[sophocles]

h again, on 01 October 2015 - 10:51 PM, said:

Well, young Snelly obviously doesn't understand for a start, which is why I have to keep pointing out the reason they went. You can add Sophocles to that small but select list.

Who we have replaced them with is irrelevant to the argument, but if you want my view they aren't Championship failures, though they may be crocks. In another month or so we might be in a position to judge - at the moment any opinions are just urinating into the breeze, because we haven't the data to make a judgement.

It's you who has misunderstood mate. I've understood all along why those players had to go , given the fact that our owner is not a multi - billionaire and wanted some of his investment back. My argument which you appear not to have grasped, has been with those posters who have tried from the start to pretend that the owner's policy would somehow make us stronger by replacing our class players with even better ones. The fact that selling those players would result inevitably in a decline in the quality of football is all I've been pointing out, NOT that the owner should have had a different policy, because that was his choice. There HAS already been enough time, contrary to your statement, for the huge drop in quality to become obvious. What has still to be discovered, is whether the predictable decline can be halted and, hopefully reversed before we drop so far that recovery to anywhere near the position some predicted, becomes impossible. It's far too early to say how it will turn out yet, but it's obvious a big improvement is needed.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

h again, on 01 October 2015 - 10:21 PM, said:

Perfectly true. I know about the same as you do, which is next to nothing. Difference is, I don't feel the need to big myself up by pretending to be in the know.
Doyle, Roberts, Clucas and Darikwa - and Cooper for that matter - were going as soon as their agents negotiated the deals, and nothing anybody at CFC could do was going to change that. Whether DA wanted to keep them or not is irrelevant - their agents knew to the nearest pound what they were worth and they'd have been fools to turn it down.
Once again you demonstrate how little you know about what's happening in the real world.
Or, to be fair, you probably do, but take any opportunity to slag off the management of CFC.

Ah, so stepping over the typical jibes and taunts you've simply dodged my questions and repeated your claim.

As usual.

Well, at the risk of 'bigging myself up', I can only go by what a senior member of the CFC establishment told me a few months ago 'We had to sell Doyle because we needed the money.'


And I'll accept his version of events over your's any day of the year.

[calvin plummers socks]

MDCCCLXVI, on 02 October 2015 - 05:09 PM, said:

Ah, so stepping over the typical jibes and taunts you've simply dodged my questions and repeated your claim.

As usual.

Well, at the risk of 'bigging myself up', I can only go by what a senior member of the CFC establishment told me a few months ago 'We had to sell Doyle because we needed the money.'


And I'll accept his version of events over your's any day of the year.

That's true^ I bumped into Doyley at an event and he said the same (that he had no intention of moving and it was a forced move.
Said he would have stayed very happily (the obvious big boy rise softened the blow I guess) but said he loved it at Town

[The Black Triangle]

h again, on 30 September 2015 - 09:45 PM, said:

Absolutely correct? It's completely the opposite, as you must realise. I don't suppose for one moment that DA was sorry to see the money rolling in, but there was no way on this earth that he could have kept players offered multiples of their earnings in higher divisions - they were going without a backward glance, and fair play to them.
And if, by some bit of good fortune, a few of the current crop of youngsters come good, then exactly the same will happen - to be followed immediately by you denouncing DA for selling them.
Back in the real world it's players and agents who decide what's going to happen. We don't like it, but most people are too sensible to use it as a stick to beat the Chairman with.

I`m not sure I follow your train of thought on this thread. You seem to be saying the chairman wanted to keep the best players in the squad, while letting the contracts of Ryan, Darikwa,Morsy Cooper and Doyles contracts run down to the last year or so, even run out, before opening talks to renew? That does not make sense at all. If the club wanted to keep these players they would have been in talks with them about extending before the January window and increase any transfer value? Yet you later say the chairman was correct to accept any offers? You seem to contradict your self with each reply? Its very confusing.

[spireitewolf]

dim view said:

1443711488[/url]' post='1149389']
I agree wi thee.

The Chairman could have secured the services of Morsy and Tendayi when we were doing well last year, taking the initiative and rendering any subsequent antics by their agents controllable. He chose not to because he wanted debt clearing. With hindsight, he'd have signed them up if he'd known he would be able to sell Clucas.

We now come onto whether 'blame' is appropriate. I personally am so sick of hearing about the bludddy debt that my vote goes on getting it cleared. So, no blame. We have sufficient resources now to react to any crises and consolidate, thus being realistically in no worse position than we were last year, but with less debt.

NO WORSE POSITION ?

[newboldsteve]

The black triangle, on 02 October 2015 - 08:18 PM, said:

I`m not sure I follow your train of thought on this thread. You seem to be saying the chairman wanted to keep the best players in the squad, while letting the contracts of Ryan, Darikwa,Morsy Cooper and Doyles contracts run down to the last year or so, even run out, before opening talks to renew? That does not make sense at all. If the club wanted to keep these players they would have been in talks with them about extending before the January window and increase any transfer value? Yet you later say the chairman was correct to accept any offers? You seem to contradict your self with each reply? Its very confusing.

and were do you get the extra money from to extend these contracts and give them the championship wages they would want

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

newboldsteve, on 03 October 2015 - 12:05 PM, said:

and were do you get the extra money from to extend these contracts and give them the championship wages they would want

So are you saying 'Teflon' was lying about the budget being increased to two million?

About the sizeable offers we supposedly made to Ryan, Morsy and Darikwa?

This post has been edited by MDCCCLXVI: 03 October 2015 - 12:18 PM

[sophocles]

spireitewolf, on 03 October 2015 - 10:40 AM, said:

NO WORSE POSITION ?

Have you not noticed before that DV inhabits a parallel universe? In that amazing place you can sell your best players, bring in cheap kids and crocked older players, put loads of money in the bank AND have a stronger team! I just wish I could live there - sounds marvellous.

[The Black Triangle]

newboldsteve, on 03 October 2015 - 12:05 PM, said:

and were do you get the extra money from to extend these contracts and give them the championship wages they would want

please read the post again.

[newboldsteve]

MDCCCLXVI, on 03 October 2015 - 12:10 PM, said:

So are you saying 'Teflon' was lying about the budget being increased to two million?

About the sizeable offers we supposedly made to Ryan, Morsy and Darikwa?

lol get me a pint of what your on ffs

[h again]

MDCCCLXVI, on 02 October 2015 - 05:09 PM, said:

Ah, so stepping over the typical jibes and taunts you've simply dodged my questions and repeated your claim.

As usual.

Well, at the risk of 'bigging myself up', I can only go by what a senior member of the CFC establishment told me a few months ago 'We had to sell Doyle because we needed the money.'


And I'll accept his version of events over your's any day of the year.

Ah, these senior members of the CFC establishment who seek you out to pass on a bit of dirt. Couldn't be that they see somebody coming who's desperate for any bit of tittle-tattle, and fill them up accordingly could it?
Must be right though. I was outside the gaffer's office earwigging when he was trying to sell the Doyler, and the lad was in tears and begging to be allowed to stay and play for CFC for 'nowt, 'cos he loved us and wasn't bothered about the extra three grand a week he'd been offered.

[h again]

The black triangle, on 02 October 2015 - 08:18 PM, said:

I`m not sure I follow your train of thought on this thread. You seem to be saying the chairman wanted to keep the best players in the squad, while letting the contracts of Ryan, Darikwa,Morsy Cooper and Doyles contracts run down to the last year or so, even run out, before opening talks to renew? That does not make sense at all. If the club wanted to keep these players they would have been in talks with them about extending before the January window and increase any transfer value? Yet you later say the chairman was correct to accept any offers? You seem to contradict your self with each reply? Its very confusing.

I didn't say anything of the sort. No wonder you're confused if you read that somewhere.

I said the Chairman didn't have a choice - once they decided to go for a lot more money, and their agents got into their ears, that was it. There's absolutely no point in blaming DA because our best players went, though the reduction of the debt would have softened the blow.

[The Black Triangle]

h again, on 04 October 2015 - 09:03 PM, said:

I didn't say anything of the sort. No wonder you're confused if you read that somewhere.

I said the Chairman didn't have a choice - once they decided to go for a lot more money, and their agents got into their ears, that was it. There's absolutely no point in blaming DA because our best players went, though the reduction of the debt would have softened the blow.

Didn't you say he tried to keep them earlier in the thread?

[Cactoise]

NOKIN, on 03 October 2015 - 12:57 PM, said:

This is nothing, imagine owning a VW dealership in Greece..

I thought that was funny,have a green young man.

[h again]

sophocles, on 02 October 2015 - 12:25 AM, said:

It's you who has misunderstood mate. I've understood all along why those players had to go , given the fact that our owner is not a multi - billionaire and wanted some of his investment back. My argument which you appear not to have grasped, has been with those posters who have tried from the start to pretend that the owner's policy would somehow make us stronger by replacing our class players with even better ones. The fact that selling those players would result inevitably in a decline in the quality of football is all I've been pointing out, NOT that the owner should have had a different policy, because that was his choice. There HAS already been enough time, contrary to your statement, for the huge drop in quality to become obvious. What has still to be discovered, is whether the predictable decline can be halted and, hopefully reversed before we drop so far that recovery to anywhere near the position some predicted, becomes impossible. It's far too early to say how it will turn out yet, but it's obvious a big improvement is needed.

But you say in post no.8 that it's a 'situation DA has created'. No he hasn't - he's had to bow to circumstances.

[h again]

The black triangle, on 04 October 2015 - 10:30 PM, said:

Didn't you say he tried to keep them earlier in the thread?

No, but I hope he did. It would have been wasted effort unless he offered Championship wages, but worth a try.

[sophocles]

h again, on 05 October 2015 - 11:48 AM, said:

But you say in post no.8 that it's a 'situation DA has created'. No he hasn't - he's had to bow to circumstances.

It's quite possible to create a situation because you feel circumstances are pushing you towards taking that action. It was still DA'S choice to choose that path, which, as I've said repeatedly, he had every right to do because it's his money. He still had a choice, and the results are being experienced by us at the moment. I've never questioned his right to take the action he decided on, but I did question, at the time, whether it would make complete financial sense in the long run. I wonder what proportion of his financial gains from player sales is now being lost through lower attendances, paying for new player contracts possibly with more to go on loans, and the likely fall in the amount his successor might be willing to pay to take the club off his hands? I'm not saying he SHOULD have made other choices last year, but IMO it's not wrong to say he COULD have done.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

h again, on 04 October 2015 - 08:51 PM, said:

Ah, these senior members of the CFC establishment who seek you out to pass on a bit of dirt. Couldn't be that they see somebody coming who's desperate for any bit of tittle-tattle, and fill them up accordingly could it?
Must be right though. I was outside the gaffer's office earwigging when he was trying to sell the Doyler, and the lad was in tears and begging to be allowed to stay and play for CFC for 'nowt, 'cos he loved us and wasn't bothered about the extra three grand a week he'd been offered.

Well here's the simple truth.

Whilst enjoying an afternoon in hospitality I had a conversation with a couple of high profile individuals involved at the Club. For what it's worth we've spoken before and everything was conducted in the kind of friendly, civilised manner that those who don't just post sneers whilst hiding behind a messageboard username usually engage in. Now obviously it'd be wrong for me to go into detail on here and I refuse to do that, however if you'd like to PM me or finally accept one of my offers to discuss things over a handshake and pint I'm more than happy to reveal more.

Fair enough, 'h'? Or are you gonna continue your scornful denial whilst cowering in anonymity.


Oh, and PS: here's what you said about Doyle's departure back in July: 'Doyle - leading scorer in the division, prime target. Cardiff approach us with an offer, turned down, negotiation results in higher offer, sold.'

"Turned down"? "Negotiation"? So perhaps the Chairman did have a choice after all.

This post has been edited by MDCCCLXVI: 05 October 2015 - 03:02 PM

[newboldsteve]

sophocles, on 05 October 2015 - 12:14 PM, said:

It's quite possible to create a situation because you feel circumstances are pushing you towards taking that action. It was still DA'S choice to choose that path, which, as I've said repeatedly, he had every right to do because it's his money. He still had a choice, and the results are being experienced by us at the moment. I've never questioned his right to take the action he decided on, but I did question, at the time, whether it would make complete financial sense in the long run. I wonder what proportion of his financial gains from player sales is now being lost through lower attendances, paying for new player contracts possibly with more to go on loans, and the likely fall in the amount his successor might be willing to pay to take the club off his hands? I'm not saying he SHOULD have made other choices last year, but IMO it's not wrong to say he COULD have done.

just say da chose the other path of refusing to let the player go then we would be in the same position next season as we are this but we would have 2 to 3 million worse off because the players would have walked away for free . how can that be a better option. so with a little insight the only option was to sell and try and build again with some cash behind us