Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
Fishy Forum Fishy Boards Archive › Vernam
Users Browsing Forum
No Members and 277 Guests

Vernam

  This thread currently has 39,932 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
HertsGTFC
July 7, 2020, 12:49pm

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 14,089
Posts Per Day: 4.26
Reputation: 75.4%
Rep Score: +29 / -10
Location: Stevenage
Approval: +22,908
Gold Stars: 228
So clearly this thread has encouraged the same old uninformed critics out of their bolt holes having a pop at the club and spouting supposition about what has or hasn’t happened.

The club and the players recently made a decision on salaries that will help protect the club to the benefit of everyone on here regardless of who does and doesn’t turn out next season, this form of pragmatic collaboration should be applauded to be fair.

So in the current situation how could anyone who is involved in this scenario and thus knows the facts advocate one individual getting more money when all others have agreed to take less?

As for other clubs getting more investors well that’s great for them but considering the future is so uncertain some people clearly have money to burn.


"Crombie you would have got to that if you weren't such a fat ba%$@rd" - George Kerr, inspiration from the dug out 70s style  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 90 - 188
mimma
July 7, 2020, 1:05pm
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,650
Posts Per Day: 0.44
Reputation: 85.27%
Rep Score: +15 / -2
Approval: +5,573
Gold Stars: 78
Stop talking sense Herts,, otherwise they will have to ban you from the fishy😉
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 91 - 188
jamesgtfc
July 7, 2020, 1:25pm
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 6,039
Posts Per Day: 1.16
Reputation: 79.95%
Rep Score: +20 / -5
Approval: +12,957
Gold Stars: 190
Quoted from Bigdog
I think the board have played this a little fast and loose with our most saleable asset and the player that gets fans out of their seats the most. Forget asking the EFL for advice to try and save a few quid, just get the job done at the pre-agreed contract wage level. To secure CV, what would it have cost the club over the period of non football? 20k, 30k or 50k? What were we trying to save by offering lower terms than agreed? 10k, 20k? Or just trying to delay in paying him the extra year? Was it worth the risk of losing a player that could be worth 50 times that if his form continued? Yet the player gets all the criticism for wanting to maximise his income and further his ambitions after being messed around and the club and IH wear the halo? Forget the current circumstances, our board have got form for letting our prized assets get away. Our default position cannot be cut, cut and cut again, it's akin to selling the club to an asset stripper. The board need to think and act quickly to get us out of this mindset and prevent these situations happening. Cutting costs is not the only play to be made, raising fresh investment is another..


You have the fine balance of the team unity too. It sounds like we took advice from the EFL and then tried to tie Vernam down for longer than a year rather than the one year extension. Speculating here but that could have been a 3 year deal with a pay cut but job security nonetheless and ensuring we get a fee if anyone comes in.

You can't just make exceptions to the collective agreement on pay cuts and pay over the odds because a player scored a great solo goal against Colchester. Holloway will have pitched to him why he wants him whilst his agent, family, friends and other clubs will have told him their own opinions. Max Wright, an academy graduate didn't just sign on the dotted line so it's not that simple.

See what happens. It's a short career and if I was being offered a decent pay rise for a couple of years right now, I would take it and footballers are no different.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 92 - 188
arryarryarry
July 7, 2020, 2:09pm
Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 10,254
Posts Per Day: 1.71
Reputation: 52.76%
Rep Score: +26 / -28
Approval: +10,044
Gold Stars: 116
Quoted from HertsGTFC
So clearly this thread has encouraged the same old uninformed critics out of their bolt holes having a pop at the club and spouting supposition about what has or hasn’t happened.

The club and the players recently made a decision on salaries that will help protect the club to the benefit of everyone on here regardless of who does and doesn’t turn out next season, this form of pragmatic collaboration should be applauded to be fair.

So in the current situation how could anyone who is involved in this scenario and thus knows the facts advocate one individual getting more money when all others have agreed to take less?

As for other clubs getting more investors well that’s great for them but considering the future is so uncertain some people clearly have money to burn.



I thought we know the facts. IH stated that the club had taken advice from the EFL and they suggested the club didn't have to exercise  the contract extension. Charles Vernam's agent said that as the club hadn't activated that extension in time he is now a free agent.

I think it is fair to ask why all of a sudden GTFC has decided to take a suggestion from the EFL about signing a player they say they wanted to keep.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 93 - 188
HertsGTFC
July 7, 2020, 2:18pm

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 14,089
Posts Per Day: 4.26
Reputation: 75.4%
Rep Score: +29 / -10
Location: Stevenage
Approval: +22,908
Gold Stars: 228
Quoted from arryarryarry



I thought we know the facts. IH stated that the club had taken advice from the EFL and they suggested the club didn't have to exercise  the contract extension. Charles Vernam's agent said that as the club hadn't activated that extension in time he is now a free agent.

I think it is fair to ask why all of a sudden GTFC has decided to take a suggestion from the EFL about signing a player they say they wanted to keep.


Maybe you’ve answered your own question in that the club where seeking advice in regards to their obligation to the player to save them having to go against their current collective wage cut.




"Crombie you would have got to that if you weren't such a fat ba%$@rd" - George Kerr, inspiration from the dug out 70s style  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 94 - 188
arryarryarry
July 7, 2020, 2:41pm
Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 10,254
Posts Per Day: 1.71
Reputation: 52.76%
Rep Score: +26 / -28
Approval: +10,044
Gold Stars: 116
Quoted from HertsGTFC


Maybe you’ve answered your own question in that the club where seeking advice in regards to their obligation to the player to save them having to go against their current collective wage cut.




But who in the EFL suggested the club didn't have to exercise that option yet? Was it from someone on the other end of the phone or someone with legal knowledge of contracts. I don't think the club response of "well the EFL told us so" is really good enough.

If the club may now follow with legal action as IH suggested in his interview how much would that cost?

Logged
Private Message
Reply: 95 - 188
Croxton
July 7, 2020, 3:13pm
Cocktail Drinker
Posts: 1,778
Posts Per Day: 0.75
Reputation: 78.46%
Rep Score: +14 / -4
Approval: +3,014
Gold Stars: 33
Quoted from arryarryarry



I thought we know the facts. IH stated that the club had taken advice from the EFL and they suggested the club didn't have to exercise  the contract extension. Charles Vernam's agent said that as the club hadn't activated that extension in time he is now a free agent.

I think it is fair to ask why all of a sudden GTFC has decided to take a suggestion from the EFL about signing a player they say they wanted to keep.


In an RH interview with Matt Dean on June 4th, Phillip Day said that the EFL had advised players to wait for the outcome of a report from Deloittes before agreeing the 25% wage cut. The players opted to comply in the interests of the club. The law of unintended consequences and the agent jungle have bitten hard here. Philliip Day said we may have been the first EFL club to broker such a wage cut. How many clubs did this on top of the furlough arrangements?

All parties meant well but the contract implications are crucial to both losing players and our own potential signings of free agents. Have other cubs had similar problems over wage cuts or did they just rely on the furlough scheme?

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 96 - 188
Madeleymariner
July 7, 2020, 5:52pm

Vodka Drinker
Posts: 6,041
Posts Per Day: 1.01
Reputation: 64.28%
Rep Score: +23 / -15
Approval: +3,052
Gold Stars: 49
The point with the finance is, why aren't the board buying £50k of shares each at this time, its either A they dont have any money or B they're a bunch of tight arses that dont care too much as long as they get a free dinner, drinks, a seat  and parking 30 times a year, If its [/b]A[b] then its time we enticed someone with money to buy into it like IH, there must be local businessmen with a little dosh to spare for a seat on the board, just don't let them know what happened with former directors like Parker,  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 97 - 188
Croxton
July 7, 2020, 9:37pm
Cocktail Drinker
Posts: 1,778
Posts Per Day: 0.75
Reputation: 78.46%
Rep Score: +14 / -4
Approval: +3,014
Gold Stars: 33
Oldham's retained and released list on July 1st included five players under option who were retained on 'Covid 19 short term extensions'. The EFL brought this in to allow 2/3 month temporary extensions for players and clubs to sort things out. I have not heard Ollie's interview so don't know if this was part of discussions with any players let alone Vernam.

Accrington have decided to reduce the size of their squad and liabilities. Newly promoted Crewe have snapped up Zanzala from Accy and extended contracts of Kirk and Porter. They had wanted to keep Jamie Jones but he chose Lincoln. Crewe already planning to test all players and staff, costing thousands, and getting squad in for preseason. The supporters are buying season tickets like mad, Contrasting pictures from a few minutes googling!
Fenty and Day appear to be taking Accy's cautious view while Crewe are optimistic. Their model has served them well so far.

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 98 - 188
Limerick Mariner
July 7, 2020, 9:45pm
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,348
Posts Per Day: 0.56
Reputation: 78.12%
Rep Score: +10 / -3
Location: Melton Mowbray
Approval: +5,695
Gold Stars: 136
I haven't read the whole thread so apologies if this has been said above here, but surelyTown couldn't require a wage cut of 25% and then enforce a contract clause extending the contract by a year. The EFL advice seems like a red herring. Disappointing, but I don't see what the club could have done. Leave Vernam on full wages and extend his contract by year and then cut his wages by 25% - that was never going to happen. Nor was leave him on full wages, extend his contract and still leave him on full wages - what would the likes of James Mck think about that? It was a no-win situation for Town if a League 1 club is prepared to pay him more to play in an empty stadium...
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 99 - 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

Fishy Forum Fishy Boards Archive › Vernam

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.