Amond move to Hartlepool (merged)

Quoted from BackHeelTony

Really don't see how we could have offered  Amond ,  Tait or Arnold anymore than  1 deals when they're not proven at this level. We must remember they all got released by league 2 clubs to come to us!

...Yeah but in the case of Tait and Amond, there was obviously going to be better offers on the table, so a 1 year contract is just a token gesture....the real disappointment is that a club like Hartlepool are able to poach our best players.

Podge had a brilliant season for us,

He scored loads of goals,

Got dropped on the odd occasion,

But never complained  he just got his head down and worked harder,

He was 100% a professional .

However he did struggle to score against the better teams,

He his at an age to start making some money out of this games as he will not have that many seasons left if he stayed with us for another year or two,

So if he goes I will be sad but he goes with my blessing and good wishes,

Thanks for the promotion Podge because we would not have done it without your goals,

Just do not come back here and score against us.

Who's to say he would score the amount of goals he did last season anyway! He will be up against better defences this season, TBH when I first heard he was going I was a bit miffed (so was my lad) but now I'm excited in who Paul will be bringing in, remember we have Bogle who himself is a very good striker - let's stay positive about this.

Quoted from Garth

Think about it, if Hurst wanted  Podge (top scorer) to stay and was told no by the board, knowing the pride of the manager regarding his past exploits, do you not think it would be Hurst who would have decided to leave the club.
I think and its only a guess that Hurst as we all, admired Podge`s efforts last season, but  he will not be held to ransom by any one player at the expense of the team, good luck Podge but not against us

I don't know. Really, none of us do. Looking at the evidence, no players were offered more than a 12 months contract so that looks to me like a policy decision regardless of individuals. It doesn't strike me as a ransom situation, more a take it or leave it one.

The offers were sort of "we don't mind if you want to stay another year but if you can do better elsewhere we won't try and stop you".

There will be reasons for that policy but we can't second guess at this stage. It's a high risk strategy though if all those players prove to have been at least as good as squad fillers Hurst might be forced into taking just to make up the numbers in a hurry.

Quoted from TheRonRaffertyFanClub

I don't know. Really, none of us do. Looking at the evidence, no players were offered more than a 12 months contract so that looks to me like a policy decision regardless of individuals. It doesn't strike me as a ransom situation, more a take it or leave it one.

The offers were sort of "we don't mind if you want to stay another year but if you can do better elsewhere we won't try and stop you".

There will be reasons for that policy but we can't second guess at this stage. It's a high risk strategy though if all those players prove to have been at least as good as squad fillers Hurst might be forced into taking just to make up the numbers in a hurry.

Or maybe offering some one year deals has freed up the opportunity to offer new additions of better quality 2 year deals. If you want to bring in players who are better than what you have/had then you need to offer more value in a deal than what you would to existing players.
This feels a bit disloyal to those that took us up but sadly it happens that way.  

Quoted from TheRonRaffertyFanClub

I don't know. Really, none of us do. Looking at the evidence, no players were offered more than a 12 months contract so that looks to me like a policy decision regardless of individuals. It doesn't strike me as a ransom situation, more a take it or leave it one.

The offers were sort of "we don't mind if you want to stay another year but if you can do better elsewhere we won't try and stop you".

There will be reasons for that policy but we can't second guess at this stage. It's a high risk strategy though if all those players prove to have been at least as good as squad fillers Hurst might be forced into taking just to make up the numbers in a hurry.

Macca got a 2 year deal and we don't know what Nolan or Toto were offered.

Quoted from OllieGTFC

Who that Tw*t from Ireland
Who that money grabbing hore
Padraig Amond is he name and he hasn't got a brain
And he won't be going up anymore !

That's not really on is it.. Disrespect for a player that gave his all for our club.

Quoted from HertsGTFC

Or maybe offering some one year deals has freed up the opportunity to offer new additions of better quality 2 year deals. If you want to bring in players who are better than what you have/had then you need to offer more value in a deal than what you would to existing players.
This feels a bit disloyal to those that took us up but sadly it happens that way.  

My thoughts exactly. Were we trying to sign a 37-goal striker from the Conference I'm certain we'd offer them more than a 1 year contract. But Hurst isn't naïve, surely he must have known offering only a 1 year contract (if that is the case) would almost certainly see Amond going elsewhere? An exercise in pointlessness it seems. It's a bit perplexing, unless Hurst truly feels he can get better value for money with other players. Amond has gotten double figures in League 2 before and was apparently played on the wing for most of that season, so it's not as if he hasn't shown he is League 2 quality before.

Quoted from Grimal

Was it that Arnold told people or someone said Arnold told people ?  we all know how rumours spread. Loads of Shite flying about at the moment.

Ah , but was this a plausible rumour ?

I hate this " Billy Big Bollox " attitude towards Hartlepool - they are a Div 2 side , same as us!. We don't know their wage structure, finances or anything else about the clubs funding. They could be aiming for a small, well paid squad or have several players on long , lowish pay contracts that allows them to fund one or two quality players.
PH knows what he needs.He was certainly a very experienced league defender and as such knows what a sort of striker he needs to combat a league 2 defence. If Amond was offered a 1 year deal , then fair enough, it gives PH time to assess his effectiveness against League 2 defences and doesn't tie us to a player who doesn't repeat his goal scoring feats this season. As has been pointed out he has played at this level for two other clubs and certainly didn't tear any trees up for them. Maybe he wasn't played at his best position for them but that would be a strong argument if it only applied to one team but not two.