Randy Marsh Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 bbcbristolsport <H1 id=heading></H1>Midfielder Gavin Williams is in talks with Bristol Rovers about a free transfer - one of two players they are in discussion with today. 25 minutes ago via webAgent Williams is behind enemy lines and looks ready to fully infiltrate the Rovers camp. Good luck in your mission sir. Coles and Sawyer have done a fantastic job so far, as did Akinde. Operation Gas:Down is on it's final stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toastienick Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 bbcbristolsport <H1 id=heading></H1>Midfielder Gavin Williams is in talks with Bristol Rovers about a free transfer - one of two players they are in discussion with today. 25 minutes ago via webAgent Williams is behind enemy lines and looks ready to fully infiltrate the Rovers camp. Good luck in your mission sir. Coles and Sawyer have done a fantastic job so far, as did Akinde. Operation Gas:Down is on it's final stage. i hope he doesnt hell do well for them if he stays fit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riaz Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 can only see him doing well down the rugby ground to be honest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC_Red Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 hell do well for them if he stays fit dont worry. He won't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Hows his FOOTBALL skills gonna suit their RUGBY pitch? It's like the battle of the Somme this time of year up there. Enjoy League 2 Gavin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pride of the west Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 The blue few are hailing him as the savior already. The gimps in work are loving it. They really do love all our rejects dont they. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 I wonder why Williams didn't sign for Yeovil? Skiverton rated him very highly. Seems strange that Williams should be considering a move to the gas. He'll do well for them if he can stay off the treatment table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 can only see him doing well down the rugby ground to be honest My thoughts exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS3_RED Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 he has signed for them. I always thought he was a little short up stairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS3_RED Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 In the pic on their OS holding that toilet roll, isnt he in the away end? Maybe he just cant bring himself to enter their ground. That could be a problem on match day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 I wonder why Williams didn't sign for Yeovil? Skiverton rated him very highly. Seems strange that Williams should be considering a move to the gas. Rovers are one of the highest wage payers in that league, Yeovil aren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Marsh Posted February 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 6 months contract... Wonder if they're suspicious yet.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 He says he's from South Wales, so wanted to stay in the area, and has been to watch them (the Gas) a few times so knows what to expect. So the move must have been on the cards for a while then as why else would you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 He says he's from South Wales, so wanted to stay in the area, and has been to watch them (the Gas) a few times so knows what to expect. So the move must have been on the cards for a while then as why else would you! You're right, by the sounds of it the move has obviously been on the cards for a while. I don't understand what City gain by his contract being "mutually terminated". It doesn't mean we've paid him nothing for the last 6 months on his contract surely? Anyone know how this works? Does it mean we save on part of his wages between now and the end of the season? If so, I hope it's a big saving. I could understand this arrangement if they knew he was going to Yeovil/Exeter, but even if he scores just one goal in the whole of the rest of the season, he'll have helped Rovers. Why on earth would we want to do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 You're right, by the sounds of it the move has obviously been on the cards for a while. I don't understand what City gain by his contract being "mutually terminated". It doesn't mean we've paid him nothing for the last 6 months on his contract surely? Anyone know how this works? Does it mean we save on part of his wages between now and the end of the season? If so, I hope it's a big saving. I could understand this arrangement if they knew he was going to Yeovil/Exeter, but even if he scores just one goal in the whole of the rest of the season, he'll have helped Rovers. Why on earth would we want to do that? I assume it means we pay part of the 6 months we're contractually obliged to pay him, but not the whole lot. Which is a saving. If we're not gonna use the bloke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotswoldRed Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Shame he's gone there. He's just the sort of player they need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 We pay an agreed some prolly 10% of the wages he would be due for the next 6 months, He'd rather play football then rot in the reserves so it was best for all parties Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matty-H Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Worrying. I can see him having enough influence on the pitch to drag them out of trouble. He is far superior to anything they have at the moment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 He's an excellent player at L1 level. Proved that at Yeovil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 We pay an agreed some prolly 10% of the wages he would be due for the next 6 months Well, let's say he was on 250k per year at the Gate. 10% of half of that would mean City paying just 12.5k. to 'mutually terminate' his contract. If that was our only cost and Rovers will basically take over his contract and have to stump up the rest of the 125k, then I'm reasonably reassured. If however we had to pay him considerably more then it might have been better to keep him, loan him to the gas, and make them pay through the nose for the privilege by stumping up most of his wages. We could also recall him if he started doing too well. If we really have saved 100k+ by the mutual termination, so be it, but I'm not convinced the pay off would have been anything like that small and I'm certainly not happy he's ended up at the gas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 considering how vociferously unamused you were at Akinde's loan to the sags, would that not employ a case of double standards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slave to the rhythm Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Well, let's say he was on 250k per year at the Gate. 10% of half of that would mean City paying just 12.5k. to 'mutually terminate' his contract. If that was our only cost and Rovers will basically take over his contract and have to stump up the rest of the 125k, then I'm reasonably reassured. If however we had to pay him considerably more then it might have been better to keep him, loan him to the gas, and make them pay through the nose for the privilege by stumping up most of his wages. We could also recall him if he started doing too well. If we really have saved 100k+ by the mutual termination, so be it, but I'm not convinced the pay off would have been anything like that small and I'm certainly not happy he's ended up at the gas. There's no way that Gavin would have accepted a £100k reduction in his earnings! Let's live in the real world. I imagine that he's received the bulk of the money he would have earned at City, because, let's face it, why else would he walk away from his contract with us? I wouldn't walk away from a nice juicy contract if I didn't have to! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeRed Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 You're right, by the sounds of it the move has obviously been on the cards for a while. I don't understand what City gain by his contract being "mutually terminated". It doesn't mean we've paid him nothing for the last 6 months on his contract surely? Anyone know how this works? Does it mean we save on part of his wages between now and the end of the season? If so, I hope it's a big saving. I could understand this arrangement if they knew he was going to Yeovil/Exeter, but even if he scores just one goal in the whole of the rest of the season, he'll have helped Rovers. Why on earth would we want to do that? We are making some very big savings by not having to pay all the medical bills he costs us. Seriously - to those worrying about him helping the Gas - come on how long has Williams ever been fit? Do you really expect him to play many games? In the 3 years he was at AG he was rarely available , either injured, coming back from injury, or if actually playing a game- just about to get injured And it was the same at ipswich Hopefully they're paying him a lot - but will get very little out of him (exactly like our experience) CR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 There's no way that Gavin would have accepted a £100k reduction in his earnings! Let's live in the real world. I imagine that he's received the bulk of the money he would have earned at City, because, let's face it, why else would he walk away from his contract with us? I wouldn't walk away from a nice juicy contract if I didn't have to! Deduction for six month interest + administrative fee? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 There's no way that Gavin would have accepted a £100k reduction in his earnings! Let's live in the real world. I imagine that he's received the bulk of the money he would have earned at City, because, let's face it, why else would he walk away from his contract with us? I wouldn't walk away from a nice juicy contract if I didn't have to! So what advantage is there to City to pay him off rather than loaning him to the desperate gas on condition they pay the majority of his wages? Wouldn't we have then saved tens of thousands of pounds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slave to the rhythm Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 So what advantage is there to City to pay him off rather than loaning him to the desperate gas on condition they pay the majority of his wages? Like you, I have no idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WellRedPhil Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Great player for that level when fit, hopefully stays injured then! How gutting would it be if he did amazing for them and helped them stay up. Always liked the guy and under any other circumstances would wish him well, but obviously this is different... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riaz Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 So what advantage is there to City to pay him off rather than loaning him to the desperate gas on condition they pay the majority of his wages? Wouldn't we have then saved tens of thousands of pounds? Maybe there was no offers on the table? From rovers point of view they would have to pay a loan fee plus wages, so probabaly werent interesed. When he was released they would only have to pay wages - He would'nt be after a signing on fee because he's just had a pay off. City probabaly didnt pay up 100% of his wages either, so they have saved that way also. Everyone is happy? Apart from up because we've just got rid of our only creative midfielder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 From rovers point of view they would have to pay a loan fee plus wages, so probabaly werent interesed. I couldn't care less about Rovers' point of view - pay up or no deal! When he was released they would only have to pay wages - He would'nt be after a signing on fee because he's just had a pay off. So City pay him off to facilitate a move to Rovers even though there is little or no financial advantage to us, quite possibly the opposite. Rovers don't have to pay a signing on fee because we've already covered it. Madness! City probabaly didnt pay up 100% of his wages either, so they have saved that way also. As well as what? If indeed we saved much, if anything on the 'mutual agreement to terminate', which many seem to think we won't have. Everyone is happy? Well, Gavin Williams and the gas anyway. Apart from up because we've just got rid of our only creative midfielder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havanatopia Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 I would have thought the objective was to remove him from the squad; as long as the deal was close to or even marginally worse than a loan out deal it might have favoured us because we reduce the numbers and Millen was under pressure to do that. And, as many have said, his medical fees must have been disproportionately high which would have continued under a loan deal. I also believe Williams wants to play football more than just sitting in the reserves not least because he needs to put himself in the shop window for a longer term and decent deal and where he is more assured of first team football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.