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

davewebbsbrain · Sep 10, 2014

Feathers said:
But why let the facts get in the way of a good rumour!!

Lets try this one.....I have it on good authority from my cousins best friend who met a man in a pub, who had a PM on Shrimperzone that when Tomlin signed his contract with Southend it was stipulated that he must play every game or he would release some dodgy pictures of Paul Sturrock in his kilt.

He didn't play every game and I haven't seen any dodgy pictures of PS in a kilt so that one must be a rumour

mrsblue · Sep 10, 2014

Feathers said:
But why let the facts get in the way of a good rumour!!

Lets try this one.....I have it on good authority from my cousins best friend who met a man in a pub, who had a PM on Shrimperzone that when Tomlin signed his contract with Southend it was stipulated that he must play every game or he would release some dodgy pictures of Paul Sturrock in his kilt.

I listened to Paul Dickov and another bloke where they both stated the parent club can do whatever they wish as it's up to the club who takes their players to accept or reject the deal,They both agreed the parent club can insist on playing time.

These 2 surely know more than us regarding these deals and why did Spurs and Fulham loan us guys who by a miracle played in every game yet they both rarely scored yet still are selected.

Were they both played on merit..I don't think so.

dannypav · Sep 10, 2014

davewebbsbrain said:
Pointless post as he was our player, not a loan player

It's far from pointless.
The point is Tomlin took 16 games to score and ended up as being one of our main goal threats.
Coulthirst is getting 'kicked' after 6.
The point is , all is not well right now , but give the guy a chance.
None of us know if it will work out , but people getting on his back now certainly won't help.
It was the same with Tomlin , but he was a bit older and wiser and didn't 'go under'.
Not sure this kid will survive at this rate.

Feathers · Sep 10, 2014

mrsblue said:
I listened to Paul Dickov and another bloke where they both stated the parent club can do whatever they wish as it's up to the club who takes their players to accept or reject the deal,They both agreed the parent club can insist on playing time.

These 2 surely know more than us regarding these deals and why did Spurs and Fulham loan us guys who by a miracle played in every game yet they both rarely scored yet still are selected.

Were they both played on merit..I don't think so.

What, someone knows more about these deals than you?

mrsblue · Sep 10, 2014

Feathers said:
What, someone knows more about these deals than you?

I am open to these weird deals as I know they happen without Dickov convincing me.

sufclee · Sep 10, 2014

Phil Brown quote from Chris Phillips.

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

Feathers · Sep 10, 2014

mrsblue said:
I am open to these weird deals as I know they happen without Dickov convincing me.

I am not disputing that such deals can and do exist. It is your continued reference to them despite Phil Brown saying that we would not agree to them and Cauley Woodrow not playing (or starting as you first said) every game.

If and when Shaq does not play a game will you publicly state on here that you were wrong?

united we stand · Sep 10, 2014

mrsblue said:
I listened to Paul Dickov and another bloke where they both stated the parent club can do whatever they wish as it's up to the club who takes their players to accept or reject the deal,They both agreed the parent club can insist on playing time.

These 2 surely know more than us regarding these deals and why did Spurs and Fulham loan us guys who by a miracle played in every game yet they both rarely scored yet still are selected.

Were they both played on merit..I don't think so.

Just to be sure, you are talking about the same player that a few weeks after playing for us was playing in the premiership , and then was called up for England U21's and was the only player to play all games on a short tour.
Maybe Phil ,like Fulham and England saw 'something' in him in training every day and thought he was the best man for the job. With hindsight it didn't work. But lets say we didn't play him, we would have been saying the below ......
' yeah we had a guy at Southend on loan, didn't play him as he didn't score in his first few matches and therefore was obviously crap . After he left us he played in the prem (and scored) and then played for England U21's (and scored). He had a great record before coming to us and getting him was a real coup, I don't understand why we didn't give him more of a chance'.

Lastly seeing as how you keep making the same comments I will reply witht he same comments others make to your posts on Coulthirst------ Gavin Tomlin !

ooh-andy-ansah · Sep 10, 2014

united we stand said:
Just to be sure, you are talking about the same player that a few weeks after playing for us was playing in the premiership , and then was called up for England U21's and was the only player to play all games on a short tour.
Maybe Phil ,like Fulham and England saw 'something' in him in training every day and thought he was the best man for the job. With hindsight it didn't work. But lets say we didn't play him, we would have been saying the below ......
' yeah we had a guy at Southend on loan, didn't play him as he didn't score in his first few matches and therefore was obviously crap . After he left us he played in the prem (and scored) and then played for England U21's (and scored). He had a great record before coming to us and getting him was a real coup, I don't understand why we didn't give him more of a chance'.

Lastly seeing as how you keep making the same comments I will reply witht he same comments others make to your posts on Coulthirst------ Gavin Tomlin !

Great post but I fear it will go whoosh over certain people's heads :smile:

It could also be argued that sometimes these youngsters from Prem clubs will struggle a bit in a lower league side because the average lower league player isn't going to spot the same runs, expect a certain ball to be played etc. This is what makes it bloody hard to get the whole team working as a unit but hey all PB needs to do is throw in a few of our youth team to sort it out according to some :nope:

mrsblue · Sep 10, 2014

Feathers said:
I am not disputing that such deals can and do exist. It is your continued reference to them despite Phil Brown saying that we would not agree to them and Cauley Woodrow not playing (or starting as you first said) every game.

If and when Shaq does not play a game will you publicly state on here that you were wrong?

If you look back I stated Woodrow must have pitch time which he duly had,When Shaq signed I remained silent because I thought another funny deal was in the offing ,I remained silent until I was informed he must play a portion or the club will need to cough up his wages or part of.

Of course Phil denies it yet he won't leave Shaq out or never dropped Woodrow from the squad.The time to tell is when Shaq doesn't get a game unless injured and Phil omits him from further squads.

Blue_Wes · Sep 10, 2014

dannypav said:
It's far from pointless.
The point is Tomlin took 16 games to score and ended up as being one of our main goal threats.
Coulthirst is getting 'kicked' after 6.
The point is , all is not well right now , but give the guy a chance.
None of us know if it will work out , but people getting on his back now certainly won't help.
It was the same with Tomlin , but he was a bit older and wiser and didn't 'go under'.
Not sure this kid will survive at this rate.

The best thing in all this, is the person giving him the main aggro is the one who flooded the blood clamouring for a younger, hungry striker, despite being told, young and hungry isn't the be all and end of being a footballer, and that just changing strikers doesn't gurantee goals.

Now the young and hungry striker is failing to score, we've got another secret clause. Same ****, different player*.

*victim

mrsblue · Sep 10, 2014

Blue_Wes said:
The best thing in all this, is the person giving him the main aggro is the one who flooded the blood clamouring for a younger, hungry striker, despite being told, young and hungry isn't the be all and end of being a footballer, and that just changing strikers doesn't gurantee goals.

Now the young and hungry striker is failing to score, we've got another secret clause. Same ****, different player*.

*victim

I feel the need to answer you in depth but frankly cannot be bothered.

Feathers · Sep 10, 2014

mrsblue said:
If you look back I stated Woodrow must have pitch time which he duly had,When Shaq signed I remained silent because I thought another funny deal was in the offing ,I remained silent until I was informed he must play a portion or the club will need to cough up his wages or part of.

Of course Phil denies it yet he won't leave Shaq out or never dropped Woodrow from the squad.The time to tell is when Shaq doesn't get a game unless injured and Phil omits him from further squads.

Could you pop down to Roots Hall and move the goalposts by us much as your Woodrow conspiracy. It would certainly improve our chances of scoring.

mrsblue · Sep 10, 2014

Feathers said:
Could you pop down to Roots Hall and move the goalposts by us much as your Woodrow conspiracy. It would certainly improve our chances of scoring.

You have admitted these deals happen yet you believe they won't happen at cash strapped Southend United FC.

Blue_Wes · Sep 10, 2014

mrsblue said:
You have admitted these deals happen yet you believe they won't happen at cash strapped Southend United FC.

No, he simply doesn't know if they are or are not in place at Southend. So because he doesn't know, he doesn't present a made up theory based on 'well it happens elsewhere' as fact to support his conspiracy theories and his desire to play Jason Williams at all costs.

mrsblue · Sep 10, 2014

Blue_Wes said:
No, he simply doesn't know if they are or are not in place at Southend. So because he doesn't know, he doesn't present a made up theory based on 'well it happens elsewhere' as fact to support his conspiracy theories and his desire to play Jason Williams at all costs.

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.

OldBlueLady · Sep 10, 2014

mrsblue said:
I listened to Paul Dickov and another bloke where they both stated the parent club can do whatever they wish as it's up to the club who takes their players to accept or reject the deal,They both agreed the parent club can insist on playing time.

No, I disagree with that. They can ask whatever they wish but it will always be up to the club that takes them whether they agree or not, and if they don't, then surely they won't take them on loan? Brown is on record as saying he doesn't go along with these, yet you still persist with totally unsubstantiated allegations about contract clauses.

Supa Shrimpa · Sep 10, 2014

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

Blue_Wes · Sep 10, 2014

mrsblue said:
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.

You wouldn't think so, the way you constantly use it as a bona fide reason for bashing Brown for picking him week on week.

Why is it suspicious that a player that isn't scoring, is being picked ahead of other players that aren't scoring? At the end of the day, he offers more than Barnard or Corr, our other recognised first team strikers, due to his versatility, his pace (in comparison to Corr & Barnard) something you clamoured for, his pedigree in footballing education, and his ability to play in more than one position. So when you have three strikers, none of whom are hitting the back of the net, you look to the one(s) that can offer you more, in this situation, it's Coulthirst. Especially given Brown's penchant for a 4-3-3 formation, that requires wide strikers.

You moaned about Barnard starting, you moaned about Corr starting, you moaned about Woodrow starting, you moaned about Eastwood starting, you're moaning about Coulthirst starting. I can't think of one striker who you haven't wanted to kick out of the first eleven.

mrsblue · Sep 10, 2014

Blue_Wes said:
You wouldn't think so, the way you constantly use it as a bona fide reason for bashing Brown for picking him week on week.

Why is it suspicious that a player that isn't scoring, is being picked ahead of other players that aren't scoring? At the end of the day, he offers more than Barnard or Corr, our other recognised first team strikers, due to his versatility, his pace (in comparison to Corr & Barnard) something you clamoured for, his pedigree in footballing education, and his ability to play in more than one position. So when you have three strikers, none of whom are hitting the back of the net, you look to the one(s) that can offer you more, in this situation, it's Coulthirst. Especially given Brown's penchant for a 4-3-3 formation, that requires wide strikers.

You moaned about Barnard starting, you moaned about Corr starting, you moaned about Woodrow starting, you moaned about Eastwood starting, you're moaning about Coulthirst starting. I can't think of one striker who you haven't wanted to kick out of the first eleven.

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

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

Webby⭐

Banned

President

Coach

Banned

Coach

Coach

Life President⭐

Director

Banned

Simple Minded

Banned

Coach

Banned

Simple Minded

Banned

Junior Blues Coordinator⭐⭐

Director⭐

Simple Minded

Banned

.

ShrimperZone Sponsors

ShrimperZone - Player Sponsorship

Southend United Away Travel

All At Sea Fanzine