Bristol Rob Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Interest from Celtic, Fulham and Wigan in signing him, according to The Post. Get shot and hope an alternative becomes available or keep him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marmite Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Lets get the alternative first this time eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattjtsmith Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Yer, I wouldn't let him go until we had our own deals in. But if Lafferty and Smith replaced him? Super. Do love a bit of Agard though, work rate is fantastic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Well the mention of Fulham will have people shouting for swop deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Agard is a player who needs more game time . i rate him and if he goes i'm sure we'll all be saying it was a big mistake , Pitman like ! He has been unfortunate to be injured at key moments which has impacted on his career with us . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyeverett300 Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Doubt fullham would be interested Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 6 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said: Interest from Celtic, Fulham and Wigan in signing him, according to The Post. Get shot and hope an alternative becomes available or keep him? I'm sure it's just paper talk . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRISTOL86 Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 What has he done that would have other championship clubs interested? Not slating him by any means, just can't see why he'd be on many clubs radar at this level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Negan Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Even if we bring another striker in I don't think we should let him go. If reports are to believed we're looking at a target man. It's no good getting rid of Agard and replacing him with a different type of striker. Nope, let's get that target man, then an improvement on Agard and flog him in the summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolman Block B Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/BRISTOL-CITY/story-28599557-detail/story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Cyril Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 3 minutes ago, Major Isewater said: I'm sure it's just paper talk . Not yet it's not - it's only in the Evening Post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wheatus59 Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 10 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said: Interest from Celtic, Fulham and Wigan in signing him, according to The Post. Get shot and hope an alternative becomes available or keep him? The trouble is he never gets a chance , he needs 10 games in a row , cotts and now pembo cant fancy him . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin1988 Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Agard isn't much worse than our other striking options at the moment. He's a hard-working pacey striker with a questionable end product. Probably still better than Danny Haynes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lou-peters-dive Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 If he goes it had better be an inflated price like ** million. It's time we were not taken for mugs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supercidered Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 27 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said: Interest from Celtic, Fulham and Wigan in signing him, according to The Post. Get shot and hope an alternative becomes available or keep him? Has Fulham had their embargo lifted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 23 minutes ago, RedM said: Well the mention of Fulham will have people shouting for swop deal. Fulham would have to sell first, and can then only buy at 75% of the sold player. So a City could do a deal to get Smith at a right price for buying and selling £s to meet criteria. Agard would be a useful pawn in this deal. He is only cover at the mo'. Burns could be the cover for two up top, plus maybe less pressure to get a proven replacement in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrongagain Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Keep agard a bit longer and start him, our first division team need the confidence lifting, should be him starting and kodja on bench, at least he is likely to net a few more sitters! Dont start williams and Bryan together, williams not a team player, takes every opportunity to make Bryan look bad, only passing to him when the ball is near impossible to play! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 6 minutes ago, Davefevs said: Fulham would have to sell first, and can then only buy at 75% of the sold player. So a City could do a deal to get Smith at a right price for buying and selling £s to meet criteria. Agard would be a useful pawn in this deal. He is only cover at the mo'. Burns could be the cover for two up top, plus maybe less pressure to get a proven replacement in. I don't think they can spend 75% of any incoming fees, but may well be wrong. My reading is there is an absolute ban on paying any fees at all, and then on the player's employment costs (which I would assume to be wages and also maybe pensions, NI etc) they can offer at most 75% of the outgoing players employment costs up to a maximum of £600k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Yes, that's what I mean, say Agard £1m, Smith £4, just buy Smith for £3m, say Agard was free and use 75% of Smith's wages (or less) on Agard....or something like that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCulturalBomb Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 There is no harm in going for Smith now, the next few months are critical to whether last season was nothing but pointless. We need goals and he can score them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 This could have legs, liked Smith from before a battler and could finish; he`s been before and not getting much game time a Fulham. We may know in an hour, is there not a press con at 5 ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 7 minutes ago, Davefevs said: Yes, that's what I mean, say Agard £1m, Smith £4, just buy Smith for £3m, say Agard was free and use 75% of Smith's wages (or less) on Agard....or something like that! But in that case I think they still fall foul. They are not allowed to pay a fee or compensation for any player. Im not sure that they could argue the discount on Smith is anything but compensation for Agard. If it isn't, what it is? If we artificially value him at £nil, I would guess there'd be non-footballing reasons preventing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrahamC Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Not sure who this "Dan Newman" is that has suddenly started writing for the Post but he seems no better. Like some of the rubbish he wrote last week, this is clearly just speculation, but surely if Fulham were interested then a swap deal would be possible even if they are under an embargo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrahamC Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 14 minutes ago, Davefevs said: Yes, that's what I mean, say Agard £1m, Smith £4, just buy Smith for £3m, say Agard was free and use 75% of Smith's wages (or less) on Agard....or something like that! Smith cost Fulham £800k and can't get in their side, Agard cost us £750k and can't get in ours. In all seriousness I'd be suggesting a straight swap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordy62 Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 3 minutes ago, GrahamC said: Smith cost Fulham £800k and can't get in their side, Agard cost us £750k and can't get in ours. In all seriousness I'd be suggesting a straight swap. Absolutely sensible. I'd take that. Although we'd still need a striker. Hetting rid of players is something we don't really want to be doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedLionLad Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 7 minutes ago, GrahamC said: Smith cost Fulham £800k and can't get in their side, Agard cost us £750k and can't get in ours. In all seriousness I'd be suggesting a straight swap. Agard's goal against Swindle alone was worth £750k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Dawe Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 9 minutes ago, GrahamC said: Smith cost Fulham £800k and can't get in their side, Agard cost us £750k and can't get in ours. In all seriousness I'd be suggesting a straight swap. Their £800k striker failing to shift their £11m striker. Good luck, Kieran Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 7 minutes ago, GrahamC said: Smith cost Fulham £800k and can't get in their side, Agard cost us £750k and can't get in ours. In all seriousness I'd be suggesting a straight swap. I still struggle with how that could comply with the rules. The trouble I have is the rules ban paying compensation or any fee for a transfer. If you're swapping a player, even if no money has changed hands and of equal value, there is a value attributable to each transfer and one must in my simple mind be compensation for the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrahamC Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 3 minutes ago, Jack Dawe said: Their £800k striker failing to shift their £11m striker. Good luck, Kieran Who will be with Middlesbrough by next week.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Dawe Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 7 minutes ago, GrahamC said: Who will be with Middlesbrough by next week.. Good point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.