Aden Flint - Badly Treated? (Too many merges to mention)

[CiderCraig]

30 minutes ago, Franks21 said:

Word from an insider flinty told Johnson he didn't want to play.

So your first post suggests you've got inside sources. 

Well done.

[Lrrr]

Sounds like we didn't want to play one of hegeler or baker (imagine hegeler after cramping up in game and the fact he was taken off) but we still wanted a first team defence, given Moore wasn't in the squad or we could have started Kelly at lb with baker and mags at cb, we don't even know if we've accepted a bid so best to wait for news from the club on that, hardly stitching a player up to request him to play. 

[Super]

As usual its LJ's fault according to some.

[man in the middle]

9 hours ago, Maltshoveller said:

We are Bristol City not Real Madrid

Our best players will leave us to go to bigger clubs

Thing is Bristol City will carry on like they always have done

Personally I don't think Birmingham are a bigger clus, I'd say we are about the same regarding stadium, attendance and league position, But I agree can't blame him for going when they are probably going to offer him a massive wages, 

[BigAl&Toby]

I'll not mourn his departure. Might be in the minority including his target club but I always thought there were far better footballing CBs out there than AF. Ok so he had passion and scored vital goals, but for me defensively he was woeful at times.

[Robbored]

10 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Did you read my post? What I've done is take the evidence we have and made a judgement on how I think the club have dealt with the situation. I've clearly backed up my opinion with reasoning, yet you still ask 'in what way'? Sorry if using reasoning to back up an opinion is beyond your understanding  

What evidence? A not very clear explanation from Macca who brushed over the question? 

i get the impression  that you like to slag off the club at every opportunity especially when it's speculation or misinterpretation.

[phantom]

23 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

The whole thing smacks of a stitch-up on Flint. So he wasn't played v FC Twente and didn't start against Barnsley. Was instead brought on as a cameo for what we all assumed was goodbye.

Then suddenly LJ wants him to play a league cup game when he knows there's strong interest from another club, has said himself that "Flint's head has been turned" and the owner has gone on the radio and basically said the player is up for sale for £5m. Why the **** would you want to play him last night?

It's quite clear Flint is off so why select him for a league cup game when that would make him cup-tied and potentially effect the price we get for him?

Flint has been absolutely stitched up IMO, poor form again from the club.

I would disagree saying until he is sold he's our player and we are fully within our rights to pick him when we want, getting cup tied in the league cup isn't going to affect his sale value. 

[Slack Bladder]

If someone doesn't want to play for us then sod 'em.

For me it's City or nothing, don't understand the whole clapping former players business.

 

[Malago]

1 minute ago, phantom said:

I would disagree saying until he is sold he's our player and we are fully within our rights to pick him when we want, getting cup tied in the league cup isn't going to affect his sale value. 

Couldn't agree more.  Because we've had two  good results and they can't criticise the club's on the field performance at the moment, my impression is that some people are weaponising Flint's departure to have a go at the club off the field.

 

[Phileas Fogg]

LJ will probably give some 'clues' today. I like him but he can't stop himself dropping hints at times.

[BobBobSuperBob]

38 minutes ago, AJgEEZa said:

The Macca interview on the main site definitely implies that Flint asked not to play. He says "He decided not to play" not "we decided not to play him". That may just have been phrasing but it doesn't paint him in a good light. Coupled with the wording on the statement and it will be interesting to hear LJ's take on it today. Who knows!?!

Does he ?

Does he say 'he' or they ? (I can't decipher)

And if was 'he' - was 'he' the head coach oh or the player

You obviously know from your post

[Franks21]

16 minutes ago, CiderCraig said:

So your first post suggests you've got inside sources. 

Well done.

Was simply just saying mate having said that I have the utmost respect for flint he has done a lot for the club and will allways be a legend in my eyes. Louis Carey and Scotty Murray left and still come back legends so there is no difference  in flint

[Kid in the Riot]

8 minutes ago, Robbored said:

What evidence? A not very clear explanation from Macca who brushed over the question? 

i get the impression  that you like to slag off the club at every opportunity especially when it's speculation or misinterpretation.

So, in other words, you have absolutely nothing to add to the debate and are on a trolling mission - what a surprise!

7 minutes ago, phantom said:

I would disagree saying until he is sold he's our player and we are fully within our rights to pick him when we want, getting cup tied in the league cup isn't going to affect his sale value. 

Off course technically we are fully within our rights to pick him. The question is how wise a decision is that when the head coach himself feels the player's head has been turned (unless he's lying about that, very possible granted), the player is up for sale and a move is imminent?

I would suggest it doesn't look good from the outside when you have 3 players that have allegedly refused to play for us in 12 months just days before they move from the club.

This is an exact repeat of the Kodjia situation and one assumes it will be announced on Saturday that Flint isn't in the squad as a bid has been accepted from Brum and he will officially join them on Sunday!

As @Benjam!n Ultra rightly said, why are we throwing our players (popular ones who are making us money) under a bus just before they leave? No need.

[AJgEEZa]

3 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Does he ?

Does he say 'he' or they ? (I can't decipher)

And if was 'he' - was 'he' the head coach oh or the player

You obviously know from your post

Clearly I don't as I said it could have been the phrasing and who knows. What I do know is that until we get clarity, people are going to speculate, it's a forum. Sorry. Clearly upset you by using the only two club sources regarding the matter to speculate with. I'll try harder next time. IF he did refuse though we will know later as LJ told us about Kodjia. I am not currently in either camp though to put your mind at rest. He may have, it may have been for club reasons. Who knows!!

[myol'man]

Pure speculation on my part, but maybe a deal has been done so that Flint goes to Brum and doesn't play against us on Saturday if he didn't play last night?

[Robbored]

7 minutes ago, myol'man said:

Pure speculation on my part, but maybe a deal has been done so that Flint goes to Brum and doesn't play against us on Saturday if he didn't play last night?

That's pretty much what I was thinking......but certain posters just can't help slagging off the club at every opportunity........

[frenchred]

If a deals been done, let him go, let him play against us, our quick football will kill him!

[David Brent]

1 hour ago, AJgEEZa said:

The Macca interview on the main site definitely implies that Flint asked not to play. He says "He decided not to play" not "we decided not to play him". That may just have been phrasing but it doesn't paint him in a good light. Coupled with the wording on the statement and it will be interesting to hear LJ's take on it today. Who knows!?!

Or maybe Flint was asked "do you want to play"? Bearing in mind the impending move.

[David Brent]

4 minutes ago, Robbored said:

That's pretty much what I was thinking......but certain posters just can't help slagging off the club at every opportunity........

If you're referring to Kid in the Riots post, he gave his opinion on a series of truths. 

So if certain posters don't agree with pretty much what you were thinking then it means they're slagging off the club at every opportunity?....

[bs20ciderarmy]

It's a bit funny how so many fans are sticking up for fling and blaming city for it. First of all thank you Flint for everything you have done for this football team you will be missed. Although we don't know the full facts it would seem Flint has NOT handled this situation with credit, as far as I'm concerned he should be willing to give 110% till that moment LJ tells him a bid has been accepted. He's not leaving to further his career, closer to family etc etc it's for a extra bit a dosh. But if that's what he wants to do fair doo's. As with the blaming the club for how they have handled it is pathetic. City fans have always moaned the club doesn't tell the fans about x but since Johnson has been here he's been nothing but open with us yet it seems he's "sticking" people up by opening up! Do you really think the club would go on record if Flint didn't have the convo and say he didn't want to play

[Marina's Rolls Royce]

The amount of money a selling club receives is not the concern of the player being sold or his agent. The amount of potential money the player will receive in fees and wages is all he and the agent are concerned with.

If a club is in a very strong position, don't have to sell and are playing hard ball on a transfer fee then the player and his agent may feel this is standing in the way a securing a more lucrative future and subsequently tries to force the issue by using tactics to ensure a deal goes through.

BCFC have held out when 'blackmailed' in this way ( Kodjia, Freeman & Flint) and so they should. It is not "throwing a player under a bus" it is about ensuring sustainability and not being held ransom by a player and his agent. Redknapp has stated several times he does not want to pay 'inflated' prices yet may believe he can force a deal.

Whether Flint is jumping or being pushed makes no odds to me but to some on here it's about conspiracy.  Once a decision is made by a player for whatever reason then they'll do what they can to get their pay rise. Particularly if it's a sideways move playing wise and Birmingham must be seen as a sideways move.

 

[View from the Dolman]

1 hour ago, Kid in the Riot said:

The whole thing smacks of a stitch-up on Flint. So he wasn't played v FC Twente...

He played against FC Twente.

[Cardy]

This may not be a story at all. If a sensible bid for Flint was received during the day on Tuesday & a deal is now really close then it could have been a mutual decision which was best for all parties - that said we need to know this today from LJ. Additionally it would suggest he will be gone in the next couple of days.

If Flint has genuinely decided that he can't / won't play in order to try & force a move then that is a completely different situation which potentially changes his status from Hero to Zero overnight.

[Marina's Rolls Royce]

Just now, View from the Dolman said:

He played against FC Twente.

awkward

[Kid in the Riot]

1 minute ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

awkward

Not at all. That appears to be the only fault anyone can find with my post at the moment. I'll take that. Thanks for being the only person to actually respond sensibly (above, not this childish post obviously)

[screech]

I think it's pretty obvious he's leaving and it should be really obvious that him and his agent went looking for a pay rise. They hoped to flush out bigger clubs who were interested and have failed, unfortunately or fortunately (whichever way you look at it) he's left with one option a bigger pay packet but a side ways move.

They've made their decision a while back and need to carry it through, good luck to him, although I am fully backing the clubs stance on this one. Basso mk2 I think.

[myol'man]

12 minutes ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

awkward

Or, as Mark Twain said “Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.” 

[phantom]

47 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

I would suggest it doesn't look good from the outside when you have 3 players that have allegedly refused to play for us in 12 months just days before they move from the club.

As @Benjam!n Ultra rightly said, why are we throwing our players (popular ones who are making us money) under a bus just before they leave? No need.

Does this not say more about the players and their agents though?

[BobBobSuperBob]

48 minutes ago, bs20ciderarmy said:

It's a bit funny how so many fans are sticking up for fling and blaming city for it. First of all thank you Flint for everything you have done for this football team you will be missed.

Although we don't know the full facts

it would seem

Flint has NOT handled this situation with credit, as far as I'm concerned he should be willing to give 110% till that moment LJ tells him a bid has been accepted.

Where is it stated , & who has said that he isn't ?

 

He's not leaving to further his career, closer to family etc etc it's for a extra bit a dosh. But if that's what he wants to do fair doo's.

As with the blaming the club for how they have handled it is pathetic. City fans have always moaned the club doesn't tell the fans about x but since Johnson has been here he's been nothing but open with us yet it seems he's "sticking" people up by opening up! Do you really think the club would go on record if Flint didn't have the convo and say he didn't want to play

 they were truthful about Tomlins time here weren't they

Gone on record in what respect ?

Flint refusing to play ?

Who at the club has stated that ?

Simple q - Why did the club have to tell everyone that Flint was originally the side but then 'removed '

-For what purpose exactly  ???

 

your opening line 'It's a bit funny how so many fans are sticking up for fling and blaming city for it.' is strange as you seem to be doing exactly the same in reverse w

 

 

[downendcity]

9 hours ago, Benjam!n Ultra said:

Why's the club recently chosen to pull this kind of stunt?

Kodjia, Freeman and now Flint. I've not known this club before to really hammer players as if they're ******* us over. 

I find it cringeworthy, tinpot and pathetic. 

If a pillar is to bring in young players and move them on for more money let's stop throwing them under the bus when these successful moves arise as we have done in the past 12 months. 

Too many fans see the strategy of bringing in young players as an end in itself . i.e sell them on for a profit asap, but I just don't see this as the case.

Of course there will be players where this will happen, either because the club does not see them progressing sufficiently well or we receive an offer just too good to refuse. However, I am pretty certain the main aim is to bring in younger players that have the ability to improve and that improvement will benefit the development of the team.

I am pretty sure that this time last year the club saw Kodjia as an integral part f our immediate development, but his head was obviously turned by Villa's interest and especially after Kodjia effectively " downed tools" the club acted quickly do secure the best deal and quickly.

WE have a few other young players all developing at different rates. Some, like Bryan, Patterson and Brownhill seem to have become important parts of the first team squad, for others, like O'dowdy and Engval, the jury is still out and it could be that if better options become available ( Eliasson?) then they might be moved on at a profit.

If we are successful with this policy, then we will run the risk that other, bigger clubs will be interested in our players, and if we lose them at least the blow will be softened because of the financial gain we make, but over time I would suspect our aim is to hold our better players to improve the team to the degree that we can challenge tav the top end of the table.

We are still paying decent fees for the players being brought in, but not the stupid money that would be required to bring in the fabled "championship proven" players that many advocate is essential. The club's approach matches the club's aim of financial stability but might mean the team's development takes a bit longer, but it will avoid the financial perils we have experienced in the past by paying top wages for players who didn't perform and then we couldn't shift, other than at huge financial cost to the club.