VinjayV4 Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Rhodes camp are saying they're shocked because they can hardly admit that they couldn't agree personal terms. Here's a club statement and judging by this (plus other reactions) Rhodes is responsible. http://www.rovers.co.uk/news/article/blackburn-rovers-jordan-rhodes-middlesbrough-2930096.aspx
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
Backroom DE. Posted January 31, 2016 Backroom Posted January 31, 2016 Here's a club statement and judging by this (plus other reactions) Rhodes is responsible. http://www.rovers.co.uk/news/article/blackburn-rovers-jordan-rhodes-middlesbrough-2930096.aspx Heh... not exactly a "welcome back" from Lambert. If Rhodes is going to stay here for another six months, I'm not sure what there is to gain by alienating him with comments like that.
LDRover Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Sounds like Rhodes's agent has scuppered the deal. If this is a move Rhodes desperately wanted, as we're led to believe, he needs to bin the agent off. That is unless they're offering him a couple of grand a week less than the 45k he's on now. Poor lad has to pay the bills I suppose.
Riverside67 Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Given that statement Rhodes needs to fire his agent who has royally screwed up the negotiations
yoda Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Here's a club statement and judging by this (plus other reactions) Rhodes is responsible. http://www.rovers.co.uk/news/article/blackburn-rovers-jordan-rhodes-middlesbrough-2930096.aspx Not sure how you draw that conclusion, deal agreed with the two clubs 1st so JR then asks to talk to them. All straight forward and business like. You don't know what Boro offered, could be a pay cut, Boro should have done their homework, would not have been to hard with family members. Reeks of Boro wanting him on the cheap.
VinjayV4 Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Heh... not exactly a "welcome back" from Lambert. If Rhodes is going to stay here for another six months, I'm not sure what there is to gain by alienating him with comments like that. Well he's not exactly damning Rhodes and neither is the club. However I'm sure that statement is deliberately clarifying who's responsible. So Rhodes may have to backtrack on his claims.
Veevs Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 I'm worried about where this leaves us...player wants out, manager is happy to get rid...Monday morning will be a bit awks!! Not really, both parties have been pretty good in terms of comments towards each other.. from the interview with PL after the match: "“We have to have a plan here. This club has to have a plan to move forward. There is a lot, a lot of work to get done. Sometimes you have to go back to go forward and the Jordan thing, while people will be disappointed, they have to understand why we have done it. This football club will outweigh any individual. It always will. And we have to make ourselves as strong as we can. “Nobody can criticise Jordan Rhodes’ contribution to Blackburn Rovers. He’s been a phenomenon. But that’s football. We have to get a better team. That’s my concern, having a team that can compete to get out of the league, and hopefully the money will help us in that aspect.”"
yorkblue Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 "After securing a good deal for the club, which would have enabled me to rebuild the squad,"..... That sounds like there will be no rebuilding now or a much-reduced version. It also suggests that there is little money coming out of Venkys pocket either.
Backroom Tom Posted January 31, 2016 Author Backroom Posted January 31, 2016 Reading that statement you have to hope Rhodes is content with a place on the bench for a while
LDRover Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 "After securing a good deal for the club, which would have enabled me to rebuild the squad,"..... That sounds like there will be no rebuilding now or a much-reduced version. It also suggests that there is little money coming out of Venkys pocket either. I think it's more to do with FFP to be honest.
Backroom DE. Posted January 31, 2016 Backroom Posted January 31, 2016 Well he's not exactly damning Rhodes and neither is the club. However I'm sure that statement is deliberately clarifying who's responsible. Saying Rhodes has wanted to leave for three windows and essentially blaming him for the inability to rebuild the squad isn't damning? Not sure there was any need for Lambert to comment before the transfer was concluded beyond a "bid has been accepted and we'll see what happens from here." If Rhodes does now stay, it's going to be awkward to say the least. We'll either have a player on £40k p/w on the bench, or on the pitch knowing we're looking to get rid ASAP. Unless he's sold tomorrow that's a pretty keany situation.
VinjayV4 Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Saying Rhodes has wanted to leave for three windows and essentially blaming him for the inability to rebuild the squad isn't damning? Not sure there was any need for Lambert to comment before the transfer was concluded beyond a "bid has been accepted and we'll see what happens from here." If Rhodes does now stay, it's going to be awkward to say the least. We'll either have a player on £40k p/w on the bench, or on the pitch knowing we're looking to get rid ASAP. Unless he's sold tomorrow that's a pretty keany situation. Well he's certainly not damning him in the way he did with Koita. Granted for different reasons...
magicalmortensleftpeg Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Rhodes can't complain. He's asked to go several times and this time we've let him but his advisors have ballsed it up. What PL has said is just the facts. We all know JR. wants out. It's no more awkward than it was last transfer window. What I like is that now Rhodes has truly shown his colours, PL does not have to feel any obligation to play Rhodes. Some option to have on the bench.
JBiz Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 "We have to have a plan here. This club has to have a plan to move forward. There is a lot, a lot of work to get done. Sometimes you have to go back to go forward " Anybody else get chills reading this sentence ?
Backroom DE. Posted January 31, 2016 Backroom Posted January 31, 2016 Well he's certainly not damning him in the way he did with Koita. Granted for different reasons... Koita was gone when he made those comments, which was the main difference. Lambert was talking about how Rhodes should have been sold years ago before the transfer had even been concluded.
magicalmortensleftpeg Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Saying Rhodes has wanted to leave for three windows and essentially blaming him for the inability to rebuild the squad isn't damning? Not sure there was any need for Lambert to comment before the transfer was concluded beyond a "bid has been accepted and we'll see what happens from here." If Rhodes does now stay, it's going to be awkward to say the least. We'll either have a player on £40k p/w on the bench, or on the pitch knowing we're looking to get rid ASAP. Unless he's sold tomorrow that's a pretty keany situation. But we all know that he's wanted to leave for the last year or so?! That's not new information. PL wants the money from the sale, at no point has he criticised JR personally. The person who will feel the most uncomfortable will be JR. PL has nothing to hide.
VinjayV4 Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Koita was gone when he made those comments, which was the main difference. Lambert was talking about how Rhodes should have been sold years ago before the transfer had even been concluded. Yeah but that's not exactly a personal thing just more for the greater good in his view. If he said Rhodes is unprofessional, his advisors are a disgrace now that would be what I call personal.
yoda Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Best course of action now is for PL (he will already be preparing what he will say) to sit down with JR and say your best chance of the PL is here, get your head together and make it happen
matt83 Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Some option to have on the bench. As luck would have it we only had 6 subs yesterday so there's a space open.
magicalmortensleftpeg Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Koita was gone when he made those comments, which was the main difference. Lambert was talking about how Rhodes should have been sold years ago before the transfer had even been concluded. Becaus the money was so good. Not because Rhodes isn't a good player.
tomphil Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Well the riot that the Darwen End promised if Rhodes was sold has been called off. I do expect a site crash though
Mani Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Why should he welcome him back? I said he'd had his head turned over 12 months ago and the club has known since then that he'd go anywhere given the chance..hence the valuation being mooted around the club since then.. So finally, they get rid of the lad, for good money and it falls through because he's asked for too much money!!? I'd be pretty p*#sed off too if I was Lambert. Especially considering most of the fans still think the sun shines out of his ar*e! What makes it worse is that literally none of them rate him as a footballer...from the old or apparently the new regime! I bet Lambert is gutted.
yoda Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 As luck would have it we only had 6 subs yesterday so there's a space open. Kismet as Barry would say
wolfie Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Journo in The Northern Echo reckons there's a chance it could still go through https://t.co/vemThS9aPy
RibbleValleyRover Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Reading that statement just confirms what I thought earlier that Rhodes has to go this window. Probably not going to get £9m+ for him now, most likely a lot less. Staying would do more harm than good both for the player and the team. What a mess.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.