Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
Moderators: Moderator
Users Browsing Forum

Vernam

  This thread currently has 23,864 views. Print
19 Pages Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next All Recommend Thread
arryarryarry
July 5, 2020, 12:25am
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,515
Posts Per Day: 1.61
Reputation: 58.59%
Rep Score: +25 / -21
Approval: +7,592
Quoted from moosey_club


Exactly, using the EFL as an excuse sounds a bit of a cop out to me, i am sure we would have offered the extension without hesitation normally but with income being tight and future revenue stream unknown i imagine the club took a business decision and decided not to offer an extension for now until there was a clearer  picture to avoid paying out unnecessarily.

Way too early to say whether or not this is a good or bad thing for us overall, football WILL be completely different to what we knew so one player walking away from us could lead to others players walking in under very similar circumstances.



Considering the number of footballers and staff on the books would one more player have made that much difference when we will likely be having to sign some more soon.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 30 - 188
fishboyUTM
July 5, 2020, 12:27am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 442
Posts Per Day: 0.59
Reputation: 71.75%
Rep Score: +5 / -3
Approval: +203
Quoted from Davec


Yes Holloway said on Humberside just now that the EFL advised us not to activate the automatic contract extension so we didn't. And Vernam and his agent has said "we are free agent then"


As you'd expect if you are the player.

I will hold Ian Fleming personally responsible if we lose our best player on what would surely be a free transfer despite his age, as we haven't offered him a deal at all. When we had an option on his contract. Charles Vernam is an absolute star at this level and if he is effectively released on a free, then the CEO who has been around a very long time, and we are looking at 16 years at league 2 level or even below should be held responsible.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 31 - 188
Kris2
July 5, 2020, 12:58am

Champagne Drinker
Posts: 2,201
Posts Per Day: 0.52
Reputation: 53.25%
Rep Score: +13 / -16
Approval: +304
Quoted from fishboyUTM


As you'd expect if you are the player.

I will hold Ian Fleming personally responsible if we lose our best player on what would surely be a free transfer despite his age, as we haven't offered him a deal at all. When we had an option on his contract. Charles Vernam is an absolute star at this level and if he is effectively released on a free, then the CEO who has been around a very long time, and we are looking at 16 years at league 2 level or even below should be held responsible.


Feels like a bit of an exaggeration. Found some good form after new year but spent much of the season before that phoning it in before being shipped off to the bottom of the  National League to find some confidence. At that point nobody complained and felt he hadn't lived up to expectation. Would rather have kept him than lose him but with things as they are it might have been too difficult. I think we can find a replacement for him though, I don't think he was some indispensable superstar.


Comrade Kris2
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 32 - 188
SDUTM
July 5, 2020, 2:36am
Coke Drinker
Posts: 44
Posts Per Day: 0.39
Approval: +21
Quoted from fishboyUTM


As you'd expect if you are the player.

I will hold Ian Fleming personally responsible if we lose our best player on what would surely be a free transfer despite his age, as we haven't offered him a deal at all. When we had an option on his contract. Charles Vernam is an absolute star at this level and if he is effectively released on a free, then the CEO who has been around a very long time, and we are looking at 16 years at league 2 level or even below should be held responsible.


How can you hold Ian Fleming responsible? Every penny spent at the club and every players contract is controlled by Fenty. Fenty is the only one at the club with money however does not want to put money in and therefore does not want the club to spend anything.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 33 - 188
Mikey_345
July 5, 2020, 6:57am
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 677
Posts Per Day: 0.15
Reputation: 83.38%
Rep Score: +7 / -1
Location: Sutton
Approval: +1,203
Quoted from SDUTM


How can you hold Ian Fleming responsible? Every penny spent at the club and every players contract is controlled by Fenty. Fenty is the only one at the club with money however does not want to put money in and therefore does not want the club to spend anything.


Might be an unpopular opinion, but in times like these I’m bloody glad someone like Fenty is and has been controlling the money....



All Town aren’t we
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 34 - 188
aldi_01
July 5, 2020, 8:53am

Vodka Drinker
Posts: 6,573
Posts Per Day: 1.42
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +46 / -14
Approval: -26
Well run club and all that...

I mean I’m not sure it’s like losing an Amond or Bogle or Groves etc but given the form he found under Holloway one would’ve assumed he’d fair with under him so it could be a loss.

I mean, to be honest, is anyone surprised we copulated this up? It seems to be a member up, whether or not that’s being used as an excuse to cover the fact the club decided not to engage the extension on financial grounds but even that’s a flimsy excuse to be honest.

I’m not sure kicking in Vernam’s contract extension would’ve been that costly regardless of the current climate.

Perhaps it’s a combination of a player fancying his chances at a higher level that his current club are long way from and GTFC just being GTFC and cocking it up...


'the poor and the needy are selfish and greedy'...well done Mozza
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 35 - 188
SDUTM
July 5, 2020, 9:21am
Coke Drinker
Posts: 44
Posts Per Day: 0.39
Approval: +21
Quoted from Mikey_345


Might be an unpopular opinion, but in times like these I’m bloody glad someone like Fenty is and has been controlling the money....



I wasn’t knocking Fenty just simply stating that he controls everything financial at the club not Ian Fleming. If people want to be angry about the Vernam contract then they need to be angry at the right person as Ian Holloway stated, John Fenty is a hell of a contract negotiator! Sometimes that works and sometimes it doesn’t and this time it appears that we have come unstuck. I would imagine that the club is now offering lower terms and Charles thinks that he’s worth more so going elsewhere? Wages will drop however for good players the demand will still be there and players agents will play clubs off against each other in order to get their client the best deal. I don’t think that we could trigger the added year on reduced terms as they have to be the same amount or more and therefore if offered less, Charles could and is allowed to walk away any how.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 36 - 188
SDUTM
July 5, 2020, 9:24am
Coke Drinker
Posts: 44
Posts Per Day: 0.39
Approval: +21
Quoted from aldi_01
Well run club and all that...

I mean I’m not sure it’s like losing an Amond or Bogle or Groves etc but given the form he found under Holloway one would’ve assumed he’d fair with under him so it could be a loss.

I mean, to be honest, is anyone surprised we copulated this up? It seems to be a member up, whether or not that’s being used as an excuse to cover the fact the club decided not to engage the extension on financial grounds but even that’s a flimsy excuse to be honest.

I’m not sure kicking in Vernam’s contract extension would’ve been that costly regardless of the current climate.

Perhaps it’s a combination of a player fancying his chances at a higher level that his current club are long way from and GTFC just being GTFC and cocking it up...


You can’t take up the optional extra year on reduced terms (money, bonus etc) it has to be the same otherwise the other party is allowed to walk for free.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 37 - 188
gtfc82
July 5, 2020, 9:32am
Cocktail Drinker
Posts: 1,815
Posts Per Day: 0.39
Reputation: 72.37%
Rep Score: +8 / -4
Approval: +583
Quoted from SDUTM


You can’t take up the optional extra year on reduced terms (money, bonus etc) it has to be the same otherwise the other party is allowed to walk for free.


Good point, and maybe the club can't afford to be paying him the same amount, considering the financial losses they've suffered.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 38 - 188
emisar
July 5, 2020, 9:55am
Beer Drinker
Posts: 134
Posts Per Day: 0.04
Reputation: 86.91%
Rep Score: +5 / 0
Approval: +165
would be nice to think it may open the way to cover Bogles wages .
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 39 - 188
19 Pages Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next All Recommend Thread
Print


Thread Rating
There is currently no rating for this thread
 

Back to top of page

This is not an official forum of Grimsby Town Football Club, the opinions expressed are those of the individual authors. If you see an offensive post then click "Report" on the relevant post. Posts will be deleted at the discretion of the moderators whose decision is final. Posts should abide by the Forum Rules. IP addresses of contributors together with dates and times of access are stored. The opinions and viewpoints expressed by contributors to The Fishy are their own and not necessarily those of The Fishy. The Fishy makes no claims that information dispersed through this forum is accurate or reliable. Also The Fishy cannot be held liable for any statements made by contributors of The Fishy.