[Siberian Spireite]

trickytrevsfanclub, on 19 July 2018 - 05:21 PM, said:

As I’ve said on a previous thread Robbie Weir has been a decent player for many seasons. He hasn’t become a bad one overnight. He was playing in a team so bad last season it’d have made Ronaldo look like Ronald McDonald.

Yes, but in my view he was a major contributor to that team being so bad.

[Goku]

Siberian Spireite, on 19 July 2018 - 11:03 PM, said:

Yes, but in my view he was a major contributor to that team being so bad.

Are you insinuating that being slow, small, not a very good passer, not particularly strong and unable to offer a goal scoring threat from midfield whilst shouting and pointing at everyone and everything despite failing to do your own job aren’t good traits? Can we have some positivity please! Allen clearly has better credentials than you, so just agree with everything he says please

[Skywalker]

Weir never looked fully fit at any point last season so whilst not a huge fan, I’ll reserve judgment this season.

[dtp]

Stoptalkingbol, on 19 July 2018 - 10:55 PM, said:

How do you know he wasn’t offered a pay off behind the scenes? Why is it a fact? He’s clearly not going to take one through is he and take a fraction of the contract he has. No one will offer him anywhere near the money he will be on now with this stupid extension so he knows full well he has to stay and bank his last decent pay day. Allen doesn’t have a choice but to retain him if he chooses to see out his contract, that’s a proper fact for you.

He’s not a good player and been relegated twice to the conference since his injuries. There’s nothing to defend, he’s shot as a player but some moronic negotiator added this clause into his deal. Making up facts won’t make him over come these injuries and become a decent player unfortunately.

There is no argument regarding whoever negotiated his contract which included an extension if he played a certain number of games - it is not unusual, though, in football.

However, it is a fact that MA included him in his list of players he wanted to keep and not the list of players he granted free transfers to some of whom were then negotiated with to arrive at a settlement figure to terminate their contracts.

Weir initially decided to not take up his contract extension. It is assumed, as their has been no announcement since, that he has signed that extension. The very fact that MA wanted him to stay and gas now made him captain logically suggests that no effort has been made to pay him off and get rid. As captain, MA must consider that Weir will be starting most games whenever possible.

Quite honestly, I am more concerned about where Talbot fits in to the team than Weir as I don't see him being available for as many games nor do I see which position he will be consistently first choice for.

[Stoptalkingbol]

dtp, on 20 July 2018 - 07:21 AM, said:

There is no argument regarding whoever negotiated his contract which included an extension if he played a certain number of games - it is not unusual, though, in football.

However, it is a fact that MA included him in his list of players he wanted to keep and not the list of players he granted free transfers to some of whom were then negotiated with to arrive at a settlement figure to terminate their contracts.

Weir initially decided to not take up his contract extension. It is assumed, as their has been no announcement since, that he has signed that extension. The very fact that MA wanted him to stay and gas now made him captain logically suggests that no effort has been made to pay him off and get rid. As captain, MA must consider that Weir will be starting most games whenever possible.

Quite honestly, I am more concerned about where Talbot fits in to the team than Weir as I don't see him being available for as many games nor do I see which position he will be consistently first choice for.

It’s stupid when someone has had cruciate injuries, assess it a year at a time, it’s not like we would get a fee for him if he was under contract so pretty pointless.

He had no offers elsewhere on the money he’s on, he was never going anywhere unless some other mug took a punt on him, but they clearly didn’t. Allen has to use him as he’s part of his contracted squad, why does this mean he wanted him to stay? Pretty sure he’d rather have shelled his wage and got his own men in as he has done with the rest of the useless higher earners. Weir skippered last season, so no surprise he’s still doing it.

No, agree with that. Another gamble and hopefully he is on a pay as you play deal or again our chief negotiator needs a kick in the nuts.

[Spire-Power]

dtp, on 20 July 2018 - 07:21 AM, said:

There is no argument regarding whoever negotiated his contract which included an extension if he played a certain number of games - it is not unusual, though, in football.

However, it is a fact that MA included him in his list of players he wanted to keep and not the list of players he granted free transfers to some of whom were then negotiated with to arrive at a settlement figure to terminate their contracts.

Weir initially decided to not take up his contract extension. It is assumed, as their has been no announcement since, that he has signed that extension. The very fact that MA wanted him to stay and gas now made him captain logically suggests that no effort has been made to pay him off and get rid. As captain, MA must consider that Weir will be starting most games whenever possible.

Quite honestly, I am more concerned about where Talbot fits in to the team than Weir as I don't see him being available for as many games nor do I see which position he will be consistently first choice for.

Drew will cover RB and LB when he's fit. For me he's the first choice RB though MA may see things differently. Good option to have.

[dtp]

Stoptalkingbol, on 20 July 2018 - 09:25 AM, said:

It’s stupid when someone has had cruciate injuries, assess it a year at a time, it’s not like we would get a fee for him if he was under contract so pretty pointless.

He had no offers elsewhere on the money he’s on, he was never going anywhere unless some other mug took a punt on him, but they clearly didn’t. Allen has to use him as he’s part of his contracted squad, why does this mean he wanted him to stay? Pretty sure he’d rather have shelled his wage and got his own men in as he has done with the rest of the useless higher earners. Weir skippered last season, so no surprise he’s still doing it.

No, agree with that. Another gamble and hopefully he is on a pay as you play deal or again our chief negotiator needs a kick in the nuts.

The 10 players MA put on the transfer list were all contracted to the club. MA specifically stated he wanted Weir to stay neither did he, personally, put him on the transfer list.

Of the 10 players MA put on the transfer list 7 have been paid off and one loaned out for the season. If MA had wanted to negotiate a okay-off for Weir he would have placed him on the transfer list and tried to negotiate a settlement figure - he didn't.

If MA didn't want Weir as captain he is enough of his own man to not have appointed him to that possession rather than follow the decisions taken by previous managers.

Regarding his actual contract don't you think your idea of assessing his fitness one year at a time was, in fact, taken into account and that is why a one year extension clause subject to number of appearances was inserted?

[Spire-Power]

Stoptalkingbol, on 20 July 2018 - 09:25 AM, said:

It’s stupid when someone has had cruciate injuries, assess it a year at a time, it’s not like we would get a fee for him if he was under contract so pretty pointless.

He had no offers elsewhere on the money he’s on, he was never going anywhere unless some other mug took a punt on him, but they clearly didn’t. Allen has to use him as he’s part of his contracted squad, why does this mean he wanted him to stay? Pretty sure he’d rather have shelled his wage and got his own men in as he has done with the rest of the useless higher earners. Weir skippered last season, so no surprise he’s still doing it.

Obviously no club wanted Weir and if we have offered him a severance deal it wasn't attractive enough for him. So, to that end, we may be "stuck with him". However I don't think Weir having previously captained the failed/relegated team explains why he has been appointed captain of Allen's new team. I'm more inclined towards the view that Allen rates Weir and didn't want him to leave. If so I'm surprised by that. I'd expected Nelson to be captain.

[Stoptalkingbol]

dtp, on 20 July 2018 - 10:39 AM, said:

The 10 players MA put on the transfer list were all contracted to the club. MA specifically stated he wanted Weir to stay neither did he, personally, put him on the transfer list.

Of the 10 players MA put on the transfer list 7 have been paid off and one loaned out for the season. If MA had wanted to negotiate a okay-off for Weir he would have placed him on the transfer list and tried to negotiate a settlement figure - he didn't.

If MA didn't want Weir as captain he is enough of his own man to not have appointed him to that possession rather than follow the decisions taken by previous managers.

Regarding his actual contract don't you think your idea of assessing his fitness one year at a time was, in fact, taken into account and that is why a one year extension clause subject to number of appearances was inserted?

It’s a stupid clause as it was triggered during last season and not reassessed close season, plus his terms will be the same, not on reduced terms which he would get now if offered something. Now we are stuck with another no hoper on a football league salary clogging up the budget. Again, whoever inserted the clause is an idiot, no point trying to justify it.

[Essex_Spireite]

metallilad, on 19 July 2018 - 04:48 PM, said:

He looked poor against football league teams. Look at those EFL leagues and tell me if you see our name in any of them.
The post I put up offers different opinions as to why last season he was poor. So why can't he look a different class in a lower league or playing a different game or playing for a different manager?
There's a lot of "in MA we trust" that gets mentioned but lots of people questioning this decision. Are you really saying that you know better than Martin Allen?

The way you have put it you would think Martin Allen has never made a mistake. He's been sacked many times in his career so I am sure his mistakes are countless.
If Robbie Weir is allowed to show he is 'a different class' in a lower league then why weren't Evatt, Hird and even Jack Lester given the same chance?
The biggest factor for me isn't Weir's footballing quality, we can argue till the cows come home regarding that; my biggest issue is that he asked to leave the club meaning he thought he was better and didn't want to get this club back up to the football league.

[metallilad]

Essex_Spireite, on 20 July 2018 - 11:44 AM, said:

The way you have put it you would think Martin Allen has never made a mistake. He's been sacked many times in his career so I am sure his mistakes are countless.
If Robbie Weir is allowed to show he is 'a different class' in a lower league then why weren't Evatt, Hird and even Jack Lester given the same chance?
The biggest factor for me isn't Weir's footballing quality, we can argue till the cows come home regarding that; my biggest issue is that he asked to leave the club meaning he thought he was better and didn't want to get this club back up to the football league.

Until MA comes out and says that he got rid of Evo and Hird you surely can't blame him for that decision? Jack supposedly come to an agreement to leave, so I can't really see what that has to do with any of this.

However.
I strongly agree with your opinion about how RW thought he was too good to battle for us and get us back up into the FL. But all I'm saying is that against Gainsborough he looked good and battled for the team. If MA sees fit to hand him the armband then can't people just accept it and get with the team rather than slagging players off before we start the season?

[metallilad]

Goku, on 20 July 2018 - 07:15 AM, said:

Are you insinuating that being slow, small, not a very good passer, not particularly strong and unable to offer a goal scoring threat from midfield whilst shouting and pointing at everyone and everything despite failing to do your own job aren’t good traits? Can we have some positivity please! Allen clearly has better credentials than you, so just agree with everything he says please

Well. You clearly think that you know more than him even though he is the manager of the club and has obviously seen enough of him to decide to keep him and make him captain.

But to more or less quote one person's opinion to answer another person's post is just carrying on a disagreement which is pathetic and quite frankly immature.

[Siberian Spireite]

Essex_Spireite, on 20 July 2018 - 11:44 AM, said:

The way you have put it you would think Martin Allen has never made a mistake. He's been sacked many times in his career so I am sure his mistakes are countless.
If Robbie Weir is allowed to show he is 'a different class' in a lower league then why weren't Evatt, Hird and even Jack Lester given the same chance?
The biggest factor for me isn't Weir's footballing quality, we can argue till the cows come home regarding that; my biggest issue is that he asked to leave the club meaning he thought he was better and didn't want to get this club back up to the football league.

Evo and Hird's contracts were up. Weir's was not, alas.

[dtp]

Spire-Power, on 20 July 2018 - 10:35 AM, said:

Drew will cover RB and LB when he's fit. For me he's the first choice RB though MA may see things differently. Good option to have.

You covered it with the words "when he's fit" and "cover".

It looks like Drew will miss the start of the season thus giving other players chance to establish themselves in the starting eleven. If they do, he will only break into the team from the bench or if a player is injured.

Unless he is injured between now and the start of the season, Weir will lead the team out at Ebbsfleet as first choice. Only, if he gets injured or doesn't come up to MA's expectations will he lose his place.

Simply put, Weir's starting position is for him to lose whereas Drew's starting position is for another player to lose and Drew to win.

[Albert Holmes Slides In]

If Robbie Weir wasn't fit all last season as someone suggests, what was going on in training, the medical room and in team selection?

No one seems to be asking the question - what effect it will have on the rest of the team who seemed to be keen to play for Chesterfield that the man selected as Captain actually didn't want to do that. Won't they wonder how they appear to Mr Allen if Robbie Weir is the most likely candidate in the squad?

Everything Mr Allen was doing seemed to be about building a team with spirit. This might be a masterstroke but I don't feel much like shouting, "Captain my Captain!" We won't need to resurrect Robin Williams to play the part when they make the film in widescreen vanaramascope.

[Goku]

metallilad, on 20 July 2018 - 12:36 PM, said:

Well. You clearly think that you know more than him even though he is the manager of the club and has obviously seen enough of him to decide to keep him and make him captain.

But to more or less quote one person's opinion to answer another person's post is just carrying on a disagreement which is pathetic and quite frankly immature.

Why is it? I’m using your argument and pointing out how ridiculous it is

[Valley Blues]

Stoptalkingbol, on 20 July 2018 - 11:39 AM, said:

It’s a stupid clause as it was triggered during last season and not reassessed close season, plus his terms will be the same, not on reduced terms which he would get now if offered something. Now we are stuck with another no hoper on a football league salary clogging up the budget. Again, whoever inserted the clause is an idiot, no point trying to justify it.

How much exactly is Weir on a week?
And what is a football league salary? Accrington and Salford City spring to mind.

This post has been edited by Valley Blues: 20 July 2018 - 04:03 PM

[Stoptalkingbol]

Valley Blues, on 20 July 2018 - 04:02 PM, said:

How much exactly is Weir on a week?
And what is a football league salary? Accrington and Salford City spring to mind.

Like the rest of our underperforming previous squad and extortionate wage bill, too much. No one came in for him despite wanting to leave, that’s how much he’s on.

[isleaiw1]

Stoptalkingbol, on 20 July 2018 - 05:16 PM, said:

Like the rest of our underperforming previous squad and extortionate wage bill, too much. No one came in for him despite wanting to leave, that’s how much he’s on.

Or maybe they did but when he looked at what his options were and listened to the manager, he decided this was his preferred option and knuckled down...

We just don’t know. Some are quoting as though they know all the background - much is guesswork!

[Stoptalkingbol]

isleaiw1, on 20 July 2018 - 05:49 PM, said:

Or maybe they did but when he looked at what his options were and listened to the manager, he decided this was his preferred option and knuckled down...

We just don’t know. Some are quoting as though they know all the background - much is guesswork!

He wanted to leave and couldn’t get a club for that money, nobody wanted him! Knuckled down on his safe wedge in the conference.