nicko Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 Have I missed something? What happened on Friday? Villa trying to agree a fee again...and Warnock being left out by the manager who said his head wasn't right...that was a busy Friday by anyone's standards. It's obviously not right between Sam and the player at the moment and the bottom line is that a move is best for all concerned...as long as Villa pay the fee. When a club leaves a player out because of an off-the-field issue like this it is hard to go back to 'normality' afterwards.
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
The Prof. Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 Villa trying to agree a fee again...and Warnock being left out by the manager who said his head wasn't right...that was a busy Friday by anyone's standards. It's obviously not right between Sam and the player at the moment and the bottom line is that a move is best for all concerned...as long as Villa pay the fee. When a club leaves a player out because of an off-the-field issue like this it is hard to go back to 'normality' afterwards. Come on Nicko - spill the beans was it Friday when the 'bust up' happened? And more importantly - How much is the fee roughly?
roversmum Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 I see. At first thought, I didn't want Warnock to go but under the circumstances and looking back at various things perhaps it will be for the best. As Paul said, I also felt some sort of empathy with Stevie but it's not fair to disrupt the other players who need to be concentrating on the job in hand, that is unprofessional.
John Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 So late in the day though, selling a key member of the team/squad. Leaves little time to bring firstly an adequate replacement and secondly this world class midfielder who everyone keeps going on about. Sam said selling him may not be in the best interests of the club, especially as Nelsen is now injured.
Stuart Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 I see. At first thought, I didn't want Warnock to go but under the circumstances and looking back at various things perhaps it will be for the best. As Paul said, I also felt some sort of empathy with Stevie but it's not fair to disrupt the other players who need to be concentrating on the job in hand, that is unprofessional. What really annoys me though, mum, is that the 'bigger' clubs know exactly what they are doing. A club like ours doesn't want to sell their better players so they make a low bid to unsettle the player, get other players to get in contact and sound them out. It eventually escalates to the point where the player becomes a liability and the club has to sell. I'm absolutely sick of it. Until the FA actually punishes a club (points decuction) then they'll carry on doing it. I'll be watching the Lescott fallout with interest.
captainhaircut Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 Nicko, Is there anything in the Burnley Nicky Butt link this morning? I thought Sam might have a look at Butt to play about 50% of our games and bring along N'Zonzi.
T4E Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 Come on Nicko - spill the beans was it Friday when the 'bust up' happened? And more importantly - How much is the fee roughly? I think you're making too much out of it mate. Friday was the day the team boarded the coach and went up to Sunderland - and Warnock was left off. Sam says his head wasnt right - the inference is he refused to travel. I dont think there's any more of a bust up than that. Anyway, on the subject itself, I think this is a great deal for the club. Warnock is at his optimum value right now, and we have an excellent player in Givet to take his place. As long as we invest in a good midfielder this will end up a good window for us. Regarding value for money, I think Rovers work slightly differently to the usual. We can compare Warnock with the fees being touted for Lescott and Upson if we like, but I doubt that is the boards first main consideration. More likely, when we receive a bid for a player, we look at age, potential future value, and in my opinion most vitally, what they cost us. We signed Warnock for 1.5m, and are selling him for 8m, having got the best 2 1/2 years of his career out of him. Thats a good looking deal in anyone's eyes, and I suspect that's how it has been assessed. Unfortunately, the more we sign players on the cheap and make them goodies, the more we're likely to accept slightly less than market value for them. I'm sure buying clubs consider the same.
roversmum Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 There is that to it, Jisty. Perhaps I'll get my MON doll and the pins out again then Of course, wouldn't you just love it, if City were deducted points for the reasons you state but it's not going to happen, is it?
jannerman Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 So late in the day though, selling a key member of the team/squad. Leaves little time to bring firstly an adequate replacement and secondly this world class midfielder who everyone keeps going on about. Sam said selling him may not be in the best interests of the club, especially as Nelsen is now injured. Totally agree with this - business should have been done and dusted and the team should be well on the way to gelling I think selling Warnock now with no replacement - or backup for Nelsen and/or a decent midfielder will cost us dear in the long run.....
nicko Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 Come on Nicko - spill the beans was it Friday when the 'bust up' happened? And more importantly - How much is the fee roughly? I don't think there was a bust-up as such...the real argument is about the size of the fee...but while that goes on there isn't much point in playing Warnock. If he gets injured that wrecks everything. I have to stress I don't think Warnock refused to play. Nicko, Is there anything in the Burnley Nicky Butt link this morning? I thought Sam might have a look at Butt to play about 50% of our games and bring along N'Zonzi. Nothing in the Burnley link...they couldn't pay his petrol money now...most of the dough gone already. Not a bad shout for Rovers, though. Wonder if it was 'planted' for the reason? That is just a guess, by the way.
Stuart Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 I think you're making too much out of it mate. Friday was the day the team boarded the coach and went up to Sunderland - and Warnock was left off. Sam says his head wasnt right - the inference is he refused to travel. I dont think there's any more of a bust up than that. That was my original question to Nicko really. Was wondering if there was more to it than Villa's bid. Probably not. Regarding value for money, I think Rovers work slightly differently to the usual. We can compare Warnock with the fees being touted for Lescott and Upson if we like, but I doubt that is the boards first main consideration. More likely, when we receive a bid for a player, we look at age, potential future value, and in my opinion most vitally, what they cost us. We signed Warnock for 1.5m, and are selling him for 8m, having got the best 2 1/2 years of his career out of him. Thats a good looking deal in anyone's eyes, and I suspect that's how it has been assessed. We don't really know that though do we. If that were true, everyone would agree to sell. There is that to it, Jisty. Perhaps I'll get my MON doll and the pins out again then Of course, wouldn't you just love it, if City were deducted points for the reasons you state but it's not going to happen, is it? Love it, I would. But no. Doesn't mean I have to like it though.
T4E Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 We don't really know that though do we. If that were true, everyone would agree to sell. Sorry, I meant so far, wasn't making a prediction. But you'd have to say we had him in what you would consider his peak years.
Stuart Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 Sorry, I meant so far, wasn't making a prediction. But you'd have to say we had him in what you would consider his peak years. Aye, fair enough. I personally think he is nearing his peak - the question then would be how long he plateau'd for before going into decline. And for a club like Rovers how long his value would remain for. Unless there are some big injuries to several left backs, we won't see Chelsea or City sniffing around. I just hate the fact that we are being forced to sell when, as things stand, it would weaken our team and there is so much doubt about whether the funding would be available to strengthen.
thenodrog Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 I'd rather play Zurab than Warnock any day! Much much better defender. Lets just grab the cash and get Tuncay in quick! Are you realted to Paul Ince?
Fylde Coast Fan Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 BBC Gossip: "Portsmouth are willing to sell midfielder Niko Kranjcar should any other club match their £8m valuation of the Croatia international." Yes please...
RoyRover Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 What really annoys me though, mum, is that the 'bigger' clubs know exactly what they are doing. A club like ours doesn't want to sell their better players so they make a low bid to unsettle the player, get other players to get in contact and sound them out. It eventually escalates to the point where the player becomes a liability and the club has to sell. I'm absolutely sick of it. Until the FA actually punishes a club (points decuction) then they'll carry on doing it. I'll be watching the Lescott fallout with interest. My thoughts exactly. I always thought that could have been the way that Bentley wanted to leave. Being away with the England team, players would have been putting things in his head.
Guest ErinBrown Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 BBC Gossip: "Portsmouth are willing to sell midfielder Niko Kranjcar should any other club match their £8m valuation of the Croatia international." Yes please... £5 million plus extras based on appearances would make me happy. Appearances because he has had problems with injuries.
rover6 Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 What really annoys me though, mum, is that the 'bigger' clubs know exactly what they are doing. A club like ours doesn't want to sell their better players so they make a low bid to unsettle the player, get other players to get in contact and sound them out. It eventually escalates to the point where the player becomes a liability and the club has to sell. I'm absolutely sick of it. Until the FA actually punishes a club (points decuction) then they'll carry on doing it. I'll be watching the Lescott fallout with interest. Erm...that's what all clubs do - including us. Signing a player is generally a mucky business.
T4E Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 I just hate the fact that we are being forced to sell when, as things stand, it would weaken our team and there is so much doubt about whether the funding would be available to strengthen. Are we being forced to sell? It sounds like the club have a value on the player and Villa are close to matching it. We don't have to sell, we are choosing to.
thenodrog Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 My thoughts exactly. I always thought that could have been the way that Bentley wanted to leave. Being away with the England team, players would have been putting things in his head. players AND agents! Apparently England hotels are always crawling with em. An England call up is a poisoned chalice, a nest of vipers in fact and condoning it does the FA's reputation no good at all.
Tyrone Shoelaces Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 Nicko, Is there anything in the Burnley Nicky Butt link this morning? I thought Sam might have a look at Butt to play about 50% of our games and bring along N'Zonzi. Butt's not what we want, he's just another Grella. We could do with an attacking midfielder not another defensive one. We want a Paul Scholes type player.
Stuart Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 Erm...that's what all clubs do - including us. Signing a player is generally a mucky business. I actually think John Williams is a lot more honest in his dealings that that. Are we being forced to sell? It sounds like the club have a value on the player and Villa are close to matching it. We don't have to sell, we are choosing to. The way things are going, with Warnock struggling to find it in him to play for us I'd say our hand is being forced.
T4E Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 The way things are going, with Warnock struggling to find it in him to play for us I'd say our hand is being forced. Nicko did say that he didnt think Warnock had refused to play.
thenodrog Posted August 23, 2009 Posted August 23, 2009 Nicko did say that he didnt think Warnock had refused to play. Correct. And imo he'd have been mighty shocked and undergone a reallity check when SA told him he was dropped. SW would have thought himself irreplaceable but to any good manager the team always comes before an individual. Given the result at Sunderland he might find one or two of his teammates a trifle frosty on Monday.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.