchases.
Many said "it's just excuses, just pay him what he wants".

The blame is with Adkins not the board.

It's the boards job to trust and back the manager but
It's the manager's job to pick the right players.
Hammond has seriously let down Adkins as I reckon his faith in DH was a big factor in losing his job.
 
Sheffsteel said:
Are you now critisism the board for being ambitious?

I remember at the time many predicting we were in dream land trying to get a PL player to join us.
There was no way the board would be ambitious enough to sign him up.

In the past the board used to talk about unreasonable demands from agents for failed purchases.
Many said "it's just excuses, just pay him what he wants".

The blame is with Adkins not the board.

It's the boards job to trust and back the manager but
It's the manager's job to pick the right players.
Hammond has seriously let down Adkins as I reckon his faith in DH was a big factor in losing his job.
Click to expand...

I'm not criticising the board for being ambitious. I'm criticising everybody involved in the running of the club who made it possible for a player to negotiate a permanent contract for himself after his loan deal expired before he'd even kicked a ball for us.

If it was purely down to Adkins and it was he alone that oversaw that particular deal (which is doubtful), then much of the blame still lies with the board for being so thick and allowing that to take place in their club.
 
TomJonesBlade said:
I'm not criticising the board for being ambitious. I'm criticising everybody involved in the running of the club who made it possible for a player to negotiate a permanent contract for himself after his loan deal expired before he'd even kicked a ball for us.

If it was purely down to Adkins and it was he alone that oversaw that particular deal (which is doubtful), then much of the blame still lies with the board for being so thick and allowing that to take place in their club.
Click to expand...
I think until the exit of Brannigan managers were given the freedom to manage there budget whichever way they thought best,Brannigan said as much in an interview during cloughs tenure.It does seem that the technical board was formed on the back of Brannigan departure.Unfortunately by then Adkins
had brought in his loaned players (Sammon, Edgar And Hammond ) all 3 would have been on good wages at there parent club,so none will have come cheap. What do we conclude from this :: well the board backed the manager and maybe nievely let Brannigan have control ( he departed soon after Hammond arrived ) he was managing director so should have been relied upon to use the budget which Adkins had wisely.
Brannigan was gone very quickly in the autumn,I wonder if he carried the can for poor use of the budget.
 
maidmarion said:
Has anyone checked the stats of our results when Hammond played or didn't play. Would be interesting to see how many wins we had and how many goals we conceded when he was or wasn't in the squad.
This is a job for Silent Blade me thinks.....
Click to expand...

I recall William Henry Foulkes telling us how disappointing it was to have no Hammond for the Coventry game and how we was destined to get beaten, but now he is disappeared in to cyberspace he would be unable to impart to his adoring public the reasons why
 
Notts Blade 123 said:
Does nobody think we should give him a chance, maybe Wilder will get the best out of him...
Click to expand...
In addition to Almost Humans post - No, Nay, Never, Ni, Nag, Ne, Nein, Nei, Nne, Ahaa (Nepalese - rather apt) and the many hundreds of other ways I googled for saying No. I wouldn't pay him him a half pence piece if they were still valid currency as that is far too much. Show him the door and tell him to Foxtrot Oscar.
 
I'd be in favour of paying him up, it's clear he's not going to be involved which ever way you look at it. We might as well try and reach a settlement to save a little bit of money. It would also remove the risk of a potentially poisonous mindset and personality affecting the first team squad.
 
Barney said:
I'd be in favour of paying him up, it's clear he's not going to be involved which ever way you look at it. We might as well try and reach a settlement to save a little bit of money. It would also remove the risk of a potentially poisonous mindset and personality affecting the first team squad.
Click to expand...

Would have to agree with you on this one, as much as it will grate on us all to have him associated with us is an embarrassment and can only contribute towards a poisonous atmosphere whether on the subs bench or around the youngsters.

What kind of example does it set when he's just kicking around collecting a paycheck despite being on big money...

What a wanker he is
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lincoln_Blades1889
United as one
Replies
9
Views
2K
The Crab
The Crab
Ball_Sup (Phil)
Ball Sup Blog... v Cardiff City (h)
Replies
0
Views
234
Ball_Sup (Phil)
Ball_Sup (Phil)
BalticBlade
Pies!
2
Replies
48
Views
4K
Birdwell Blade
Birdwell Blade
ThatJa
Giving away x2 tickets to a game of your choice! & Support Grassroots football
Replies
1
Views
269
ThatJa
ThatJa
Ball_Sup (Phil)
Ball Sup Blog... SUFC Academy U21 v Barnsley (h)
Replies
0
Views
394
Ball_Sup (Phil)
Ball_Sup (Phil)

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom