Interesting insight into yesterday

[Revolution]

Coming from somebody who sticks up for Pigs,i am taking no notice of anything you may say

Get back to salivating over Cheds injury,Pig Apologist

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[Revolution]

Wasnt Wilder told initially he was available on a free? At that point do you think he should have said, no no, we'll give you £200 grand?

He was told that, which given Cole's form and the limited amount I've seen of him on TV this season I found baffling. Not surprised we were interested.

As for whether we should have made a higher bid, yes, if we wanted him, we should have made a higher bid, as in the grand scheme of things I suspect that 200 grand is not a lot of money to the club compared to the potential upside of having Cole.

Indeed, that was the strategy United adopted. The entry at 908 pm shows they were prepared to pay. Mitchell - who knows more about Cole than we do - is quoted as saying a cash fee plus appearances money was a good deal for us.

The only problem with all this is that the negotiations as to a fee happened too late for a deal to get over the line. So perhaps we should have counter offered earlier. Hard to tell from the transcript if that would have worked. But in light of what we were prepared to offer a few hours later, if Fleetwood said "no free transfer but he's yours for 200k" I would have snatched their hands off immediately.

 

[him behind you]

You would think that Sinclair needs to be playing but his agent will probably say "stay with me and I'll make you rich" and at the moment he's been true to his word because his contract at Watford means he's now set up for live and doesn't need to play a single match.

The motivation for many youngsters seems to be fortune/ money above actually playing the game they suppose to love.

You've hit the nail on the head here. As much as we fans think the game is important, I'm afraid a huge proportion of the professional footballers clearly just see it as a way to get rich. The game is simply a means to an end, not something they want to do.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

You would think that Sinclair needs to be playing but his agent will probably say "stay with me and I'll make you rich" and at the moment he's been true to his word because his contract at Watford means he's now set up for live and doesn't need to play a single match.

The motivation for many youngsters seems to be fortune/ money above actually playing the game they suppose to love.

Accually I'd be bored if I was a footballer and the cash would be my motivation.

You grow up and stop playing games with your mates and do something in the Adult world.

 

[Bladesway]

The following article makes for quite an interesting read!...

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...ed-boss-chris-wilder-on-transfer-deadline-day

I have said it before and I'll no doubt say it again, there is no part of what Wilder and his team do that doesn't impress me. They operate with utter integrity and maintain credibility through everything they do. Because of that players come because they want to play, not because of what they get paid. Our set up us as good as I can ever remember.

 

[Bladesway]

You've hit the nail on the head here. As much as we fans think the game is important, I'm afraid a huge proportion of the professional footballers clearly just see it as a way to get rich. The game is simply a means to an end, not something they want to do.

What do you do for a living? I'm assuming whatever it is you do it to get paid? They are only the same. Only difference is they have a person acting on their behalf to get them both as much as possible. Whilever there are agents in the game this will continue. If you could ban agents you would instantly cut a cancer out of the game. Set structured, tiered and capped wages and you break down another barrier.

It can be changed but football doesn't actually want to change it.

 

[him behind you]

What do you do for a living? I'm assuming whatever it is you do it to get paid? They are only the same. Only difference is they have a person acting on their behalf to get them both as much as possible. Whilever there are agents in the game this will continue. If you could ban agents you would instantly cut a cancer out of the game. Set structured, tiered and capped wages and you break down another barrier.

It can be changed but football doesn't actually want to change it.

Agreed but I have enough professional pride to want to actually do the job I get paid to do in order to benefit my customers. If I had nothing to do at work and had the opportunity to go to a different employer for the same money where I would work, that's the option I'd take. To stay suggests the attitude of a lazy individual who wants anything for nothing IMHO.

 

[IOM Blade]

Have a suspicion Sinclair bottled it and asked his agent to get him out of the deal, hence the massive increase last min.

 

[Bladesway]

Have a suspicion Sinclair bottled it and asked his agent to get him out of the deal, hence the massive increase last min.

Where do you get this from? Behind the sofa?

 

[Sean Thornton]

He was told that, which given Cole's form and the limited amount I've seen of him on TV this season I found baffling. Not surprised we were interested.

As for whether we should have made a higher bid, yes, if we wanted him, we should have made a higher bid, as in the grand scheme of things I suspect that 200 grand is not a lot of money to the club compared to the potential upside of having Cole.

Indeed, that was the strategy United adopted. The entry at 908 pm shows they were prepared to pay. Mitchell - who knows more about Cole than we do - is quoted as saying a cash fee plus appearances money was a good deal for us.

The only problem with all this is that the negotiations as to a fee happened too late for a deal to get over the line. So perhaps we should have counter offered earlier. Hard to tell from the transcript if that would have worked. But in light of what we were prepared to offer a few hours later, if Fleetwood said "no free transfer but he's yours for 200k" I would have snatched their hands off immediately.

Didnt Fleetwood fail to complete paperwork in time?

 

[Revolution]

Didnt Fleetwood fail to complete paperwork in time?

Yes, hence the thought that it's possible we might have got the deal done if we'd agreed to pay a little earlier. We can't really tell from what has been published.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Yes, hence the thought that it's possible we might have got the deal done if we'd agreed to pay a little earlier. We can't really tell from what has been published.

Exactly but you seem to put all the blame on us, without, like me, being 100% au fait with the situation. It was a judgement call full of negativity rather than taking an unbiased view.

 

[Revolution]

Exactly but you seem to put all the blame on us, without, like me, being 100% au fait with the situation. It was a judgement call full of negativity rather than taking an unbiased view.

Sean, you're in full on McCabe wumao mode here. I was speculating that the deal might have not worked for a particular reason and made a number of caveats. I do not put all the blame on us. Grow up.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Sean, you're in full on McCabe wumao mode here. I was speculating that the deal might have not worked for a particular reason and made a number of caveats. I do not put all the blame on us. Grow up.

Yes. On the basis that it was our fault. As usual.

Grow up? Is that because you have an objection to me passing an opinion on your posts? Because that's what it appears to be.

When discussing McCabe and the club particularly on finances I tend to rely on facts rather than my own opinion, which may be biased. It's what reasonable agenda lite posters do.

 

[Bartleby]

He was told that, which given Cole's form and the limited amount I've seen of him on TV this season I found baffling. Not surprised we were interested.

As for whether we should have made a higher bid, yes, if we wanted him, we should have made a higher bid, as in the grand scheme of things I suspect that 200 grand is not a lot of money to the club compared to the potential upside of having Cole.

Indeed, that was the strategy United adopted. The entry at 908 pm shows they were prepared to pay. Mitchell - who knows more about Cole than we do - is quoted as saying a cash fee plus appearances money was a good deal for us.

The only problem with all this is that the negotiations as to a fee happened too late for a deal to get over the line. So perhaps we should have counter offered earlier. Hard to tell from the transcript if that would have worked. But in light of what we were prepared to offer a few hours later, if Fleetwood said "no free transfer but he's yours for 200k" I would have snatched their hands off immediately.

It went up to £1.2 million at 7.25PM before going back down to 200k. Stupid prices, and an totally amateur way of doing business. The whole shambolic process wants regulating - or maybe a few more clubs to start telling them to shove it, which I am glad we did.

 

[Sean Thornton]

It went up to £1.2 million at 7.25PM before going back down to 200k. Stupid prices, and an totally amateur way of doing business. The whole shambolic process wants regulating - or maybe a few more clubs to start telling them to shove it, which I am glad we did.

And I'd we'd paid £1.2m ( this is not aimed at you Revolution) we'd have been criticised for paying silly money for someone who hadn't yadda yadda yadda.

 

[PeteBlade]

Would loved to have seen the comments on here had there not been a video accusing us of all sorts for not getting the deals done.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Would loved to have seen the comments on here had there not been a video accusing us of all sorts for not getting the deals done.

Sinclairs words would have been believed unconditionally. Without the "proof" demanded by a couple of dimwits when it comes to Wilders statements on matters. (Although they actually just stay clear of accusing Wilder, just in case).

 

[Revolution]

Exactly but you seem to put all the blame on us, without, like me, being 100% au fait with the situation. It was a judgement call full of negativity rather than taking an unbiased view.

Sean, you're in full on McCabe wumao mode here. I was speculating that the deal might have not worked for a particular reason and made a number of caveats.

Yes. On the basis that it was our fault. As usual.

Grow up? Is that because you have an objection to me passing an opinion on your posts? Because that's what it appears to be.

When discussing McCabe and the club particularly on finances I tend to rely on facts rather than my own opinion, which may be biased. It's what reasonable agenda lite posters do.

Sean, its speculation as to why the deal failed. That's all. I haven't accused the McCabes of stealing from the club. You can calm down.

I know it's your mission to defend every criticism, observation or bit of wishful thinking that you feel slights the owners of the club using your facts. Fine, here's a fact: a club of our size had just emerged from a six season spell in the third tier of English football. The McCabes are clearly not infallible.

I don't hold a high regard for the club's ownership. I used to and they destroyed that between 2007 and 2013. Things are improving. I do have a high regard for the club's management.

I wouldn't say I have an agenda. I have met, and like, Mr McCabe. He's done many admirable things whilst he's owned the club. I also feel he lost his way a bit. I'm sure that's reflected in my posts, but I don't have an agenda to slam him or the club at any opportunity. And I don't. I've praised him in this window for not selling good players.

Please feel free to say what you like about any of my posts. That's where good debate comes from. But jumping on that post as an example of me attacking the club as usual is way over the top, and imho makes you look like the one with an agenda.

Don't worry though. I've only ever put one person on ignore, and even when you're attacking an agenda that isn't there you're way more interesting than he is.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Sean, you're in full on McCabe wumao mode here. I was speculating that the deal might have not worked for a particular reason and made a number of caveats.


Sean, its speculation as to why the deal failed. That's all. I haven't accused the McCabes of stealing from the club. You can calm down.

I know it's your mission to defend every criticism, observation or bit of wishful thinking that you feel slights the owners of the club using your facts. Fine, here's a fact: a club of our size had just emerged from a six season spell in the third tier of English football. The McCabes are clearly not infallible.

I don't hold a high regard for the club's ownership. I used to and they destroyed that between 2007 and 2013. Things are improving. I do have a high regard for the club's management.

I wouldn't say I have an agenda. I have met, and like, Mr McCabe. He's done many admirable things whilst he's owned the club. I also feel he lost his way a bit. I'm sure that's reflected in my posts, but I don't have an agenda to slam him or the club at any opportunity. And I don't. I've praised him in this window for not selling good players.

Please feel free to say what you like about any of my posts. That's where good debate comes from. But jumping on that post as an example of me attacking the club as usual is way over the top, and imho makes you look like the one with an agenda.

Don't worry though. I've only ever put one person on ignore, and even when you're attacking an agenda that isn't there you're way more interesting than he is.

Before I leave you with your thoughts on this, just two things that you've not only dramatised, but made up, because I never mentioned anything about you suggesting McCabe has been stealing from the club. It's a rather bizarre comment to make, whatever the circumstances.

Secondly, I believe I suggested that there was negativity in your posts. As there often is. I don't recall accusing you of "attacking" the club so why you need to pretend otherwise is distinctly odd. I know it's fashionable on here to deliberately misquote posters for effect but I'm surprised at you doing it, one of the last people I would have expected. Which is why, as I tend to do when it happens, am leaving it here.

Disappointing.

 

[Revolution]

Before I leave you with your thoughts on this, just two things that you've not only dramatised, but made up, because I never mentioned anything about you suggesting McCabe has been stealing from the club. It's a rather bizarre comment to make, whatever the circumstances.

Secondly, I believe I suggested that there was negativity in your posts. As there often is. I don't recall accusing you of "attacking" the club so why you need to pretend otherwise is distinctly odd. I know it's fashionable on here to deliberately misquote posters for effect but I'm surpised at you doing it, one of the last people I would have expected. Which is why, as I tend to do when it happens, am leaving it here.

Disappointing.

You miss my point. Sorry if it was not clear. My point is that my post garnered the same response from you as the ones you hand out to those who do accuse McCabe from stealing from the club or similar crimes. Your response basically accused me of posting as part of an agenda of negativity. That was what I felt was unfair.

Anyway, enough.

 

[Harrisblade]

Would loved to have seen the comments on here had there not been a video accusing us of all sorts for not getting the deals done.

I think they were from 11pm onwards on the morning of 1st Sept

 

[Sean Thornton]

You miss my point. Sorry if it was not clear. My point is that my post garnered the same response from you as the ones you hand out to those who do accuse McCabe from stealing from the club or similar crimes. Your response basically accused me of posting as part of an agenda of negativity. That was what I felt was unfair.

Anyway, enough.

Fair enough, but I was replying to you initially on a specific and certainly didn't mean to corrall you in with those who post purely out of spite and lack of reasoning and/or facts.

If I didn't make that clear I apologise for that particular misunderstanding.

 

[Harrisblade]

Yes, hence the thought that it's possible we might have got the deal done if we'd agreed to pay a little earlier. We can't really tell from what has been published.

Bloody Hell!
It's deadline day - the player has been (seemingly) put in the shop window by Fleetwood themselves, what paperwork wouldn't have been ready, apart from putting in a name of buying club and price to be paid.
More likely that no-one had told Rosler and he threatened to walk.
Fleetwood bottled it and then turned the fax off.

 

[HermitageBlade]

Sorry if it's already been mentioned but who was the player Wilder was on the phone to discussing Heneghan? I think he called him Carl.

 

[WhiteHawk]

Sorry if it's already been mentioned but who was the player Wilder was on the phone to discussing Heneghan? I think he called him Carl.

There's a Carl McHugh who currently plays for Motherwell so probably him?

 

[HermitageBlade]

There's a Carl McHugh who currently plays for Motherwell so probably him?

Wonder how him and Wilders paths have crossed?

 

[WhiteHawk]

Wonder how him and Wilders paths have crossed?

It might not be him, I just presumed it would be someone who was a current team mate of him.

Doesn't look like he's played under Wilder in his career so that could rule him out.

 

[HermitageBlade]

It might not be him, I just presumed it would be someone who was a current team mate of him.

Doesn't look like he's played under Wilder in his career so that could rule him out.

Yeah I thought that, I've had a look at the teams he's played for and no clues their. Might be a youth player.

 

[davidblade]

To be honest I'm not sure in the long run all this exposure to these transfer dealing is going to benefit United a great deal. Yes we know agents are cunts but there is a danger to bucking the system and exposing the corruption. It's not always a good idea to make enemies.