Jump to content
IGNORED

Wilbraham's departure - suspicious?


Fordy62

Recommended Posts

I feel this needs its own thread...

Now I'm no conspiracy theorist. But I do work with evidence. 

Now, Bolton are under a transfer embargo

- so many on here have said. I can find plenty of evidence that they were put under one, but nothing that they have been released from it.

Its also been said that they can neither sign anyone but free nor pay anyone over £4.5k - although I don't know how credible the wages thing is.

Now, having 'signed' a new one year contract with us - announced on 7/7, Albie certainly was not a free agent. Nor could he plausibly be considered to be paid 4.5k or under - he was one of our higher earners.

Factor in the Bolton reporters mysteriously deleted 'City hierarchy vetoed Albie deal' article - there certainly are some fishy goings on here.

I'd like to think we let him go on a free with best wishes, so why not just say that? What's all this undisclosed fee business that we know Bolton aren't allowed to pay?

Is SL more involved in the football side of things than we'd have thought?

What exactly went on here?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That BP article got deleted sharpish and Stocky seems to be ignoring questions about any goings on... too random a thing to be mentioned if there's no fire...

Reading between the lines it sounds like Johnson wanted him to stay and someone/more than one someone from higher up didn't want it. 

My guess is that it was announced that he had signed before the T's were crossed and the I's dotted and thus he was a free agent after all despite having allegedly signed a contract. 

I've no doubt there is meddling from higher up in the playing side of things. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was probably easier for them to say undisclosed as didn't expect everyone to dissect it! Other reporters earlier in the day were suggesting that the contract would be torn up. Obviously we don't know but is it suspicious? No.

Wilbs wanted to go back oop north. Suitable offer didn't materialise in the summer so he was happy to stay with us. Now Bolton have come in and offered more playing opportunity and Wilbs has asked to go which we've agreed to. Contract torn up or nominal undisclosed fee? Doesn't make any difference really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really.

wilbraham comes from the Manchester area, has family there so probably wanted to return there once retired. Bolton desperate for an experienced player on the cheap gave him the opportunity to head for home and City were not going to block that bearing in mind what he has done for us and that he was unlikely to get much game time this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

I feel this needs its own thread...

Now I'm no conspiracy theorist. But I do work with evidence. 

Now, Bolton are under a transfer embargo

- so many on here have said. I can find plenty of evidence that they were put under one, but nothing that they have been released from it.

Its also been said that they can neither sign anyone but free nor pay anyone over £4.5k - although I don't know how credible the wages thing is.

Now, having 'signed' a new one year contract with us - announced on 7/7, Albie certainly was not a free agent. Nor could he plausibly be considered to be paid 4.5k or under - he was one of our higher earners.

Factor in the Bolton reporters mysteriously deleted 'City hierarchy vetoed Albie deal' article - there certainly are some fishy goings on here.

I'd like to think we let him go on a free with best wishes, so why not just say that? What's all this undisclosed fee business that we know Bolton aren't allowed to pay?

Is SL more involved in the football side of things than we'd have thought?

What exactly went on here?

 

 

think we cancelled his contract but could just be an arsehole (me not him).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, David Brent said:

I imagine we signed Wilbraham with LJ being completely honest about his plans for him.

Bolton enquired, Aaron fancied it and we had no reason to stand in his way.

 

 

 

What I don't understand is why the BP would write about issues with the senior management and then quickly delete it. Seems to random for there to be nothing behind it. Otherwise it's borderline libellous. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, freezer said:

It would be really lovely if there was more honesty wouldn't it. Then things would be a lot easier to understand. Perhaps the football hierarchy(sp) are learning to talk, politician speak?

I think they've nailed politician talk and a lot of managers do very well at it. Nigel Adkins was always good at it! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Countryfile said:

Bolton can pay transfer fees, the embargo relates to the number of players they can have in total for a first team squad.

 

Really.....where are you reading this from?

EFL FFP RULES - click here

@Fordy62

Where does the £4.5k pw come from too?  £600k pa for a one year deal, that's £12k pw.

No idea how much Wilbs is on though, but he'll be on more than Jamie Mac and Dean Holden you'd suspect....which might 'grate' with them or higher up...the playing factor is not really a factor...or it shouldn't be!

 

 

I do agree that 'undisclosed' is one term / phrase I was not expecting to see on the announcement.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Fordy62 said:

Thanks. There was another bit saying that he'd been training with them wasn't there?

Name a contracted player who trains at another club?!

 

That was a separate article I think, the one above was from the official BP article saying he'd definitely gone which was very rapidly amended, luckily I still had the browser open so could screenshot it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Davefevs said:

Really.....where are you reading this from?

EFL FFP RULES - click here

@Fordy62

Where does the £4.5k pw come from too?  £600k pa for a one year deal, that's £12k pw.

No idea how much Wilbs is on though, but he'll be on more than Jamie Mac and Dean Holden you'd suspect....which might 'grate' with them or higher up...the playing factor is not really a factor...or it shouldn't be!

 

 

I do agree that 'undisclosed' is one term / phrase I was not expecting to see on the announcement.

 

 

Cheers Dave. I read the 4.5k on a post from another user. It kinda fitted my conspiracy, so I went with it. 

Still can't get past that article though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

Thanks. There was another bit saying that he'd been training with them wasn't there?

Name a contracted player who trains at another club?!

 

Loads do, quite often you hear on predominantly younger players going to a top Prem club for a couple of weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

I'd wholly understand and accept that he wanted to move up north and we cancelled his contract out of respect of it weren't for that deleted article. 

It just makes sense that higher beings got involved.

Delete article is rubbish club threatens libel article is removed to prevent legal issues

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...