Lanterne Rouge Posted February 13, 2017 Report Share Posted February 13, 2017 I expect it`s all about City being seen to take the piss and we`ve promised not to do it again. Mind you SL did have his fingers crossed behind his back when he said it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoldenBall Posted February 13, 2017 Report Share Posted February 13, 2017 Victim FC realizing for once it IS their fault? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Orns Posted February 13, 2017 Report Share Posted February 13, 2017 What is there to talk about? Mt had a release clause, widely banded around on various media, we made a bid that matched it. Taylor wanted the move to a bigger club, in a higher league and probably quadrupled his wages Isn't that how transfers work? ******* amateurs, **** off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slartibartfast Posted February 13, 2017 Report Share Posted February 13, 2017 Their board is like the old Tote....All wind and piss till it gets to the nitty-gritty, then turn tail! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Said Red Posted February 13, 2017 Report Share Posted February 13, 2017 Maybe we have agreed to only take players when they are OOC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pickle Rick Posted February 13, 2017 Report Share Posted February 13, 2017 They need to draw up the positives. £300k can buy a lot of extra plastic chairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Said Red Posted February 13, 2017 Report Share Posted February 13, 2017 I see the Blue few have jumped to the conclusion that we have paid them some extra money to keep quiet. http://gaschat.co.uk/thread/9274/club-persuing-complaint-league I wonder how that will appear on each clubs statement of accounts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivorguy Posted February 13, 2017 Report Share Posted February 13, 2017 The club statement is indeed rather odd. Why should we have a transfer policy with just one league club. We have never had such an agreement before. What on earth could it say. As usual a total lack of transparency from the club. It really is sickening. It is also daft because someone at Rovers is bound to leak it. If The Post was doing its job they would ask these questions and obtain answers. Why does the club treat us fans with such contempt? It really is like living in some past century when we peasants are expected to give our support without our views being considered and are then subject to media spin which enlightens us not at all. The worst aspect for me is how many fans are happy to be treated in this way. I shall from now on limit my remarks on otib because of the personal abuse fans like me receive if we dare question how the club is being run. People like me will continue to support City but will continue to worry about the way the club is run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Said Red Posted February 13, 2017 Report Share Posted February 13, 2017 2 minutes ago, Ivorguy said: The club statement is indeed rather odd. Why should we have a transfer policy with just one league club. We have never had such an agreement before. What on earth could it say. As usual a total lack of transparency from the club. It really is sickening. It is also daft because someone at Rovers is bound to leak it. If The Post was doing its job they would ask these questions and obtain answers. Why does the club treat us fans with such contempt? It really is like living in some past century when we peasants are expected to give our support without our views being considered and are then subject to media spin which enlightens us not at all. The worst aspect for me is how many fans are happy to be treated in this way. I shall from now on limit my remarks on otib because of the personal abuse fans like me receive if we dare question how the club is being run. People like me will continue to support City but will continue to worry about the way the club is run. Careful you don't fall too far from that high horse there Ivor! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivorguy Posted February 13, 2017 Report Share Posted February 13, 2017 3 minutes ago, Port Said Red said: Careful you don't fall too far from that high horse there Ivor! Thanks for that. It makes my point most eloquently. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Said Red Posted February 13, 2017 Report Share Posted February 13, 2017 3 minutes ago, Ivorguy said: Thanks for that. It makes my point most eloquently. Thanks I thought so, just a little dig without being nasty. Seriously though, I think you are reading a bit much into it, we don't have to know the in's and out's of everything behind the scenes, but reading between the lines, that looks to me like a statement that our club being gracious enough to let their board walk away whilst saving a little face in the process. We may have to deal with them again in the future, so why antagonise them any further? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotswoldRed Posted February 13, 2017 Report Share Posted February 13, 2017 3 minutes ago, Port Said Red said: I thought so, just a little dig without being nasty. Seriously though, I think you are reading a bit much into it, we don't have to know the in's and out's of everything behind the scenes, but reading between the lines, that looks to me like a statement that our club being gracious enough to let their board walk away whilst saving a little face in the process. We may have to deal with them again in the future, so why antagonise them any further? I think we've agreed to do a bank transfer next time instead of paying with a great big bag of 2p pieces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Said Red Posted February 13, 2017 Report Share Posted February 13, 2017 1 minute ago, CotswoldRed said: I think we've agreed to do a bank transfer next time instead of paying with a great big bag of 2p pieces. Maybe their board has agreed not to tout a player to every other club before reluctantly selling him to us, next time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dastardly and Muttley Posted February 13, 2017 Report Share Posted February 13, 2017 I suspect it's more along how the clubs communicate. It's been alleged that they didn't immediately let Taylor know the clause was activated. I guess it will be an agreement that Rovers will inform any agent of any bid immediately, and we will make any approach formally to a named person at Rovers. Maybe we had to go to Taylor's agent, as they hadn't and the deadline was approaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChippenhamRed Posted February 13, 2017 Report Share Posted February 13, 2017 50 minutes ago, Ivorguy said: The club statement is indeed rather odd. Why should we have a transfer policy with just one league club. We have never had such an agreement before. What on earth could it say. As usual a total lack of transparency from the club. It really is sickening. It is also daft because someone at Rovers is bound to leak it. If The Post was doing its job they would ask these questions and obtain answers. Why does the club treat us fans with such contempt? It really is like living in some past century when we peasants are expected to give our support without our views being considered and are then subject to media spin which enlightens us not at all. The worst aspect for me is how many fans are happy to be treated in this way. I shall from now on limit my remarks on otib because of the personal abuse fans like me receive if we dare question how the club is being run. People like me will continue to support City but will continue to worry about the way the club is run. Sickening? Treating us with contempt? It's a statement about football transfers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy1968 Posted February 13, 2017 Report Share Posted February 13, 2017 56 minutes ago, Dastardly and Muttley said: I suspect it's more along how the clubs communicate. It's been alleged that they didn't immediately let Taylor know the clause was activated. I guess it will be an agreement that Rovers will inform any agent of any bid immediately, and we will make any approach formally to a named person at Rovers. Maybe we had to go to Taylor's agent, as they hadn't and the deadline was approaching. Well that makes a ton of sense to me & similar to what I was thinking (I quickly discounted the rumour that we were bunging them an extra fifty quid and half a dozen packs of ready salted crisps). Why the **** do they have to be so cloak and dagger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unan Posted February 14, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2017 Hahahaha rational post of the day "Did conversation go...Wael- So, you've made some bad choices lately Steve. Appointed the son of a cockey midget as manager to find he used to play for you, and was hated by the fans then. Extended his contract, just before he embarked on a catastrophic run of results, leaving you on the brink of relegation, dodgy deal that bought you MT against EFL rules, which could cost you x £m plus x number of points, this all on top of sinking some £80+m so far into a poor championship side, get your cheque book out and we'll take it no further." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Orns Posted February 14, 2017 Report Share Posted February 14, 2017 12 minutes ago, Matty Taylor [BCFC] said: Hahahaha rational post of the day "Did conversation go...Wael- So, you've made some bad choices lately Steve. Appointed the son of a cockey midget as manager to find he used to play for you, and was hated by the fans then. Extended his contract, just before he embarked on a catastrophic run of results, leaving you on the brink of relegation, dodgy deal that bought you MT against EFL rules, which could cost you x £m plus x number of points, this all on top of sinking some £80+m so far into a poor championship side, get your cheque book out and we'll take it no further." And that mug believes every word of that Tinpot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WessexPest Posted February 14, 2017 Report Share Posted February 14, 2017 Good news. As much as I hate the Rent Boys I never had them down for sour grapes and pettiness. Besides, their legal team has a lot on its plate right now - what with trying to get Wycombe retroactively relegated from the Football League and the results of the supporters' charity game - in which those rotten Teds cheated by fielding some ex-pros - expunged from the records. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan Posted February 14, 2017 Report Share Posted February 14, 2017 2 hours ago, Port Said Red said: I see the Blue few have jumped to the conclusion that we have paid them some extra money to keep quiet. http://gaschat.co.uk/thread/9274/club-persuing-complaint-league I wonder how that will appear on each clubs statement of accounts? As I said...morons. If that had happened it would suggest City had knowingly done something wrong in the first place...and if that was the case then why would their owners let us get away with a dodgy backhander? They had their pants very publicly pulled down on deadline day so you'd think they'd want to put the record straight. Either they knew they were talking bollocks from the very beginning or they didn't have the balls to take us on? Either way, they don't come out of the whole thing looking very good. No wonder Matty was desperate to leave as soon as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan Posted February 14, 2017 Report Share Posted February 14, 2017 17 minutes ago, AzerbaijanApeman said: Good news. As much as I hate the Rent Boys I never had them down for sour grapes and pettiness. Besides, their legal team has a lot on its plate right now - what with trying to get Wycombe retroactively relegated from the Football League and the results of the supporters' charity game - in which those rotten Teds cheated by fielding some ex-pros - expunged from the records. Ha, I'd forgotten about them crying over that. Of course what they failed to mention was that they'd invited some of their own ex pro's who didn't show up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
42nite Posted February 14, 2017 Report Share Posted February 14, 2017 7 hours ago, Nibor said: Why the **** are we pandering to these muppets? 8 hours ago, Matty Taylor [BCFC] said: SL says we won't sue you for character defamation and Wally says okay boss. Question fairly well answered I'd guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carey 6 Posted February 14, 2017 Report Share Posted February 14, 2017 Release clauses for players at the Gas are now for anybody but us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted February 14, 2017 Report Share Posted February 14, 2017 basically we've done them a favour so they can save face, they's been unprofessional we have been very professional Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hello Posted February 14, 2017 Report Share Posted February 14, 2017 9 hours ago, Ivorguy said: The club statement is indeed rather odd. Why should we have a transfer policy with just one league club. We have never had such an agreement before. What on earth could it say. As usual a total lack of transparency from the club. It really is sickening. It is also daft because someone at Rovers is bound to leak it. If The Post was doing its job they would ask these questions and obtain answers. Why does the club treat us fans with such contempt? It really is like living in some past century when we peasants are expected to give our support without our views being considered and are then subject to media spin which enlightens us not at all. The worst aspect for me is how many fans are happy to be treated in this way. I shall from now on limit my remarks on otib because of the personal abuse fans like me receive if we dare question how the club is being run. People like me will continue to support City but will continue to worry about the way the club is run. The statement is an odd one (the same from both sides). I guess we won't no what happened in the talks, but it would suggest that at the very least both side have an issue over what actually happened and would probably be difficult to prove either way. Whether this means Rovers have been compensated over and above the transfer fee or not, who knows. Agreed Transfer policy seems a very odd phrase which now everyone on both side will speculate on. To me it sounds as if there was at least a lot of 'chatter' about the proposed transfer that went on 'outside of the boardrooms' and perhaps wasn't formally done (ignoring the alleged release clause for a second) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted February 14, 2017 Report Share Posted February 14, 2017 1 minute ago, Hello said: The statement is an odd one (the same from both sides). I guess we won't no what happened in the talks, but it would suggest that at the very least both side have an issue over what actually happened and would probably be difficult to prove either way. Whether this means Rovers have been compensated over and above the transfer fee or not, who knows. Agreed Transfer policy seems a very odd phrase which now everyone on both side will speculate on. To me it sounds as if there was at least a lot of 'chatter' about the proposed transfer that went on 'outside of the boardrooms' and perhaps wasn't formally done (ignoring the alleged release clause for a second) yea we did have an issue, you didn't like the fact we bid for one of your players (you didn't tell said player we matched his clause until the last minute after you whore'd him to every club) and we didn't like the fact you cried foul and went running to the press before actually making any complaint, almost all clubs would complain in private and not tell the press before they do anything, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kodjias Wrist Posted February 14, 2017 Report Share Posted February 14, 2017 1 minute ago, Hello said: The statement is an odd one (the same from both sides). I guess we won't no what happened in the talks, but it would suggest that at the very least both side have an issue over what actually happened and would probably be difficult to prove either way. Whether this means Rovers have been compensated over and above the transfer fee or not, who knows. Agreed Transfer policy seems a very odd phrase which now everyone on both side will speculate on. To me it sounds as if there was at least a lot of 'chatter' about the proposed transfer that went on 'outside of the boardrooms' and perhaps wasn't formally done (ignoring the alleged release clause for a second) Yeah the gas will be all over this like a rash. All their ITK making all sorts of conspiracy theories, I was told by someobe in the club blah blah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hello Posted February 14, 2017 Report Share Posted February 14, 2017 1 minute ago, Monkeh said: yea we did have an issue, you didn't like the fact we bid for one of your players (you didn't tell said player we matched his clause until the last minute after you whore'd him to every club) and we didn't like the fact you cried foul and went running to the press before actually making any complaint, almost all clubs would complain in private and not tell the press before they do anything, 1 minute ago, Kodjias Wrist said: Yeah the gas will be all over this like a rash. All their ITK making all sorts of conspiracy theories, I was told by someobe in the club blah blah. As suggested/leaked above, I suspect it means that any release clauses do not relate to BCFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hello Posted February 14, 2017 Report Share Posted February 14, 2017 2 minutes ago, Monkeh said: yea we did have an issue, you didn't like the fact we bid for one of your players (you didn't tell said player we matched his clause until the last minute after you whore'd him to every club) and we didn't like the fact you cried foul and went running to the press before actually making any complaint, almost all clubs would complain in private and not tell the press before they do anything, I don't think we should have complained publicly. it was daft and I bet nearly half of all transfers (if not more) are hardly done by the letter of the rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stortz Posted February 14, 2017 Report Share Posted February 14, 2017 11 minutes ago, Hello said: Whether this means Rovers have been compensated over and above the transfer fee or not, who knows. Let me answer that for you: No you ******* haven't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.b717f72c0320930c89b72b5fcf5f7a26.png)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.