fingers Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 9m could mean total deal size - incl. signing on fees / agent fees / wages over several years of contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dollymarie Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrggggggggghhhhhhhh!!! (Not you Cynic) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Red Hat Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrggggggggghhhhhhhh!!! (Not you Cynic) There's TWO of 'em!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTone Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrggggggggghhhhhhhh!!! (Not you Cynic) I detect frustration my Pet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dollymarie Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 I detect frustration my Pet Yes, my supply of cheese is about to run out, I've got to go back to work tomorrow, and people keep posting garbage on the forum. Can ya blame me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Robin Posted January 2, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Christ put some info up from another site,and the shit hits the fan. How any fan on here can say that info is correct or not is beyond me. I understand the info has come from a journalist who reported on Leicester this afternoon. I personally did not here it,i just passed on the info from that city site. The info was supplied from a moderator on a Leicester site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 I'm an admin on here, i'm going to inform you that the world is flat. It's the truth. honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dollymarie Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 HE STILL DIDN'T WANT TO LEAVE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Red Hat Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Christ put some info up from another site,and the shit hits the fan. How any fan on here can say that info is correct or not is beyond me. I understand the info has come from a journalist who reported on Leicester this afternoon. I personally did not here it,i just passed on the info from that city site. The info was supplied from a moderator on a Leicester site. But you didn't just "put some info up from another site" did you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 I'm an admin on here, i'm going to inform you that the world is flat. It's the truth. honest. And I'm here to tell you that the cruel exploitation of animals is wicked, Tomarse. It is 2012: loose the cat - it 'isn't nice'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 And I'm here to tell you that the cruel exploitation of animals is wicked, Tomarse. It is 2012: loose the cat - it 'isn't nice'. Are you still going on about that? Christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTone Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Yes, my supply of cheese is about to run out, I've got to go back to work tomorrow, and people keep posting garbage on the forum. Can ya blame me? Cheri, when it comes to smelly cheese I am your man. Have I let you down before ? Je'taime beaucoup et je manques toi aussi XXX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 And I'm here to tell you that the cruel exploitation of animals is wicked, Tomarse. It is 2012: loose the cat - it 'isn't nice'. Says the one with the pigs being beaten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTone Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 I'm an admin on here, i'm going to inform you that the world is flat. It's the truth. honest. Why then on a flight to Australia does the plane not take a sudden dive when it "hits the edge". The flight remains calm and level proving the world is flat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Attention seeking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riaz Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 no chance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTone Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Attention seeking Why are you ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Attention seeking Yes, Donald - that's bigtone59 'all over' - did you see his web-cam earlier?? I can't believe they let children on here ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Says the one with the pigs being beaten. I have never heard a post in DEFENCE of Woolfie - yours is the first!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Are you still going on about that? Christ. Tomarse I take no personal satisfaction in the fact you have been forced to change your picky. You are to be congratulated in the dignity in which you have accepted the inevitable. As a result of your actions, you are now my third favourite moderator, after Dollymarie and Dollymarie. Well done Tomarse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddevon Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Just out of curiosity, and knowing that NM did not want to go to Leicester. what would the finnancial mechanics of the proposed £6m deal have been? I thought players who did not request a transfer used to get around 10% of an agreed fee (or was this just down to an individuals' contract). If so, and with say £2m going to Crewe, NM turned down £600k, with the balance of £3.4m to the club. Even as a free agent in the summer would he get as much as £600k signing on fee? With no Prem clubs appearing to be interested, has NM taken a big gamble on the £600K ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tunneller Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Pretty sure lansdown stated Maynard wasn't willing to go to Leicester on the radio the other week, so unsure how we've messed up ?? An also the figure was said to be around 6m I think? I don`t blame him, I live right on the outskirts of Leicester and it`s a dog hole Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Most accounts I've heard from people who claim to be in the know are that Maynard didn't want to join Leicester (or any other Championship club). If that's true I don't see the relevance of what Leicester offered. The other thing is whether it was £9 million or a number of add-ons based on appearances, goals, promotion etc. that might at some point hit £9 million if everything worked out but could otherwise stand to be a lot less. So, even if this is true, I'd not read too much into it without knowing the wider facts. From Colin Sexstone's close of window interview the facts we do know: The City board rejected 4 bids from Leicester, "the last very substantial and far in excess of what they had offered before." We also know that " the board was adamant we wanted to keep Nicky Maynard ... and didn't want to sell to a rival Championship club." So what we know for sure is that Leicester made 4 bids and the CLUB rejected them, no mention of the club accepting a bid and Maynard himself rejecting Leicester. http://www.bcfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10327~2438705,00.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brislingwood Red Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 From Colin Sexstone's close of window interview the facts we do know: The City board rejected 4 bids from Leicester, "the last very substantial and far in excess of what they had offered before." We also know that " the board was adamant we wanted to keep Nicky Maynard ... and didn't want to sell to a rival Championship club." So what we know for sure is that Leicester made 4 bids and the CLUB rejected them, no mention of the club accepting a bid and Maynard himself rejecting Leicester. http://www.bcfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10327~2438705,00.html Lansdown stated on radio that a substantial offer was made and that as Nicky expressed no desire to go to Leicester the bid didn't need accepting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBristolian Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Lansdown stated on radio that a substantial offer was made and that as Nicky expressed no desire to go to Leicester the bid didn't need accepting. He did indeed. And I think Adam Baker and various other sources have substantiated this. The fact City didn't put it in their official web statement is probably more to do with tact - at a delicate point in the club's negotiations with Maynard it probably wasn't appropriate to put in writing that Maynard wants to join a Premier League club as it might have increased speculation and attracted Premier League clubs to play on that to get a cut-price deal. But certainly it was said elsewhere. It's disappointing with Maynard but I think it's the club's error much more than the player. I can genuinely believe he wanted to see what the club did in the league before making a contract decision, which is entirely fair enough (and don't forget the club were talking about promotion in close-season) but I think the club should have been a bit more circumspect in seeing that we weren't going to go up this year and, that being the case, we maybe should have transfer-listed him in the summer to try and get a Premier league team involved who'd play good price (though I can see there might have been a sense we may have needed his goals to stay up so I can see why the gamble was taken). But all, this is by the by - I've personally got no problem with him wanting to try his luck in the Premier League but it's a shame we let the contract situation get this far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Lansdown stated on radio that a substantial offer was made and that as Nicky expressed no desire to go to Leicester the bid didn't need accepting. But if the board had officially accepted it, and Maynard himself had then formally rejected Leicester, other club's would have been alerted to the fact that City were willing to sell for the right price and may have quickly matched the offer. A club more to Maynard's liking, perhaps. For whatever reason City dug their heels in during that window and gave every impression to the football world that they were absolutely determined to keep Maynard. Their statement that they were adamant they wanted to keep him at AG would only have put off potential bidders. No harm at all in accepting Leicester's offer if they thought the last, very substantial, bid was a good deal for the club. It doesn't appear any pressure at all was put on Maynard to concentrate his thoughts and surely they should only have rejected the huge last offer if Maynard had given some indication he was willing to sign his new deal soon after. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 But if the board had officially accepted it, and Maynard himself had then formally rejected Leicester, other club's would have been alerted to the fact that City were willing to sell for the right price and may have quickly matched the offer. A club more to Maynard's liking, perhaps. For whatever reason City dug their heels in during that window and gave every impression to the football world that they were absolutely determined to keep Maynard. Their statement that they were adamant they wanted to keep him at AG would only have put off potential bidders. No harm at all in accepting Leicester's offer if they thought the last, very substantial, bid was a good deal for the club. It doesn't appear any pressure at all was put on Maynard to concentrate his thoughts and surely they should only have rejected the huge last offer if Maynard had given some indication he was willing to sign his new deal soon after. As is made clear in the article and was spoken openly about in the press at the time, City didn't want to sell to a divisional rival, something routinely operated in football. Furthermore, the club had already rejected bids from Leicester during the transfer window and so Nicky's stance was already known, making accepting a further bid purely so Maynard could turn it down a pointless excersise. Any Premier League club would have read from Sexstone's statement in the article you linked to that this was the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 But if the board had officially accepted it, and Maynard himself had then formally rejected Leicester, other club's would have been alerted to the fact that City were willing to sell for the right price and may have quickly matched the offer. A club more to Maynard's liking, perhaps. For whatever reason City dug their heels in during that window and gave every impression to the football world that they were absolutely determined to keep Maynard. Their statement that they were adamant they wanted to keep him at AG would only have put off potential bidders. No harm at all in accepting Leicester's offer if they thought the last, very substantial, bid was a good deal for the club. It doesn't appear any pressure at all was put on Maynard to concentrate his thoughts and surely they should only have rejected the huge last offer if Maynard had given some indication he was willing to sign his new deal soon after. What BCFC say in public has absolutely no effect on what clubs come forward for the player. Remember that agents will have already talked to every even vaguely interested party as will BCFC. There was no club Nicky wanted to go to willing to pay a price BCFC could accept, had there been, he'd have gone - simple as that. The most obvious conjecture is that the lack of a buyer means that he has a move lined up for his contract expiring in the summer. This thread is basically fantasy, it takes someone with at best a very tenuous grasp on reality to imagine that a story that Leicester offered £9m could be true or that the club could have forced a sale in the summer that the player didn't want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBristolian Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 But if the board had officially accepted it, and Maynard himself had then formally rejected Leicester, other club's would have been alerted to the fact that City were willing to sell for the right price and may have quickly matched the offer. A club more to Maynard's liking, perhaps. For whatever reason City dug their heels in during that window and gave every impression to the football world that they were absolutely determined to keep Maynard. Their statement that they were adamant they wanted to keep him at AG would only have put off potential bidders. No harm at all in accepting Leicester's offer if they thought the last, very substantial, bid was a good deal for the club. It doesn't appear any pressure at all was put on Maynard to concentrate his thoughts and surely they should only have rejected the huge last offer if Maynard had given some indication he was willing to sign his new deal soon after. I'd imagine this might be because Maynard was still undecided on what he wanted to do. Giving Maynard the impression the club wanted to cash in on him would have been a huge gamble as it would have made it less likely he'd sign the contract and, if nobody came in for him, increase the chances of him leaving for nothing. I know that's what's probably happening anyway so it's backfired but I can understand the gamble nonetheless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 I'd imagine this might be because Maynard was still undecided on what he wanted to do. Giving Maynard the impression the club wanted to cash in on him would have been a huge gamble as it would have made it less likely he'd sign the contract and, if nobody came in for him, increase the chances of him leaving for nothing. I know that's what's probably happening anyway so it's backfired but I can understand the gamble nonetheless. I can't. The player gave no firm indication at all that he was likely to sign so no harm in accepting the bid and seeing what waves that produced in the market. The club have pussy footed around with Maynard, apparently molly coddling him at every turn so as not to upset him in the slightest. Accepting the bid may have served to concentrate his mind, one way or the other, and show the football world, and NM, that City were determined to be as actively involved in resolving the situation as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.