Darthter 542 Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 people know they had to go but want them to go on our terms. talk about wanting your cake and eating it. Clearly keeping players on £30k a week wasn't feasible.....what annoys most folk though, is when they come out the woodwork later on saying how hard it was to leave etc. If they REALLY wanted to stay that much, they could have or at the very least done the "right" thing for the club & allowed at least a minimal transfer fee - They chose the route that suited their personal short term goals - why not just come out and say "The Newco couldn't afford to pay my previous wage, so moved to a team that could..." 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Clearly keeping players on £30k a week wasn't feasible.....what annoys most folk though, is when they come out the woodwork later on saying how hard it was to leave etc. If they REALLY wanted to stay that much, they could have or at the very least done the "right" thing for the club & allowed at least a minimal transfer fee - They chose the route that suited their personal short term goals - why not just come out and say "The Newco couldn't afford to pay my previous wage, so moved to a team that could..." because green said that wasn't true. so even though we know it was true it would have just been a slagging match. the playes did a lot for the club taking wage cuts. a hell of a lot considering they were innocent victims of whytes con. they probably should have refused the pay cuts and just let d@p release them. then we wouldnt be having this argument. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 because green said that wasn't true. so even though we know it was true it would have just been a slagging match. the playes did a lot for the club taking wage cuts. a hell of a lot considering they were innocent victims of whytes con. they probably should have refused the pay cuts and just let d@p release them. then we wouldnt be having this argument. Aye, millionaire victims. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 victims are victims. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Aye, millionaire victims. A million still isnt enough of a pension to live on - these guys careers are over at, say, 35. A million of a pension, even 2 million of a pension, isnt a great deal on which to survive. They would need multiples of millions to have a decent pension, especially if retiring at 35 (some will have other careers, some will blow it on buying pubs....). Not all of them were millionaires either - I doubt Ness, McCabe were millionaires. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 truth is this is actually a very complicated set of circumstances. they left and we survived. if they had stayed we may have been in admin again. we may also have got more cash. admin again may have left us in better shape tbh. or multitudes of times worse. they left and we are ok. as such i think it worked out fine. stb if you could go back in time and make then stay would you? knowing it may end us? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trueblue 64 53 Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 They did not agree wage cuts for nothing, they got guaranteed transfer fees which more than covered the loss in wages. Greedy bassas. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 They did not agree wage cuts for nothing, they got guaranteed transfer fees which more than covered the loss in wages. Greedy bassas. how did it cover it? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UCF2008 0 Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Something I've been wondering. Had the players contracts rerverted back to their original terms before being TUPE'd? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Something I've been wondering. Had the players contracts rerverted back to their original terms before being TUPE'd? yes mate, they had. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.