Tommy Doyle

[Moan? Nope-I saw Longhorn]

And the other two were under contract.

Aye
& Then leave for nowt in 12 months

 

[jono_t2000]

So why didn’t he sign ?

Because the price City wanted was much much higher than the discounted price that Wolves were given.

 

[Ndiayewillalwaysloveyou]

So why didn’t he sign ?

Because we needed to afford Stevens, Fleck, Osborn and Sharps wages. Luckily didn't keep two of em.

 

[SUFC Guy]

Reported that we wanted a relegation clause inserting that he didn't agree to.

 

[Moan? Nope-I saw Longhorn]

Because the price City wanted was much much higher than the discounted price that Wolves were given.

Aye
So,
Even if wanted to return we couldn’t afford him.
&/or: He was so keen to come to us he wouldn’t forego a (likely) lower salary than @ Wolves & wasn’t prepared to ‘risk’ that reducing even further if we were to be relegated.
Wonder if he’s (equally) keen to commit to WW come season’s end?
Or, might he (again) have better options (than them, & us) ?

 

[Moan? Nope-I saw Longhorn]

Because we needed to afford Stevens, Fleck, Osborn and Sharps wages. Luckily didn't keep two of em.

Aye
Those (2) salaries banjaxed the deal - May as well chuck in the cost of Traore Slimane et al
Or
He wasn’t as ‘committed’ to returning as is being suggested - not a criticism of the player - he needs to do what is best for his future (bank career (& bank balance)

 

[CarlMcBlade]

I felt having McAtee back without Doyle was like having Morecambe without Wise, Clough without Taylor and fish without chips. Yes, all very good…but not the full package.

 

[crucialkneeligaman]

Another fantastic strike from Tommy. All been discussed before, now full time Wolves player,can we move on, well documented as to why he wouldn't sign for us.

 

[Sithblade]

Not sure why BBC Sport have stated he's on loan from City, read a few other match reports also saying the same.

 

[Trigger Blade]

I thought he was on loan, but Wolves have the option to buy him for an agreed fee, much lower than we were quoted as City wanted Nunes. Just a vague memory, not an informed view.

 

[HarryHaslam]

Not sure why BBC Sport have stated he's on loan from City, read a few other match reports also saying the same.
View attachment 177206

He is on loan isn’t he?

 

[mattbianco1]

Not sure why BBC Sport have stated he's on loan from City, read a few other match reports also saying the same.
View attachment 177206

It's a loan to buy. But as part of the Nunes deal they said the buy part can be about 4-5m

They'd be stupid not to take them up on it

 

[CarlMcBlade]

It's a loan to buy. But as part of the Nunes deal they said the buy part can be about 4-5m

They'd be stupid not to take them up on it

They were stupid to sell MGW to a team swimming in the same water.

 

[mattbianco1]

They were stupid to sell MGW to a team swimming in the same water.

That £40m helped to see off FFP

 

[John Street West Terrace]

Reminded me of the winner against Blackburn in the QF last season

 

[CarlMcBlade]

That £40m helped to see off FFP

I guess my natural anti Forest bias is showing itself a little bit there.

 

[Nick Jansky]

Tommy would have, he really wanted to come back.

But not enough to accept a relegation clause.