Question Is the Coulthirst contract killing the team spirit...

[ooh-andy-ansah]

8 pages and we still haven't had an answer to whether there is such a contract.

There must be if Paul Dickov said there is :smile:

 

[Kenny]

8 pages and we still haven't had an answer to whether there is such a contract.

Chris Phillips just tweeted this:
Brown: "I would never be held to ransom on any loan deal. There are never clauses to say they must play."

 

[ooh-andy-ansah]

Tell you what peeps, if Shaq does have a clause in his contract I reckon he must have the same agent as Torres has had for years :smile:

 

[mrsblue]

Chris Phillips just tweeted this:
Brown: "I would never be held to ransom on any loan deal. There are never clauses to say they must play."

Phil likes to publicly deny this:winking:

 

[ooh-andy-ansah]

Phil likes to publicly deny this:winking:

In other news Phil has never denied he loves a nice lobster for his dinner :smile:

 

[Beefy]

When Barnard rejoined us the team then went on their winless run and at the latter stages when the team were actually winning Barnard was an unused sub.

Food for thought.

That perhaps you can't always solve everything wrong with your side by blaming and then changing the strikers.

 

[Beefy]

I don't doubt for a second that there could be financial incentives for us to be playing Shaq (i.e. we cover his wages when he is fit but not in the team). I don't know either way if a clause like that is in his contract but it would make sense to all parties. It is a financial incentive similar to many in football and life.

But he will likely be on a pretty modest wage and you'd assume it would be built into the wage budget which seems to be being paid ok at the moment.

There's no more logic or fact behind a claim that Shaq has to play for financial reasons than there would be behind claiming that we're deliberately not winning in order to avoid having to pay win bonuses.

 

[mrsblue]

I don't doubt for a second that there could be financial incentives for us to be playing Shaq (i.e. we cover his wages when he is fit but not in the team). I don't know either way if a clause like that is in his contract but it would make sense to all parties. It is a financial incentive similar to many in football and life.

But he will likely be on a pretty modest wage and you'd assume it would be built into the wage budget which seems to be being paid ok at the moment.

There's no more logic or fact behind a claim that Shaq has to play for financial reasons than there would be behind claiming that we're deliberately not winning in order to avoid having to pay win bonuses.

Jamie O'Hara was on 800 quid a week as a trainee then he made the bench in a league cup game and received 1500 in appearance money,Within weeks he was offered a new deal worth 90 k then it was increased to 150k before finally ending on 700k a year,I reckon Shaq is on 2k a week possibly 3 maybe 4.

 

[Blue_Wes]

Somebody mentioned under Brown those you mentioned have scored 26 goals in 160 odd games,Are you happy then with that return?

You never acknowledged my points in why Coulthirst may be selected ahead of our other first team strikers. But then you always did ignore the reasonable points that don't fit in with your agenda.

I'm not happy with our goal return no. But as stated, none of the strikers we have, are scoring. What do you propose? Other than an untried untested striker that isn't even pulling up trees against developmental defenders?

 

[mrsblue]

You never acknowledged my points in why Coulthirst may be selected ahead of our other first team strikers. But then you always did ignore the reasonable points that don't fit in with your agenda.

I'm not happy with our goal return no. But as stated, none of the strikers we have, are scoring. What do you propose? Other than an untried untested striker that isn't even pulling up trees against developmental defenders?

So you moaned about me moaning about our forwards yet you are not happy with their goal return either.

You couldn't make it up.

 

[ooh-andy-ansah]

So you moaned about me moaning about our forwards yet you are not happy with their goal return either.

You couldn't make it up.

Just because someone isn't happy with our forwards performance at the moment it doesn't mean they have to agree with your proposed alternative so why the "you couldn't make it up" comment ?

Can't wait for this explanation.

 

[chapperzUK]

Just to clear it all up, it is the forwards fault that we are not scoring then?

 

[Napster]

Just to clear it all up, it is the forwards fault that we are not scoring then?

No it's Ben Coker's. Keep up.

 

[chapperzUK]

No it's Ben Coker's. Keep up.

Thought it was Simon Francis or have I missed several seasons :unsure:

 

[Ricky Otto]

Jamie O'Hara was on 800 quid a week as a trainee then he made the bench in a league cup game and received 1500 in appearance money,Within weeks he was offered a new deal worth 90 k then it was increased to 150k before finally ending on 700k a year,I reckon Shaq is on 2k a week possibly 3 maybe 4.

Wild speculation to fit your agenda yet again! Don't know if those figures are correct? You have prem players who are starting games earning £400 and getting contracts quadrupled (£1600) so to say Shaq is on £2-4k based on one player is mad! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...00-week-wage-quadrupled-new-Swansea-deal.html


I have text a friend who is a development coach at spurs, i will return with my findings in due course.

 

[Feathers]

Guess what I don't know either!

I have never seen their contracts so I cannot know either way,I can only assume and grow even more suspicious when somebody else told me.

So why persist with the conspiracies. Basically you are making your assumptions on what an unnamed "somebody else" said but choosing to ignore Phil Brown who will be one of handful people who does actually know the position.

 

[mrsblue]

Just because someone isn't happy with our forwards performance at the moment it doesn't mean they have to agree with your proposed alternative so why the "you couldn't make it up" comment ?

Can't wait for this explanation.

I have never said anyone has too agree with me that is up to them however what I find interesting is many of you have ridiculed me which is ok yet most of you are also unhappy with our misfiring forwards,I can only offer an alternative which if tried may or may not work but that is the beauty of the game as none of us will ever know until the untried are tested.

 

[ooh-andy-ansah]

I blame PB for not reading the threads on SZ, if only he would listen to all of the armchair managers we would be top of the league with a +47 goal difference by now.

 

[OldBlueLady]

Just to clear it all up, it is the forwards fault that we are not scoring then?

No it's Ben Coker's. Keep up.

Thought it was Simon Francis or have I missed several seasons :unsure:

All wrong. It is Ron's fault. It always is.

 

[ooh-andy-ansah]

I have text a friend who is a development coach at spurs, i will return with my findings in due course.

Love it.....just goes to show you never know who you are debating with on a bulletin board.......that's made my day :thumbsup: