Nibor Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 OTT? No, I don't think so. GJ expressly said that he woulnd't be playing. That's £1.5M worth of investment being risked out there. Hand grenade time and going to Yeovil or Cheltenham isn't an option. Nope, tell him the deal's off and to enjoy his time in Egypt. I find it highly unlikely we're at any risk at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 Either we have been lied to by City, or Meteb and Al Ahly have been playing with us like a puppet on a string. I believe City need to clarify there position sooner rather than later. If we have been lied to by the player and Al Ahly, then I think we look for another striker now. He is a typical number 9 and a box player. You don't see much of him but he sticks central and moves when something is about to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stroudy Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 Either we have been lied to by City, or Meteb and Al Ahly have been playing with us like a puppet on a string. I believe City need to clarify there position sooner rather than later. If we have been lied to by the player and Al Ahly, then I think we look for another striker now. I agree 100% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCFC Grim Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 The only thing i can imagine is, GJ was informed(after his interview on the site) that it wont make any difference if he plays or not when it come to a work permit, and said it would be alright. Time will tell i guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matty f Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 ive got this feeling that city are allowing it and that something may have been agreed between the two clubs on city's return from portugal. just my opinion cause i know nothin!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheese Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 I find it highly unlikely we're at any risk at all. Oh, that's all right then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 Either we have been lied to by City, or Meteb and Al Ahly have been playing with us like a puppet on a string. Not at all, there are dozens of possible explanations that don't include anyone lying. Maybe the deals are all post dated and he was given authorisation to play this last game and we can pull out if it goes wrong. Maybe it turned out he can apply for a work permit whilst still registered but isn't a BCFC player until he gets one. Maybe he phoned GJ last night and pleaded to play. Until anyone actually knows anything he should be given the benefit of the doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Red Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 Hopefully he will pull through injury free As for people saying he should never pull on a bristol city shirt are over reacting a tad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 Oh, that's all right then. Well, yes. I think your overreaction is very premature, you could at least wait until you know whether or not he'd agreed it with the club to start demanding we drop the deal couldn't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SE23Red Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 So in other words you know how work permits and registrations work better than GJ? Fair enough. More likely to my mind is that the club just changed their mind and agreed. I don't know anything about player registrations but I'd take a punt at knowing more about work permits than GJ. The work permit will be granted as he has played enough international games, but for us to apply for it he won't have had to leave his current club. Trust me they really are completely unrelated. I'm sure we'll find out next week how Emad comes to be playing tonight after everything that was said. What I wanted to highlight was a possible inaccuracy in GJ's statement - a matter of process - that might go some way to explain it. And I'm sorry I bothered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex_BCFC Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 As for people saying he should never pull on a bristol city shirt are over reacting a tad I agree. Could be lots of things- it would be disapointing if he has gone behind City's back though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 I agree. Could be lots of things- it would be disapointing if he has gone behind City's back though. Half time. Not injured Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheese Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 Well, yes. I think your overreaction is very premature, you could at least wait until you know whether or not he'd agreed it with the club to start demanding we drop the deal couldn't you? So, we unveil him as our new signing, tell the world he's ours and that he can't play in this derby game even though he'd like to. But then we let him play? So he's not ours then - clearly. So if anyone else wants to sign him they can?? It would be a new one on me - in all my years of following football I've not heard of this before. pre-contracts - yes, but eveyone is up front about those. No doubt if the club wants the deal to go ahead they'll come and say they gave an 11th hour permission. Frankly I wouldn't believe it because if they had they would have said so on the OS before the game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldfield Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 Not at all, there are dozens of possible explanations that don't include anyone lying. Maybe the deals are all post dated and he was given authorisation to play this last game and we can pull out if it goes wrong. Maybe it turned out he can apply for a work permit whilst still registered but isn't a BCFC player until he gets one. Maybe he phoned GJ last night and pleaded to play. Until anyone actually knows anything he should be given the benefit of the doubt. If the little transfer info we get from the horses mouth is incorrect so much for SOURCES. If he is playing is with the agreement of City the official website should reflect this. People pay a premium for World and SMS only to be given incorrect info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribsbcfc Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 i said this on the other thread if his registration has been cancelled then surely they are fielding an uneligible player for which they will certainly cop a fine or even points deduction pesonally i,m a tad confused on the matter tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 So, we unveil him as our new signing, tell the world he's ours and that he can't play in this derby game even though he'd like to. But then we let him play? So he's not ours then - clearly. So if anyone else wants to sign him they can?? It would be a new one on me - in all my years of following football I've not heard of this before. pre-contracts - yes, but eveyone is up front about those. No doubt if the club wants the deal to go ahead they'll come and say they gave an 11th hour permission. Frankly I wouldn't believe it because if they had they would have said so on the OS before the game The most likely scenario to my mind is that the transfer is dependent on a work permit which hasn't yet been granted so he's officially still an Ahly player until it is and they are playing him with permission. Even if he was playing against GJ's wishes as long as he's not injured and the club isn't exposed financially (and I'm sure it can't be if he's still registered at Ahly) then I think saying he should never put on a City shirt is a massive over reaction. He's played for them since he was 12, they have an injury crisis for a derby game against their only rivals. A slap on the wrists would suffice IMO, I'd be pleased to see him show us that kind of loyalty in a few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheese Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 The most likely scenario to my mind is that the transfer is dependent on a work permit which hasn't yet been granted so he's officially still an Ahly player until it is and they are playing him with permission. Even if he was playing against GJ's wishes as long as he's not injured and the club isn't exposed financially (and I'm sure it can't be if he's still registered at Ahly) then I think saying he should never put on a City shirt is a massive over reaction. He's played for them since he was 12, they have an injury crisis for a derby game against their only rivals. A slap on the wrists would suffice IMO, I'd be pleased to see him show us that kind of loyalty in a few years. This is professional football not downs league. I cannot think for one minute that GJ would give his permisson - why should he? What's in it for us? Therefore we've been duped. But you think that's ok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 So, we unveil him as our new signing, tell the world he's ours and that he can't play in this derby game even though he'd like to. But then we let him play? So he's not ours then - clearly. So if anyone else wants to sign him they can?? It would be a new one on me - in all my years of following football I've not heard of this before. pre-contracts - yes, but eveyone is up front about those. No doubt if the club wants the deal to go ahead they'll come and say they gave an 11th hour permission. Frankly I wouldn't believe it because if they had they would have said so on the OS before the game I think it's all about handling in the working permit request as soon as possible to start the administrative process. Why else where he not presented this Monday on a press conference instead of through a video in the evening the same day as the team where off to Portugal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TinnionForEngland Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 The most likely scenario to my mind is that the transfer is dependent on a work permit which hasn't yet been granted so he's officially still an Ahly player until it is and they are playing him with permission. Even if he was playing against GJ's wishes as long as he's not injured and the club isn't exposed financially (and I'm sure it can't be if he's still registered at Ahly) then I think saying he should never put on a City shirt is a massive over reaction. He's played for them since he was 12, they have an injury crisis for a derby game against their only rivals. A slap on the wrists would suffice IMO, I'd be pleased to see him show us that kind of loyalty in a few years. Absolutely spot on and the very same thing i've just said to somebody on MSN, it might be naughty but it's very loyal and it must be so daunting to be leaving a country after so long, a bit like having to leave your long term lover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 I think with the football world in the state its in and with the Ronaldo/Barry/Lampard/Drogba etc etc transfer sagas. Its refreshing a player wants to say thank you to a club hes been with since 12. I reckon theres a simple explantion behind this and we should all support the lad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 This is professional football not downs league. I cannot think for one minute that GJ would give his permisson - why should he? What's in it for us? Therefore we've been duped. But you think that's ok? Come off it, we're not paying his wages yet are we? Why would GJ prefer that Meteb gets no match practise? Your conclusion that we've been duped is highly unlikely IMO, like I said I suspect that he's not officially ours until we get a work permit and then international clearance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crackers Corner Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 I think with the football world in the state its in and with the Ronaldo/Barry/Lampard/Drogba etc etc transfer sagas. Its refreshing a player wants to say thank you to a club hes been with since 12. I reckon theres a simple explantion behind this and we should all support the lad. I agree, innocent until proven guilty, thets wait to see what gj has to say, my money is on us givin g permission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 why should he? What's in it for us? Nothing. Its called respect and loyal and showing some thanks to a club thats done everything for him since he was 12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheese Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 Come off it, we're not paying his wages yet are we? Why would GJ prefer that Meteb gets no match practise? Your conclusion that we've been duped is highly unlikely IMO, like I said I suspect that he's not officially ours until we get a work permit and then international clearance. Ah I see. So, this club operates a high degree of secrecy when it comes to transfers Why was he revealed as our new signing last week instead of tomorrow if he wasn't ours? If he's not ours, and he scores a hat-trick tonight does that mean someone else can steal a march - could Middlesborough yet renew their interest? On the evidence available I'd say duped is far more likely than anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fka dagest Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 I don't know what the hell is going on, but it makes me feel uneasy. I'd certainly expect some update on the main site tomorrow. Out of interest, is the guy who signed for Wigan playing for Zamalek? And lastly for those watching the game, does he look good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 Nothing. Its called respect and loyal and showing some thanks to a club thats done everything for him since he was 12. Not sure but can be that he was substituted at half time. Nr 25 where starting the second half and I diden't see nr. 9 Sorry still on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheese Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 Nothing. Its called respect and loyal and showing some thanks to a club thats done everything for him since he was 12. I think you're being naive - sorry. There's something not right about this and absolutely nothing I've seen or read suggests that this should have happened. It wouldn't surpirse me if the club turn round tomorrow and say they gave permission - but I won't believe it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 the egyptian fellow said that his contract begins with us tommorow, this means he is still eligible for ahly tonight but has still signed a contract for us and is therefore a city player from tommorow. i think GJ was wrong about emad having to cancell registration to apply for a work permit, but he may still be annoyed that emad played, this said he can do nothing about it as his views are of no importance legally untill tommorow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin phantom Posted July 20, 2008 Admin Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 Someone please correct me if I am wrong but I thought that we had SIGNED Emad, so "IF" he is a Bristol City player he could not be playing tonight - seems more likely he has not signed yet ? I thought that it was reported that ONLY the work permit was required and that this would be sought as soon as he current registration was cancelled ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edson Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 The most likely scenario to my mind is that the transfer is dependent on a work permit which hasn't yet been granted so he's officially still an Ahly player until it is and they are playing him with permission. Even if he was playing against GJ's wishes as long as he's not injured and the club isn't exposed financially (and I'm sure it can't be if he's still registered at Ahly) then I think saying he should never put on a City shirt is a massive over reaction. He's played for them since he was 12, they have an injury crisis for a derby game against their only rivals. A slap on the wrists would suffice IMO, I'd be pleased to see him show us that kind of loyalty in a few years. I tend to agree to a certain extent. But does Gary Johnson strike you as the sort to allow a player to publicly disrespect him? If this has been done without Gary's express permission, I fully expect the deal to be called off, because I don't believe Gary would take on a player who is willing to go against him, no matter how commendable the reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.