Magic Monkey Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 Also from their forum: Well if he has been to see him,i posted on this site a few weeks ago he was worth a look,check it out.Been watching this kid a while now and believe me he can play.Hope its true he is on his way then i will find Steve some more Talent.And before anyone thinks im talking Rubbish Check my Record for finding Talent UTM. So they have their share of in-the-know arseholes as well, then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 Also from their forum: So they have their share of in-the-know arseholes as well, then. What was the posters name? An anagram of Oakfar perhaps? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magic Monkey Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 I can't watch the video as I'm in the office, but the Yorkshire Post has Steve Evans confirming they have two bids in for players, one of whom, they suggest, is KM. http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/football/rotherham/rotherham-united-millers-manager-evans-lauds-high-octane-victory-over-bolton-1-7075056 It's only in reported speech in the article, so may just be a journo putting two and two together, but they heavily suggest it's McLean that the bid's in for. Elsewhere in the article, Conor Newton gets decent reviews for his first league start of the season. If they like Conor, they'll love Kenny... Evans confirmed that the club have bids in for two players, with the Millers linked with a move for St Mirren midfielder Kenny McLean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank McGarvey' wonky legs Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 In the match Sun report that bid of around 400k expected from Rotherham. No way should that be enough to tempt us to sell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud the Baker Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 In the match Sun report that bid of around 400k expected from Rotherham. No way should that be enough to tempt us to sell. I would've jumped at £400k at the start of the transfer window but at this point with little/no time to get in anyone new we'd effectively be gambling cash in the hand against an increased possibility of finishing in the play-off spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 I would've jumped at £400k at the start of the transfer window but at this point with little/no time to get in anyone new we'd effectively be gambling cash in the hand against an increased possibility of finishing in the play-off spot. Will be a real test of the Bod's nouse if they reject anything below £1m What will speak volumes about 'imminent' developments if they let him go for £500k ! If they cash in at 500k to facilitate the Argie bid it will have a serious impact on the rest of our season. We will have no time to replace like for like, and end up panic buying a dud... Again. From our prospect new owners intent it will be Too late to get international clearance to ship in the revolving door of players, they might pull their bid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northendsaint Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Would £400,000 Be enough when every other kid is starting at a million.I very much doubt it.Kenny is a valuable cog in our bid to stay up and thats worth £400,000 alone.I have a horrible gut feeling he will be away though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenburn ed Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) Surely not Ian. On the bright side how good was McAusland Edited January 31, 2015 by glenburn ed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
class of 76-77 Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 The board would be mad to accept a 400k bid for Kenny. If they want him then let's start off at 750k with add ons and a sell on clause. He is miles ahead of the boy Sevco punted to Brentford for the best part of a million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud the Baker Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) Fans! **************** Itll be interesting to see how this turns out - looks to me like the player is holding all the cards! Been mentioned a few times before on the thread but Stephen Hendrie has finally agreed leave Hamilton to join West Ham on a pre-contract and not the rumoured £2M http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/31032453 So much for Accies supposed expertise at playing the market! Edited January 31, 2015 by Bud the Baker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 What was the posters name? An anagram of Oakfar perhaps? After your performance during the 10,000 hours stuff I don't think you should be flinging shit at anyone on that score. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) We have absolutely no right to hold Kenny or any other player back. Kenny deserves his chance to go if he wants and after what he's given us he shouldn't be used as a pawn and held for ransom. It's possible he'll have a release clause in his contract. If that figure is struck and he wants ti go then we should wish him well. If there isn't a release clause and he wants to go then that's tough titty on our club. The day all transfer fees are outlawed can't come soon enough. Human rights and freedom are more important than money and they are certainly FAR more important than football. Edited January 31, 2015 by oaksoft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stlucifer Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 We have absolutely no right to hold Kenny or any other player back. Kenny deserves his chance to go if he wants and after what he's given us he shouldn't be used as a pawn and held for ransom. It's possible he'll have a release clause in his contract. If that figure is struck and he wants ti go then we should wish him well. If there isn't a release clause and he wants to go then that's tough titty on our club. The day all transfer fees are outlawed can't come soon enough. Human rights and freedom are more important than money and they are certainly FAR more important than football. The day transfer fees are outlawed is the day smaller clubs stop nurturing talent. We will have poorer facilities and poorer coaches to teach them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) The day transfer fees are outlawed is the day smaller clubs stop nurturing talent. We will have poorer facilities and poorer coaches to teach them. That makes no sense whatsoever. Any business model relying on money from transferring employees isn't a business worth having. Clubs nurture talent because they have no choice. Where else are they going to get players from? Edited January 31, 2015 by oaksoft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stlucifer Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 That makes no sense whatsoever. Any business model relying on money from transferring employees isn't a business worth having. Clubs nurture talent because they have no choice. Where else are they going to get players from? Football is not a typical business arena. When clubs attempt to bring normal business ethics into their environment it ends in a poorer product. It's entertainment. Even more. It's tribal. The clubs have a finite customer base which is typically much lower than most businesses. They need to augment their income by uncommon means in an attempt to reach their goal. (No pun intended). Unlike a lot of workers, footballers have the luxury of being paid for playtime. They have the luxury of being contracted and, if they fail, they are entitled to full financial compensation for the remainder of that contract. IF they decide they want to move after signing this contract it seems reasonable that the club should receive compensation for their endeavours to improve the player and to finance replacing said either through they themselves paying compensation to another club or to develop a replacement. The players also receive part of the compensation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Can't believe you bothered to reply to the clown. Anyway, no need to worry about McLean being sold, by the time the board bother their arses to respond to the bid in 7 weeks time the window will be shut. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northendsaint Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Surely not Ian. On the bright side how good was McAusland Is that the new centre half we brought in.Delighted for him as he,s Saints through and through.Hope we dont lose him in the transfer window. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintargyll Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Marc McAWESOME last night Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) Football is not a typical business arena. When clubs attempt to bring normal business ethics into their environment it ends in a poorer product. It's entertainment. Even more. It's tribal. The clubs have a finite customer base which is typically much lower than most businesses. They need to augment their income by uncommon means in an attempt to reach their goal. (No pun intended). Unlike a lot of workers, footballers have the luxury of being paid for playtime. They have the luxury of being contracted and, if they fail, they are entitled to full financial compensation for the remainder of that contract. IF they decide they want to move after signing this contract it seems reasonable that the club should receive compensation for their endeavours to improve the player and to finance replacing said either through they themselves paying compensation to another club or to develop a replacement. The players also receive part of the compensation. You make some decent points there and I don't disagree with most of it but the flaw in your argument is that almost no clubs in Scotland sell players for money. That means they must be finding ways to survive which don't depend on sales like that. I'd argue the quality on the pitch is not suffering significantly compared to where it was 15 years ago. Most teams play a good quality of football now. We see almost no long ball hoofing for example and we see many examples of flair and exciting play. So whilst I see where you are coming from, the evidence is showing you are wrong. Edited January 31, 2015 by oaksoft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Can't believe you bothered to reply to the clown. Anyway, no need to worry about McLean being sold, by the time the board bother their arses to respond to the bid in 7 weeks time the window will be shut. I don't know stlucifer but I'm pretty sure he can decide if, when and how to wipe his own arse for himself without you telling him. As for your second sentence? Shows you are not above behaving like a twat yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faraway saint Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 You make some decent points there and I don't disagree with most of it but the flaw in your argument is that almost no clubs in Scotland sell players for money. That means they must be finding ways to survive which don't depend on sales like that. I'd argue the quality on the pitch is not suffering significantly compared to where it was 15 years ago. Most teams play a good quality of football now. We see almost no long ball hoofing for example and we see many examples of flair and exciting play. So whilst I see where you are coming from, the evidence is showing you are wrong. Oh dear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) Oh dear. Am I wrong? Show me a list of all those big money transfers clubs like Annan, Stranraer, Berwick, Albion, St Mirren, Dundee, etc have made over the last 20 years to show me I'm wrong. Edited January 31, 2015 by oaksoft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) Football is not a typical business arena. When clubs attempt to bring normal business ethics into their environment it ends in a poorer product. It's entertainment. Even more. It's tribal. The clubs have a finite customer base which is typically much lower than most businesses. They need to augment their income by uncommon means in an attempt to reach their goal. (No pun intended). Unlike a lot of workers, footballers have the luxury of being paid for playtime. They have the luxury of being contracted and, if they fail, they are entitled to full financial compensation for the remainder of that contract. IF they decide they want to move after signing this contract it seems reasonable that the club should receive compensation for their endeavours to improve the player and to finance replacing said either through they themselves paying compensation to another club or to develop a replacement. The players also receive part of the compensation. I hope you feel that was worth it. Edited January 31, 2015 by Drew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 I hope you feel that was worth it. So do I. It's shite when you genuinely can't handle other people's opinions when they differ strongly from yours. It's surely just easier to call the other person a c**t rather than engage in a difference of views. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stlucifer Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) You make some decent points there and I don't disagree with most of it but the flaw in your argument is that almost no clubs in Scotland sell players for money. That means they must be finding ways to survive which don't depend on sales like that. I'd argue the quality on the pitch is not suffering significantly compared to where it was 15 years ago. Most teams play a good quality of football now. We see almost no long ball hoofing for example and we see many examples of flair and exciting play. So whilst I see where you are coming from, the evidence is showing you are wrong. But some do get development fees which, as far as I'm concerned, is a method of cheating smaller clubs. Money changes hands. No matter what you call it. It's only the amounts that vary. As for the quality. The very fact the players are better coached is to do with the quality of the coaching, which will undoubtedly deteriorate as the extra revenue from TV etc. diminishes. This is a self perpetuating situation as, as the income decreases, so does the potential for player development. Unless we continue to invest internally and that means continuing the transfer setup as it is the carrot which ensures clubs keep bringing through talent. Edited January 31, 2015 by stlucifer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.