Kalas - Signed for Schalke04

[alexukhc]

1 hour ago, firstdivision said:

So we hang on for TK (leave the contract on the table and play him in the final game despite the fact that he hadn’t committed to the club) but bin off HNM halfway through a season because he wouldn’t re-sign. This smacks of double standards to me. 
People will doubtless say the situation is different (‘I might re-sign’; ‘I won’t re-sign’), but I can’t see how in principle. (‘I can’t commit to you, Mr NP.’)

 

I think we should just cut our losses

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

28 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

They do look good prospects but the other side of that argument is this, they have just looked good against Newport County & a second string Oxford side.

Atkinson is coming back from an ACL injury, so him being available for selection any time before late September looks to be a bonus.

Naismith was only fit for just over half of last season’s games & has already missed several in pre season.

Both Dickie & Vyner do have really good availability records but if either is missing we are switching players (Pring, McCrorie) to play them not in their best position.

In September we go to Leicester, Stoke come here then before the international break we visit Rotherham & Leeds in the same week. I really wouldn’t want (or expect) the two you have mentioned to be involved in games like that.

I am completely baffled by the Kalas situation, maybe he is banking the last big months’ money from us before making his next move, but if he was staying he could do that & still turn up to training so I do think he’s not coming back. Whatever way it goes if we get to the Preston game & he hasn’t committed surely we will move on.

 

I hear what you say and I wouldn't necessarily want to play them either but if required why not play them in those games. There are no easy games in the Championship and a test against these sides can tell you a lot about how far they've advanced.  Rotherham aside, they're less likely to receive an aerial bombardment from Leicester, Stoke and Leeds and would need to show a lot more than just strength in the air. 

[KegCity]

49 minutes ago, alexukhc said:

I think we should just cut our losses

Agree. There’s been a lot of talk about player commitment and “being on the bus” since Pearson’s arrival and Kalas clearly isn’t fully committed to the club. Completely understand why he wants to assess his options but he’s missing out on preseason because he’s looking for a better deal.

[roddy-d]

1 hour ago, KegCity said:

Agree. There’s been a lot of talk about player commitment and “being on the bus” since Pearson’s arrival and Kalas clearly isn’t fully committed to the club. Completely understand why he wants to assess his options but he’s missing out on preseason because he’s looking for a better deal.

Or he’s having more of a family break. Didn’t Baker do this?? I’m also surprised I haven’t seen any news for Kalas to go somewhere else with 2 weeks left. 
Also Bristol City haven’t come out & said he’s left the club. 

Edited July 23, 2023 by roddy-d

[bcfc01]

Kalas is obviously lying low due to the terms of his severance pay.

He won't sign for anyone until August unless a club can match his current wages - can't see that happening in the current climate unless a club are desperate. He isn't training with the club as he's out of contract and why should the club get him match fit on the off chance he may join another Championship club. He'll be training with a personal trainer to a schedule in line with a pre-season I would think.

He's well settled in Bristol with his parter being from Bristol and I understand he's building a new house here (read that on here, but possibly irrelevant). The club won't say one way or another if he's intending to sign or not as a lot can happen between now and August, but I'm hopeful that he will re-sign. Getting a player of his calibre will cost a fortune, as would a loan of that level, I can't see that happening.

Dickie, Kalas, Vyner, Atkinson, and Naismith would be a very good selection to have and with Araoye nearly there, we'd be well set up.

We'll know in a week or so anyway.

 

 

 

[Davefevs]

3 hours ago, GrahamC said:

They do look good prospects but the other side of that argument is this, they have just looked good against Newport County & a second string Oxford side.

Atkinson is coming back from an ACL injury, so him being available for selection any time before late September looks to be a bonus.

Naismith was only fit for just over half of last season’s games & has already missed several in pre season.

Both Dickie & Vyner do have really good availability records but if either is missing we are switching players (Pring, McCrorie) to play them not in their best position.

In September we go to Leicester, Stoke come here then before the international break we visit Rotherham & Leeds in the same week. I really wouldn’t want (or expect) the two you have mentioned to be involved in games like that.

I am completely baffled by the Kalas situation, maybe he is banking the last big months’ money from us before making his next move, but if he was staying he could do that & still turn up to training so I do think he’s not coming back. Whatever way it goes if we get to the Preston game & he hasn’t committed surely we will move on.

 

I think he’s gone.

I think the offer will have withdrawn by now.  Any attempts to sign him on the contract offered must’ve been on the proviso he signs and joins pre-season.

If we were to resign him, I’d be renegotiating terms, because he’s now behind everyone.

I’d rather we moved on.

As for CBs we have the obviously fit Vyner and Dickie, plus McCrorie and Roberts.  It matters not that Nige has said they will play FB.  If he needs them to play CB they will and can.  McCrorie has played a lot at CB don’t forget.  And then we have Naismith, expected to be back this week.

I think some are panicking a bit.

1 hour ago, roddy-d said:

Or he’s having more of a family break. Didn’t Baker do this?? I’m also surprised I haven’t seen any news for Kalas to go somewhere else with 2 weeks left. 
Also Bristol City haven’t come out & said he’s left the club. 

Baker re-signed on the 28th June, before his contract actually expired and was therefore in for a full pre-season.  He was playing bloody well too, such a shame.

[GrahamC]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

I think he’s gone.

I think the offer will have withdrawn by now.  Any attempts to sign him on the contract offered must’ve been on the proviso he signs and joins pre-season.

If we were to resign him, I’d be renegotiating terms, because he’s now behind everyone.

I’d rather we moved on.

As for CBs we have the obviously fit Vyner and Dickie, plus McCrorie and Roberts.  It matters not that Nige has said they will play FB.  If he needs them to play CB they will and can.  McCrorie has played a lot at CB don’t forget.  And then we have Naismith, expected to be back this week.

I think some are panicking a bit.

Baker re-signed on the 28th June, before his contract actually expired and was therefore in for a full pre-season.  He was playing bloody well too, such a shame.

Me too re Kalas & as you point out, Baker & Weimann both renewed almost immediately & reported back for pre season. Totally different situation.

Also although I would want to know exactly how near Naismith is, Roberts’ excellent performance yesterday made me think if Pring had to fill in then firstly it would mean we had the preferred right/left footed combination in place again & also we are no weaker at LB, though ideally we would have Dickie, Vyner & Naismith all available to us right up until big Rob is back.

Not a chance in a million that we go to Leicester or Leeds with a first year pro in our back four though, no matter how promising they are.

[KegCity]

2 hours ago, roddy-d said:

Or he’s having more of a family break. Didn’t Baker do this?? I’m also surprised I haven’t seen any news for Kalas to go somewhere else with 2 weeks left. 
Also Bristol City haven’t come out & said he’s left the club. 

Had plenty of time to go on holiday before pre season started, it’s unprofessional.

[Mendip City]

58 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I think he’s gone.

I think the offer will have withdrawn by now.  Any attempts to sign him on the contract offered must’ve been on the proviso he signs and joins pre-season.

If we were to resign him, I’d be renegotiating terms, because he’s now behind everyone.

I’d rather we moved on.

As for CBs we have the obviously fit Vyner and Dickie, plus McCrorie and Roberts.  It matters not that Nige has said they will play FB.  If he needs them to play CB they will and can.  McCrorie has played a lot at CB don’t forget.  And then we have Naismith, expected to be back this week.

I think some are panicking a bit.

Baker re-signed on the 28th June, before his contract actually expired and was therefore in for a full pre-season.  He was playing bloody well too, such a shame.

Agree I’m sure he’s gone. Good servant but also the injury record was becoming a concern (especially when, correctly, we’re carrying a small squad). 
 

my bigger concern is whether Vyner signs a new deal. 

[italian dave]

29 minutes ago, Mendip City said:

Agree I’m sure he’s gone. Good servant but also the injury record was becoming a concern (especially when, correctly, we’re carrying a small squad). 
 

my bigger concern is whether Vyner signs a new deal. 

If Kalas’s injury record is a concern then - in terms of proportion of time here spent out injured - neither Naismith nor Atkinson inspire much more confidence.

But agree 100% on Vyner. I don’t buy this ‘commit or your out’ line but it seems to be emerging as a bit of a theme at the club, and NP says things to suggest it’s his view. Which potentially leaves us with Vyner in that position quite soon. And I’m not sure he’ll rush to sign. I think he will - quite justifiably - want to wait and see and keep his options open.

And then, suddenly, an injury and a suspension and we’re back to looking short. 

[bcfc01]

3 minutes ago, italian dave said:

If Kalas’s injury record is a concern then - in terms of proportion of time here spent out injured - neither Naismith nor Atkinson inspire much more confidence.

But agree 100% on Vyner. I don’t buy this ‘commit or your out’ line but it seems to be emerging as a bit of a theme at the club, and NP says things to suggest it’s his view. Which potentially leaves us with Vyner in that position quite soon. And I’m not sure he’ll rush to sign. I think he will - quite justifiably - want to wait and see and keep his options open - just like Kalas.

And then, suddenly, an injury and a suspension and we’re back to looking short. 

Just a slight addition to your sentence.

[BritAbroad]

7 hours ago, firstdivision said:

So we hang on for TK (leave the contract on the table and play him in the final game despite the fact that he hadn’t committed to the club) but bin off HNM halfway through a season because he wouldn’t re-sign. This smacks of double standards to me. 
People will doubtless say the situation is different (‘I might re-sign’; ‘I won’t re-sign’), but I can’t see how in principle. (‘I can’t commit to you, Mr NP.’)

 

I think there were a lot of differences with the two cases - I believe Massengo would've been offered at least equal terms to stay, otherwise we wouldn't get compensation (at least that's how it used to be), and made it clear pretty early on that he wasn't going to re-sign. Kalas had those injury issues, so I don't know when he would have been offered a new contract, but it's clearly on lesser terms... plus we had minimal injury cover at CB, so we needed him. Also there's attitude. We don't know how Massengo was acting behind the scenes, nor Kalas. NP has hinted that it may be a situation like with Baker.

[WarksRobin]

If he has gone, it’s a bit odd that the club hasn’t said anything. I would have expected at least an acknowledgement of his service

[Mendip City]

32 minutes ago, italian dave said:

If Kalas’s injury record is a concern then - in terms of proportion of time here spent out injured - neither Naismith nor Atkinson inspire much more confidence.

But agree 100% on Vyner. I don’t buy this ‘commit or your out’ line but it seems to be emerging as a bit of a theme at the club, and NP says things to suggest it’s his view. Which potentially leaves us with Vyner in that position quite soon. And I’m not sure he’ll rush to sign. I think he will - quite justifiably - want to wait and see and keep his options open.

And then, suddenly, an injury and a suspension and we’re back to looking short. 

Difference is - Atkinson and Naismith are under contract but I agree with your point about their injury records. I guess adding Kalas to them just adds to the overall injury risk. 
 

I hope NP is reasonably fair with players running their contract down - it’s the player’s choice and not playing them is cutting off your nose to spite your face. Gary Johnson used to freeze players out completely - Basso and Orr being two examples. It didn’t help the club at all.

I guess we are thin at centre back but I don’t know how good the new signings are at playing there. We’ve also got Pring to cover. Hopefully Atkinson hits the ground running when he’s back. 

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

14 minutes ago, Mendip City said:

Difference is - Atkinson and Naismith are under contract but I agree with your point about their injury records. I guess adding Kalas to them just adds to the overall injury risk. 
 

I hope NP is reasonably fair with players running their contract down - it’s the player’s choice and not playing them is cutting off your nose to spite your face. Gary Johnson used to freeze players out completely - Basso and Orr being two examples. It didn’t help the club at all.

I guess we are thin at centre back but I don’t know how good the new signings are at playing there. We’ve also got Pring to cover. Hopefully Atkinson hits the ground running when he’s back. 

I don't know, I prefer the manager to be pragmatic if you're not getting promoted then dump em in the reserves and start planning for life without them.  If you're in with a shot of promotion or at risk of relegation then play the strongest side possible assuming the players are being professional and commit.  If they are being disruptive thrown them out on loan.

ETC...

[firstdivision]

45 minutes ago, BritAbroad said:

I think there were a lot of differences with the two cases - I believe Massengo would've been offered at least equal terms to stay, otherwise we wouldn't get compensation (at least that's how it used to be), and made it clear pretty early on that he wasn't going to re-sign. Kalas had those injury issues, so I don't know when he would have been offered a new contract, but it's clearly on lesser terms... plus we had minimal injury cover at CB, so we needed him. Also there's attitude. We don't know how Massengo was acting behind the scenes, nor Kalas. NP has hinted that it may be a situation like with Baker.

To be honest, BA, I can't quite work out the point you are trying to make. Also, there are a few unknowns and 'I don't knows' in there.

This is what I know: NP said he wants players who are committed. HNM didn't want to sign (so loaned out); Tomas Kalas hasn't signed (yet?) and has missed pre-season. Neither committed. One treated differently to the other.

Also, I would say there were definitely times last season when we had injuries in midfield and could have used HNM. We had to use OTC who was reasonably promising, but not a patch on HNM. We didn't have to play TK in the final game of the season, but we did (when he clearly hadn't agreed a new contract).

One other point re: HNM. We (and clubs) are perfectly happy to play players who will be leaving at the end of their contracts (eg Jay Dasilva) when it suits.

There are (possibly) some differences in the HNM and TK situations but it does look like double standards to me. 

Edited July 23, 2023 by firstdivision

[BritAbroad]

1 minute ago, firstdivision said:

To be honest, BA, I can't quite work out the point you are trying to make. Also, there are a few unknowns and 'I don't knows' in there.

This is what I know: NP said he wants players who are committed. HNM didn't want to sign (so loaned out); Tomas Kalas hasn't signed (yet?) and has missed pre-season. Neither committed. One treated differently to the other.

Also, I would say there were definitely times last season when we had injuries in midfield and could have used HNM. We had to use OTC who was reasonably promising, but not a patch on HNM. We didn't have to play TK in the final game of the season, but we did (when he clearly hadn't agreed a new contract).

One other point re: HNM. We (and clubs) are perfectly happy to play players who will be leaving at the end of their contracts (eg Jay Dasilva) when it suits.

There are (possibly) some differences in the HNM and TK situations but it does look like double standards to me. 

My main point was that we needed DaSilva and Kalas to cover injuries... we didn't need HNM to cover injuries. Not saying it's not double standards, just what was best for the club at the time.

[Mendip City]

6 minutes ago, Lorenzos Only Goal said:

I don't know, I prefer the manager to be pragmatic if you're not getting promoted then dump em in the reserves and start planning for life without them.  If you're in with a shot of promotion or at risk of relegation then play the strongest side possible assuming the players are being professional and commit.  If they are being disruptive thrown them out on loan.

ETC...

Yeah you’re probably right. In the case of Vyner, presumably we want to keep him and, presumably, his attitude is good. No need to change anything. I suppose sone players down tools but I reckon that’s the minority. 

[hertsexile]

Kalas as has been pointed was out injured for the vast majority of last season so wasn’t in contention. 
I am sure his attitude is up there with the rest of the team. He has been offered a contract on reduced terms, which Pearson has been open about. 
Kalas is a good CB and being a free agent he can look elsewhere. He has been a good asset at the club and the door remains open to him. 
Taking a step back to evaluate your options is a good thing hopefully Tomas will make right decision for himself and his family. I would happily see him playing in a City shirt next season but any decision has to be right for both parties 

[Andy082005]

1 hour ago, firstdivision said:

To be honest, BA, I can't quite work out the point you are trying to make. Also, there are a few unknowns and 'I don't knows' in there.

This is what I know: NP said he wants players who are committed. HNM didn't want to sign (so loaned out); Tomas Kalas hasn't signed (yet?) and has missed pre-season. Neither committed. One treated differently to the other.

Also, I would say there were definitely times last season when we had injuries in midfield and could have used HNM. We had to use OTC who was reasonably promising, but not a patch on HNM. We didn't have to play TK in the final game of the season, but we did (when he clearly hadn't agreed a new contract).

One other point re: HNM. We (and clubs) are perfectly happy to play players who will be leaving at the end of their contracts (eg Jay Dasilva) when it suits.

There are (possibly) some differences in the HNM and TK situations but it does look like double standards to me. 

There are two huge differences 

HNM wanted to leave. He didn’t want to stay. We could have offered him more money and he still would not have signed 

Kalas wanted (wants) to stay - but we offered him a contract which was considerably less to what he is on now.
 

This will possibly be his last  chance at a decent contract - I don’t think there is any one of us on this forum that would accept a wage that is considerably lower than what they are earning now 

Two completely different situations 

[cotswoldred2]

13 minutes ago, Andy082005 said:

There are two huge differences 

HNM wanted to leave. He didn’t want to stay. We could have offered him more money and he still would not have signed 

Kalas wanted (wants) to stay - but we offered him a contract which was considerably less to what he is on now.
 

This will possibly be his last  chance at a decent contract - I don’t think there is any one of us on this forum that would accept a wage that is considerably lower than what they are earning now 

Two completely different situations 

Well a lot of players do accept lower wages, especially when the club has  limited appearance stat.

[Andy082005]

13 minutes ago, cotswoldred2 said:

Well a lot of players do accept lower wages, especially when the club has  limited appearance stat.

They do yes. But at the same time - I wouldnt class someone as uncommitted simply because he doesn’t want to accept wages which could be anything between 20-50% less then what he is on now 

You can’t blame the guy if he got a contract somewhere which was willing to pay him an extra few thousand per week 

Edited July 23, 2023 by Andy082005

[firstdivision]

30 minutes ago, Andy082005 said:

There are two huge differences 

HNM wanted to leave. He didn’t want to stay. We could have offered him more money and he still would not have signed 

Kalas wanted (wants) to stay - but we offered him a contract which was considerably less to what he is on now.
 

This will possibly be his last  chance at a decent contract - I don’t think there is any one of us on this forum that would accept a wage that is considerably lower than what they are earning now 

Two completely different situations 

Yes, I see the difference as I pointed out in my original post (‘I might sign’; ‘I won’t sign’)

But my point is about our attitude to the two players. Why didn’t TK turn down the contract when it was offered and say ‘thanks but no thanks’? Because he’s hoping he might get better somewhere else and wants to keep his options open with us if he doesn’t.
He’s still not committed, which NP said he wanted players to be. TK wants the best option for him (same as HNM), not us. Fair enough. I have no quibble with either. But TK was offered his contract before the end of the season, didn’t sign, and yet we still played him. That’s the double standard: NP always emphasises commitment. Well, TK is/was hedging his commitment. 
Anyway, let’s move on. 

Edited July 23, 2023 by firstdivision

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

2 hours ago, firstdivision said:

To be honest, BA, I can't quite work out the point you are trying to make. Also, there are a few unknowns and 'I don't knows' in there.

This is what I know: NP said he wants players who are committed. HNM didn't want to sign (so loaned out); Tomas Kalas hasn't signed (yet?) and has missed pre-season. Neither committed. One treated differently to the other.

Also, I would say there were definitely times last season when we had injuries in midfield and could have used HNM. We had to use OTC who was reasonably promising, but not a patch on HNM. We didn't have to play TK in the final game of the season, but we did (when he clearly hadn't agreed a new contract).

One other point re: HNM. We (and clubs) are perfectly happy to play players who will be leaving at the end of their contracts (eg Jay Dasilva) when it suits.

There are (possibly) some differences in the HNM and TK situations but it does look like double standards to me. 

I'm fairly sure HNM was aiming to be looking elsewhere after Dean Holdens stint, and had little or no intention of staying from quite a long way out. 

[JoeAman08]

Idk, I think the fact we haven’t really seen him linked anywhere makes me think he is going to accept a deal here. Or at least see the logic in it. Take a month of his old wages say 100k before he accepts the new deal of 45-50k a month. 
 

You can say behind the rest of the squad but so would any replacement. Kalas knows the lads and knows how we want to play. If anyone could use an extra month off it is Kalas. He attracted the attention of a top club in Chelsea. Played loads for a respectable nation internationally. He isn’t going to come back out of shape as is the ultimate professional. 
 

I’d have him back and wouldn’t be rushing him to make a decision. Maybe if Scott had been gone by now we bring in someone else already. Scott is here and Kalas about as good an option available on a free. 

[GrahamC]

9 hours ago, italian dave said:

If Kalas’s injury record is a concern then - in terms of proportion of time here spent out injured - neither Naismith nor Atkinson inspire much more confidence.

But agree 100% on Vyner. I don’t buy this ‘commit or your out’ line but it seems to be emerging as a bit of a theme at the club, and NP says things to suggest it’s his view. Which potentially leaves us with Vyner in that position quite soon. And I’m not sure he’ll rush to sign. I think he will - quite justifiably - want to wait and see and keep his options open.

And then, suddenly, an injury and a suspension and we’re back to looking short. 

Fair comment on Naismith but think that’s a little harsh on Atkinson.

Aside from his ACL he has had a pretty decent availability record with us, 35 games in his debut season & he had already appeared 31 times by February when it happened at Sunderland.

Think Naismith needs to play in the Pompey game for us to be confident we have enough without Kalas.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, GrahamC said:

Fair comment on Naismith but think that’s a little harsh on Atkinson.

Aside from his ACL he has had a pretty decent availability record with us, 35 games in his debut season & he had already appeared 31 times by February when it happened at Sunderland.

Think Naismith needs to play in the Pompey game for us to be confident we have enough without Kalas.

Some of those were covid too.

[Ian M]

Re: HNM, I just always presumed he was an appearance or two away from triggering an add-on payment to Monaco.

[headhunter]

16 hours ago, hertsexile said:

Kalas as has been pointed was out injured for the vast majority of last season so wasn’t in contention. 
I am sure his attitude is up there with the rest of the team. He has been offered a contract on reduced terms, which Pearson has been open about. 
Kalas is a good CB and being a free agent he can look elsewhere. He has been a good asset at the club and the door remains open to him. 
 

You would have thought by now that if he were that good another club would have made an offer at the very least in line with ours.

[Silvio Dante]

11 minutes ago, Ian M said:

Re: HNM, I just always presumed he was an appearance or two away from triggering an add-on payment to Monaco.

Yeah but Chelsea would have paid that