Jump to content
IGNORED

Football League launch probe into Matty Taylors transfer


Smokey

Recommended Posts

If they are accusing us of foul play, I would suggest it is a smokescreen. They are trying to divert the inbrebs attention away from their latest behind the scenes issues. They have a lot more to worry about than MTs agent knowing Lee, I'm fairly sure MTs agent had the opportunity to leak MTs release clause to more than just our club, not that I'm suggesting any agent would act in such an unscrupulous manner.

 The diversion will probably work, much like MT signing for us made a few of ours forget our league position/poor run. Be prepared for more animosity and BS from the idiots, who will point the finger at LJ and SL, but won't think to question the guys who having been feeding them rubbish for the last few seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This 30 year thing is bugging me now - loads of media outlets are saying it's the 'first transfer between the clubs for 30 years..'

'Taylor is the first player to cross the divide for thirty years...'

Steve Phillips went from us to them in 2006 - how have they all missed that?!

I know it's the first transfer from Rovers to City in 30 years but they aren't saying that...'between the clubs' means either way....it's been quoted on Sky Sports, in The Independent and Daily Mail, on Talksport etc etc etc.

It just bugs me, that's all!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

This 30 year thing is bugging me now - loads of media outlets are saying it's the 'first transfer between the clubs for 30 years..'

'Taylor is the first player to cross the divide for thirty years...'

Steve Phillips went from us to them in 2006 - how have they all missed that?!

I know it's the first transfer from Rovers to City in 30 years but they aren't saying that...'between the clubs' means either way....it's been quoted on Sky Sports, in The Independent and Daily Mail, on Talksport etc etc etc.

It just bugs me, that's all!

They sign our crap and cast offs BS4, we sign their best player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

This 30 year thing is bugging me now - loads of media outlets are saying it's the 'first transfer between the clubs for 30 years..'

'Taylor is the first player to cross the divide for thirty years...'

Steve Phillips went from us to them in 2006 - how have they all missed that?!

I know it's the first transfer from Rovers to City in 30 years but they aren't saying that...'between the clubs' means either way....it's been quoted on Sky Sports, in The Independent and Daily Mail, on Talksport etc etc etc.

It just bugs me, that's all!

Sky, Talksport and the Daily Mail have never been big on facts.

Surprised by the Independent though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When there's a release fee, everyone party to any potential transfer will know the figure. Naive to think otherwise. The gas just havnt got a clue how transfers work in 2017. I can't imagine they've received a transfer fee since lambert and I doubt they've ever had a player with such a clause before now. 

 

They clearly don't know how a transfer window works and any big deal is usually done in the last couple of days. If they did then they would have had 3 or 4 strikers lined up ready to sign once we had signed taylor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of that being said you might argue that City could have been a little bit smarter here and offered a bit more; not as if its big bucks in the scheme of things. One could have predicted the media jumping on this and Rovers will try and milk it in the same quarter to look the innocent party and make us look bad. Could have been avoided in my opinion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, pride of the west said:

When there's a release fee, everyone party to any potential transfer will know the figure. Naive to think otherwise. The gas just havnt got a clue how transfers work in 2017. I can't imagine they've received a transfer fee since lambert and I doubt they've ever had a player with such a clause before now. 

 

They clearly don't know how a transfer window works and any big deal is usually done in the last couple of days. If they did then they would have had 3 or 4 strikers lined up ready to sign once we had signed taylor. 

You mean like kodjia in the summer? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, havanatopia said:

All of that being said you might argue that City could have been a little bit smarter here and offered a bit more; not as if its big bucks in the scheme of things. One could have predicted the media jumping on this and Rovers will try and milk it in the same quarter to look the innocent party and make us look bad. Could have been avoided in my opinion. 

There's articles from around time time Taylor signed his extension so the supposed fee was out in the open already. If you hear a players clause is £300,000 why bid more? If wrong they can reject it, if true it gets accepted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
41 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

This 30 year thing is bugging me now - loads of media outlets are saying it's the 'first transfer between the clubs for 30 years..'

'Taylor is the first player to cross the divide for thirty years...'

Steve Phillips went from us to them in 2006 - how have they all missed that?!

I know it's the first transfer from Rovers to City in 30 years but they aren't saying that...'between the clubs' means either way....it's been quoted on Sky Sports, in The Independent and Daily Mail, on Talksport etc etc etc.

It just bugs me, that's all!

I'd say sending Agent Akinde there on loan in 2010 counts as crossing the divide as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
14 minutes ago, havanatopia said:

All of that being said you might argue that City could have been a little bit smarter here and offered a bit more; not as if its big bucks in the scheme of things. One could have predicted the media jumping on this and Rovers will try and milk it in the same quarter to look the innocent party and make us look bad. Could have been avoided in my opinion. 

The Daily Mail is reporting that Rovers plan to do this. Ok let's just see what else the Daily Mail have been reporting.....

IMG_3923.PNG

Ooh, that looks quite interesting. Rovers are upset that on Sunday the 29th we already knew exactly how much to bid, I guess it would be helpful if we knew when the Daily Mail reported that he was available for £300k then.....

IMG_3924.PNG

Oh deary me. :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, slartibartfast said:

Here we go again.....Something For Nothing FC are moaning again !

I thought it was common knowledge when he re-signed it £300k, blimey it was plastered all over Asschat !

Fuckin  scabby graspers, how did that Wycombe appeal go ?

 

I think it is as much 'our' fault, or at least as much as some of the those that like to be In The Know.

 

Sure 300k was banded about in the summer when he signed up. 

Still think it bizaare there was so little interest as a free or at thst price as a pretty low risk gamble given what some players are going for

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hello said:

 

I think it is as much 'our' fault, or at least as much as some of the those that like to be In The Know.

 

Sure 300k was banded about in the summer when he signed up. 

Still think it bizaare there was so little interest as a free or at thst price as a pretty low risk gamble given what some players are going for

It is strange, I was surprised no Championship club took a 'gamble' in the summer when he'd have cost nothing. I guess after proving he can score goals in L1 he became less of a gamble even if it meant paying a smallish fee.

I thought he'd have been snapped up as soon as the transfer window opened. It's been mentioned that Cardiff and QPR showed an interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, smokey live said:

So what are they trying to do, have him back or get some extra bucks (10 mill maybe?)?

The same article says: 'Bristol City sources say Taylor's release-clause price had been published during media speculation before his move to City.'

In the same paper:

1 hour ago, 8menhadadream said:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4150962/Transfer-news-LIVE-Man-Utd-Arsenal-Chelsea-LFC.html#ixzz4XThmKW1M

It was in the papers last week FFS! 

It's a nothing story, even they wouldn't be that classless.

Opps, tells everyone its 300k 25th Jan. So the question is, did City put an offer in after this date

From the top link

'A club statement said: 'Bristol City can confirm that it made an offer over the weekend to Bristol Rovers for an undisclosed fee for Matthew Taylor and that offer was accepted.''

Umm... weekend was 28th - 29th Jan.

Are the gas accusing LJ/others of impropriety and is that defamation? Let's see if they actually raise a complaint or is this a deflection exercise?

ps If an agent did this (the perceived selling under the odds), would he be doing himself out of a commission?

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...