vietnamcobbler
|
can anyone confirm or deny that we will see some news out of San Sixfields today??
|
|
|
|
just.reading
|
Patience!
+1 Some people's impatience unreal! The quality signing take time. Nobody know how long it took to agree terms with Kasim/Taylor/Waters, that might have been 2+ weeks .
|
|
|
|
Joes Sweet Left Foot
|
Former Burton keeper Jon McLaughlin is on trial with Hull City. So that's one experienced keeper who won't be coming here any time soon.
|
|
|
|
guest3063
|
Former Burton keeper Jon McLaughlin is on trial with Hull City. So that's one experienced keeper who won't be coming here any time soon.
I think the magic words are 'on trial'.
|
|
|
|
everbrite
|
can anyone confirm or deny that we will see some news out of San Sixfields today??
What do you do in Vietnam Job wise? How is your Achilles now?
|
2020 Grand National S/S 3rd Place
|
|
|
Moultoncobb
|
can anyone confirm or deny that we will see some news out of San Sixfields today??
So I've heard - told Crooks last week was done and unveiled today, time will tell
|
|
« Last Edit: July 18, 2017, 11:59:11 am by Moultoncobb »
|
Report Spam
Logged
|
|
|
|
606 Parklands_Cobbler
|
Depends who you heard it from. If its the crazy guy down the street, I don't think it counts.
|
|
|
|
Cobbler78
|
As you seem in the know can you tell us what this looked like in his contract. Or more specifically what would have happened if he was left out?
Also, as his extension was triggered do we assume that the same clause would exist now?
I agree with this. I guess it was a choice between Revell and Marquis last summer and Page went for Revell. It looks daft in hindsight but I'd imagine, looking back, it was seen as a more 50-50 decision at the time
Taylor wanted 2 year contract, we couldn't offer that due to age and risk, so it was agreed if he proved his fitness by starting 40+ games he would get the second year. To avoid us benching him on 39 appearances (it's happened before) he had the clause inserted. I would guess it's not in the 2nd year as no third year is pending. No idea what the implications were if we don't didnt start him, not sure where either party would stand legally. Maybe it was a two year contract, with the second year cancelled if he did don't prove his fitness but if he did and we dropped him he would still get the 2nd year triggered but could walk away with a pay off. But that is just a guess as I can't see how else it could have been worded.
|
|
|
|
EssTeeFree
|
Taylor wanted 2 year contract, we couldn't offer that due to age and risk, so it was agreed if he proved his fitness by starting 40+ games he would get the second year. To avoid us benching him on 39 appearances (it's happened before) he had the clause inserted. I would guess it's not in the 2nd year as no third year is pending. No idea what the implications were if we don't didnt start him, not sure where either party would stand legally. Maybe it was a two year contract, with the second year cancelled if he did don't prove his fitness but if he did and we dropped him he would still get the 2nd year triggered but could walk away with a pay off. But that is just a guess as I can't see how else it could have been worded.
Thanks for the reply, this stuff genuinely interest me....which is very sad! Cheers
|
|
|
|
EssTeeFree
|
So I've heard - told Crooks last week was done and unveiled today, time will tell
I'd guess all the pics are done and with the press under embargo IF it is to happen today. Would assume if he's signed JED would want him involved tonight
|
|
|
|
Joes Sweet Left Foot
|
On the contrary it seems like the player has artfully skipped pre-season, so a diet of cross-country running and gym work will be needed before he gets to meet his team-mates.
|
|
|
|
guest2487
|
Patience pays off I reckon.
|
|
|
|
Ryan Amoo 14
|
Taylor wanted 2 year contract, we couldn't offer that due to age and risk, so it was agreed if he proved his fitness by starting 40+ games he would get the second year. To avoid us benching him on 39 appearances (it's happened before) he had the clause inserted. I would guess it's not in the 2nd year as no third year is pending. No idea what the implications were if we don't didnt start him, not sure where either party would stand legally. Maybe it was a two year contract, with the second year cancelled if he did don't prove his fitness but if he did and we dropped him he would still get the 2nd year triggered but could walk away with a pay off. But that is just a guess as I can't see how else it could have been worded.
So who decides on his eligibility to play? I.e. if he says 'i'm fit' but the club disagrees? Does this fantasy contract also include a team of independent medical adjudicators on retainer for this very purpose? Assume this was also covered in the fictional contract you're citing?
|
|
|
|
memyhead
|
On the contrary it seems like the player has artfully skipped pre-season, so a diet of cross-country running and gym work will be needed before he gets to meet his team-mates.
His loan at Scunny was cut short due to a knee injury which ruled him out for 10/12 weeks (this was in early April) so I would guess he's only just recovered from that. We've still got enough time to get a decent pre-season into him...
|
|
|
|
guest2487
|
His loan at Scunny was cut short due to a knee injury which ruled him out for 10/12 weeks (this was in early April) so I would guess he's only just recovered from that.
We've still got enough time to get a decent pre-season into him...
Pretty sure his injury was down to an impact injury also and not a more serious issue.
|
|
|
|
Joes Sweet Left Foot
|
Taylor wanted 2 year contract, we couldn't offer that due to age and risk, so it was agreed if he proved his fitness by starting 40+ games he would get the second year. To avoid us benching him on 39 appearances (it's happened before) he had the clause inserted. I would guess it's not in the 2nd year as no third year is pending. No idea what the implications were if we don't didnt start him, not sure where either party would stand legally. Maybe it was a two year contract, with the second year cancelled if he did don't prove his fitness but if he did and we dropped him he would still get the 2nd year triggered but could walk away with a pay off. But that is just a guess as I can't see how else it could have been worded.
This doesn't explain why he was hardly ever substituted though even when he appeared knackered.
|
|
|
|
rebelspawn
|
This doesn't explain why he was hardly ever substituted though even when he appeared knackered.
I was thinking the same thing...
|
|
|
|
Cobbler78
|
This doesn't explain why he was hardly ever substituted though even when he appeared knackered.
True, but who would've come on, McCourt? Taylor probably fitter and faster even after 60mins of football.
|
|
« Last Edit: July 18, 2017, 13:00:05 pm by Cobbler78 »
|
Report Spam
Logged
|
|
|
|
rebelspawn
|
True, but who would've come on, McCourt? Taylor probably fitter and faster even after 60mins of football.
I disagree, and i am not making any statement on the Quality of McCourt here, But sometimes it gets to a point when a game just needs fresh legs, even if those legs are less technically gifted than the absolutely knackered ones they are replacing. I firmly believe that if Taylor was played for 60-70 mins every game last season instead of 90, both the Club, and Taylor would have benefitted immensely.
|
|
|
|
vietnamcobbler
|
What do you do in Vietnam Job wise? How is your Achilles now?
I work for a footwear manufacturer making shoes out here and in India. I'm recovering pretty well thanks - still suffering a bit, but grateful to be back to normality.
|
|
|
|
|