Jump to content
IGNORED

Rene Gilmartins Two Jobs.


Silvio Dante

Recommended Posts

Was mentioned in the WSM match thread that Rene Gilmartin looked to be assisting the U23s. This interview posted by the FAI (where he’s now also U21 goalkeeping coach) appears to confirm that’s the case. (City bit about two minutes in)

Interestingly, Gilmartin also namechecks Conor Masterson who was randomly linked on the transfer forum the other day...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I’d guess £2-3k per week?

Gregor said he was on £4K a week.

I have no idea if that is true, but if it is, it seems to be a totally ridiculous sum (£200k a year!) for a player who is at best the 4th choice in his position & was on the bench just 4 times in the whole of last season.

This back up goalkeeper coach role (who else at our level has 2 of them?) & now this “assisting” the U21 coach role just seems a way of trying to justify employing him. No way is Pat Mountain or whoever runs the U21s on that anything like that amount & they are the actual coaches.

No wonder we have such a huge squad & incur massive losses when we employ people like on deals this, but good that he’s a “lovely bloke & great in the dressing room” though..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Gregor said he was on £4K a week.

I have no idea if that is true, but if it is, it seems to be a totally ridiculous sum (£200k a year!) for a player who is at best the 4th choice in his position & was on the bench just 4 times in the whole of last season.

This back up goalkeeper coach role (who else at our level has 2 of them?) & now this “assisting” the U21 coach role just seems a way of trying to justify employing him. No way is Pat Mountain or whoever runs the U21s on that anything like that amount & they are the actual coaches.

No wonder we have such a huge squad & incur massive losses when we employ people like on deals this, but good that he’s a “lovely bloke & great in the dressing room” though..

 He's here to allow our young goal keepers to go out and develop as well. If they are considered ready, it's better for them to go out on loan.

You need three keepers in the squad, you definitely need 3 if you have Maenpaa.

You don't sign him to play, you don't want him to play, ever. But you need to have that third guy at the club, and the one we have we use in multiple roles. You can argue cost and value of him individually. Pat Mountain isn't remotely close to being a professional level GK at the moment. Feel free to argue about Gilmartin's quality, but that's WHY he's in this role.

You mentioned he was on the bench just 4 times last season, was that your plan for Max O'Leary and his development? Nice pathway.

We could very well end up with Bentley playing EVERY game this season, and then what for Max? That's the alternative plan. We could have Bentley, Max and Jojo and be cheap and homegrown, and they don't get to play games. So it's a balance. You can argue the details about it but it makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Prinny said:

 He's here to allow our young goal keepers to go out and develop as well. If they are considered ready, it's better for them to go out on loan.

You need three keepers in the squad, you definitely need 3 if you have Maenpaa.

You don't sign him to play, you don't want him to play, ever. But you need to have that third guy at the club, and the one we have we use in multiple roles. You can argue cost and value of him individually. Pat Mountain isn't remotely close to being a professional level GK at the moment. Feel free to argue about Gilmartin's quality, but that's WHY he's in this role.

You mentioned he was on the bench just 4 times last season, was that your plan for Max O'Leary and his development? Nice pathway.

We could very well end up with Bentley playing EVERY game this season, and then what for Max? That's the alternative plan. We could have Bentley, Max and Jojo and be cheap and homegrown, and they don't get to play games. So it's a balance. You can argue the details about it but it makes sense.

Jojo Wollacott was unable to get a game at FGR & he could have covered those 4 games.

Max was better off at Shrewsbury but if Bentley or Maenpaa were unavailable Jojo could have sat on the bench.

If you think this is a good use of £200k a year that’s your opinion, I think it is an absolutely shocking waste of money, but I’m leaving it now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't have to be the same at all clubs.

For instance, Sheffield Wednesday have a kitman and an assistant kitman, no doubt they have a good reason for that - I'm sure that Scotty would like an assistant given the hours he works.

Does it really matter how much RG is on or what he does to earn it ? I couldn't give a toss personally - not my business.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GrahamC said:

Jojo Wollacott was unable to get a game at FGR & he could have covered those 4 games.

Max was better off at Shrewsbury but if Bentley or Maenpaa were unavailable Jojo could have sat on the bench.

If you think this is a good use of £200k a year that’s your opinion, I think it is an absolutely shocking waste of money, but I’m leaving it now.

Right so you want a guy who can't get a game for FGR potentially playing for us in the championship?

You need to offer a better alternative than spending that £200k is my point. Which is why I said argue the details. IF he's on £200k, who can we get who's cheaper and performs the roles better?

Who's this third choice GK, who's a quality championship player who wants to not play for £4k a week?

You have to make a compromise somewhere. What is YOUR compromise?

If it's not trying to develop one of the young GKS at the club, then that's a fine option, but that has negatives too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Prinny said:

Right so you want a guy who can't get a game for FGR potentially playing for us in the championship?

You need to offer a better alternative than spending that £200k is my point. Which is why I said argue the details. IF he's on £200k, who can we get who's cheaper and performs the roles better?

Who's this third choice GK, who's a quality championship player who wants to not play for £4k a week?

You have to make a compromise somewhere. What is YOUR compromise?

If it's not trying to develop one of the young GKS at the club, then that's a fine option, but that has negatives too.

So your argument is that a 33 year old who couldn’t get a regular game in L2 is a better bet on the bench than a 23 year old Academy keeper that we keep giving contracts to, then?

Sub goalkeeper is a strange job, the likelihood of needing to come on is probably no more than once a season.

If Maenpaa was injured when Jojo was out on loan we could bring in an emergency loan, which is far, far cheaper than paying someone £200k for nothing. Once Jojo was back from FGR who was on the bench, then?

Gilmartin or Jojo? You know the answer, it was Wollacott (for every single game post lockdown) which completely rubbishes your point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

So your argument is that a 33 year old who couldn’t get a regular game in L2 is a better bet on the bench than a 23 year old Academy keeper that we keep giving contracts to, then?

It's better if we believe that Jojo is worth developing (we keep giving him contracts) and that turns out to be true.

Sub goalkeeper is a strange job, the likelihood of needing to come on is probably no more than once a season.

Or you're one second away from playing the full season. The gamble here is that the 3rd GK doesn't have to play, but can be on the bench a few times.

Gilmartin or Jojo? You know the answer, it was Wollacott (for every single game post lockdown) which completely rubbishes your point.

It's not about who is better, it's about who is better for the club to NOT play for us and not get game time anywhere else.

We wanted Jojo to get game time at FGR because he wouldn't here, when he's back at the club you pick the best player!

It reinforces the point if anything.

If Maenpaa was injured when Jojo was out on loan we could bring in an emergency loan, which is far, far cheaper than paying someone £200k for nothing. Once Jojo was back from FGR who was on the bench, then?

57 Emergency Goalkeeper Loan 

57.1 If all the Professional Goalkeepers at a Club are unavailable as a result of having been:

https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules--regulations/section-6---players/

You don't know the rules.
How do you know it's cheaper? How do you know this emergency loan GK is better? Remember what happened last time we scrambled about to get GK cover?

Marinovic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

So your argument is that a 33 year old who couldn’t get a regular game in L2 is a better bet on the bench than a 23 year old Academy keeper that we keep giving contracts to, then?

Sub goalkeeper is a strange job, the likelihood of needing to come on is probably no more than once a season.

If Maenpaa was injured when Jojo was out on loan we could bring in an emergency loan, which is far, far cheaper than paying someone £200k for nothing. Once Jojo was back from FGR who was on the bench, then?

Gilmartin or Jojo? You know the answer, it was Wollacott (for every single game post lockdown) which completely rubbishes your point.

JoJo counted as club developed.

Im more aligned with @Prinny on this one.  £200k is a lot of money though.  At the time he signed, Niki hadn’t re-signed.  The problem isn’t just Gilmartin, it’s Wollacott and O’Leary and their development.  It probably shows a lack of clarity in the succession planning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

JoJo counted as club developed.

Im more aligned with @Prinny on this one.  £200k is a lot of money though.  At the time he signed, Niki hadn’t re-signed.  The problem isn’t just Gilmartin, it’s Wollacott and O’Leary and their development.  It probably shows a lack of clarity in the succession planning.

I dunno what the market is though.

Richard Wright made £4m at Man City in 4 years. No appearances. Played three football matches this decade, lost all three.

We had Vyner and Hinds (maybe can't remember off hand) also fulfilling the club developed role at that point, so that's not relevant in this case. I do believe they picked Jojo over Gilmartin on ability (maybe injury)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Prinny said:

We had Vyner and Hinds (maybe can't remember off hand) also fulfilling the club developed role at that point, so that's not relevant in this case. I do believe they picked Jojo over Gilmartin on ability (maybe injury)

Vyner was out injured pretty much most of pre-covid with dislocated shoulder rehab.

Hinds had come back from Colchester and was nowhere near the first team squad (In LJ’s mind).  His only reason for sitting on the bench post-covid was regulations, courtesy of an 8 minute sub appearance in 17/18 at Brentford.

Semenyo provided the club developed option pre-Xmas, Wollacott post-Xmas to pre-covid, Vyner post-covid, although Wollacott on bench as Maenpaa injured and O’Leary ineligible.

Gilmartin had been sub for all games (bar Leeds on opening day - no Semenyo) until Maenpaa was fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GrahamC said:

So your argument is that a 33 year old who couldn’t get a regular game in L2 is a better bet on the bench than a 23 year old Academy keeper that we keep giving contracts to, then?

Sub goalkeeper is a strange job, the likelihood of needing to come on is probably no more than once a season.

If Maenpaa was injured when Jojo was out on loan we could bring in an emergency loan, which is far, far cheaper than paying someone £200k for nothing. Once Jojo was back from FGR who was on the bench, then?

Gilmartin or Jojo? You know the answer, it was Wollacott (for every single game post lockdown) which completely rubbishes your point.

Unless you have Maenpaa and Bentley in your squad - then your chances of getting on the pitch increase.

Both have had their share of injuries since being here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Vyner was out injured pretty much most of pre-covid with dislocated shoulder rehab.

Hinds had come back from Colchester and was nowhere near the first team squad (In LJ’s mind).  His only reason for sitting on the bench post-covid was regulations, courtesy of an 8 minute sub appearance in 17/18 at Brentford.

Semenyo provided the club developed option pre-Xmas, Wollacott post-Xmas to pre-covid, Vyner post-covid, although Wollacott on bench as Maenpaa injured and O’Leary ineligible.

Gilmartin had been sub for all games (bar Leeds on opening day - no Semenyo) until Maenpaa was fit.

He's specifically talking post lock down tho.

 

2 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Gilmartin or Jojo? You know the answer, it was Wollacott (for every single game post lockdown) which completely rubbishes your point.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Jojo Wollacott was unable to get a game at FGR & he could have covered those 4 games.

Max was better off at Shrewsbury but if Bentley or Maenpaa were unavailable Jojo could have sat on the bench.

If you think this is a good use of £200k a year that’s your opinion, I think it is an absolutely shocking waste of money, but I’m leaving it now.

I appreciate from your last line you don't really want to have a big debate but Gillmartin's contract would have been paid for by the contributions of the loaning clubs for Jojo and Max, Rene coming in to allow them to go out on loan. Problem being Antoine not living up to what the club would have hoped and taking the club developed spot in the squad with little intent on using him. Jojo returned in January to fulfil that role. 

As we've seen Niki seems to have departed this summer and Max in so Rene remains #3 and you'd assume Jojo back out on loan now we have Zak, Morrell & Massengo as club developed players. On this occasion either Jojo's wages either cover RG's contract or is close enough that his and a coupe of 23's players out on loan probably cover it to act as a #3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

200k a year really isn't that much money for someone who has to put it just as much effort as the other goalkeepers in training, but additionally has to do coaching, too.

Just because he doesn't play 90 minutes every week doesn't mean he isn't earning his money.

You're worth what someone's willing to pay you - I don't get why it bothers other people so much - if you think you're underpaid, look for a new job. If you think someone else is overpaid, well, fair play to them I say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Coxy27 said:

200k a year really isn't that much money for someone who has to put it just as much effort as the other goalkeepers in training, but additionally has to do coaching, too.

Just because he doesn't play 90 minutes every week doesn't mean he isn't earning his money.

You're worth what someone's willing to pay you - I don't get why it bothers other people so much - if you think you're underpaid, look for a new job. If you think someone else is overpaid, well, fair play to them I say.

Bless him. Having to put the effort in for 2 hours to earn £800 a day..

 

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...