Jump to content
IGNORED

Football League launch probe into Matty Taylors transfer


Smokey

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

Apart from the fact it's them. and they regularly do an impression of a 13 year old girl when things don't go their way. 
They are not the first team to have a clause met, as said above , Arsenal bidding 1p above is a real pisstake but as far as I'm aware they didn't run to 'Sir' , though they did moan a lot. 
I'm not sure of the rules but, the clause was put in by Taylor and his agent (I'm guessing they knew about it then).   What's to stop the agent talking to people or other agents? They happily go around touting their player to anyone even while he's still in contract, so what's the difference? 
Have to ask why they always play the victim , getting old now.

You do grasp the concept of insults, don't you? Serious question. 
If someone called you a wanker (for example) would you happily walk round telling people , yeah I'm a wanker ?  
Shithead is 'their' playground attempt at an insult, it really bugs me this, what next calling the this to be put on the shirts instead of 'the Robins' ???
No offence , but this is a real bugbear of mine.

And mine. 100%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Taxi for Johnson said:

In the interests of balance, they did win the Freight Rover trophy once and at least one of their stands has got a roof made of tarpaulin.

 

Fixed that for you.

22 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

in my defence, apparently Kris Marshall is leaving the BBC's death in paradise and it would appear that he is being replaced by father Douglas Maguire.

It's Father Dougal Maguire.

#knowyourFatherTed 

Edit: Just seen your autocorrect explanation. As you were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Tipps69 said:

Another waste of time & money!!

How are they going to prove anything? And even if they can, what are they going to do about it?

Surely at the end of the day, if the player wants a move & he's aware of a clause (which he'd be stupid if he didn't), it's in his best interest to put the figure out there? Different if his clause was £10m because he'd know no one would be willing to meet that but if if it's in his best interest (enhances his chances of a pay rise, instant promotion, better standard of everything) then he'd be stupid to not let it slip...........

For arguments sake, what happens if MT mentions the fee to his missus (if he has one), she mentions it to a friend & eventually it gets to someone involved with another club & they act on it? Or are a potential buying club supposed to offer £2m knowing that he's available for the fraction of the price?

Or what's to stop a club from just making an offer, it gets accepted & then the buying club withdraws it's offer but comes back with a reduced offer but still above or matching the release clause & that just continues until it gets to the limit, we just saved a lot of time.......

Their just clutching at straws, they know they've been royally done over & are trying to save face, bless em!!

if his misses lived in nailsea,it would be common knowledge to everyone within 24hrs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Scare_Man said:

Wasn't our bid of the 'undisclosed' nature?  I'm sure it was so who released this information that it was bang on the release clause figure?

Sue them!

it's undisclosed publicly what was offered but £300k figure came out before hand by some means and even the press were speculating. It can only come from Taylor, his agent or loose lips at Rovers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Hello said:

it's undisclosed publicly what was offered but £300k figure came out before hand by some means and even the press were speculating. It can only come from Taylor, his agent or loose lips at Rovers

So tell me exactly what City have done wrong then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Super said:

So tell me exactly what City have done wrong then?

Nothing and I have said as much elsewhere here. Whether someone leaked the figure deliberately or not, I don't blame City for taking advantage of something that was rumoured in public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
16 minutes ago, BSRED said:

According to Andy Howard on Points West, City are "disappointed with the way Rovers dealt with the transfer in the early stages". Maybe a bit of tit for tat going on.

Maybe trying to stall the deal so it didn't go through in time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, BSRED said:

According to Andy Howard on Points West, City are "disappointed with the way Rovers dealt with the transfer in the early stages". Maybe a bit of tit for tat going on.

Well that's interesting because I heard that over the weekend Rovers actually rejected our bid of £300k and City had to get the lawyers involved to explain to Rovers that they could in fact not refuse a bid which triggered a release clause!

That of course, if true, would suggest we were aware of there being a release clause!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Hello said:

it's undisclosed publicly what was offered but £300k figure came out before hand by some means and even the press were speculating. It can only come from Taylor, his agent or loose lips at Rovers

As has been pointed out by other posters, the £300,000 release clause had been mentioned by ITK''s on Gaschat some time ago.

That suggests that club officials were probably accidentally the source of the leak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I've read and heard it now seems blindingly obvious that City were the only club Taylor was interested in signing for, for whatever reason.

Which makes is soooooo more painful for the blue few :rofl2br:

As an aside, why does every player called Matthew have to be referred to as Matty when playing for a Bristol club? Sounds a bit limp wristed to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Well that's interesting because I heard that over the weekend Rovers actually rejected our bid of £300k and City had to get the lawyers involved to explain to Rovers that they could in fact not refuse a bid which triggered a release clause!

That of course, if true, would suggest we were aware of there being a release clause!

And this, I can tell you, is the nub of the problem 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GASH should think themselves lucky they got £300,000 

Oxford wanted him and had contract ready

I remember him saying he wanted to leave with the GASH getting something for him and not on bad terms How many City players have crossed to them?

They would not let us have Hales and got bitter about it. £2m we offered them. And they still sold him for £2m straight away after

I think he was very considerate to them

Get a life GASH

We ARE bigger than you

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...