Jump to content

Welcome Kyle McAllister and Calum Waters


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Sweeper07 said:

Not Sweep on this signing - I mentioned 1st he was coming back in January and knew the plan was for him to be back with us this season a month ago... but hey ho!

What do I know . . .   (awaiting the abuse) . . .

Sorry, all your abusers are in a coma, apart from me. 

Ye boring turd. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


18 hours ago, shull said:

Oh forfuxsake. 

That is bad news. 

Why did they build our hopes up this morning. 

Feckem 

I am no coming back. 

Please. please, please, make this be true; I'll be good forever and ever and ever etc etc etc. I#ll even be nice tae that weeeeeeeeeeeee faraway guy...........fur a weeeeeeeeee while, he he he. 😋  😋  😋 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Sweeper07 said:
16 hours ago, faraway saint said:

Not Sweep obviously. :rolleyes:

Not Sweep on this signing - I mentioned 1st he was coming back in January and knew the plan was for him to be back with us this season a month ago... but hey ho!

What do I know . . .   (awaiting the abuse) . . .

flip, gosh, dash and blast, feck this that and the other..................just filling in till the Shull brigade and the weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee man fae arbroaf arrives.  😎

Nice to see him back though, bodes well for the team COYS............................. Kyle that is, no the weeeeeeeeeee nyaf fae abroaf

Edited by jaybee
clarification
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, jaybee said:

flip, gosh, dash and blast, feck this that and the other..................just filling in till the Shull brigade and the weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee man fae arbroaf arrives.  😎

Nice to see him back though, bodes well for the team COYS............................. Kyle that is, no the weeeeeeeeeee nyaf fae abroaf

^^^^^^^^^^ What the feck are you on..........................................about? 🤡

Link to comment
Share on other sites

flip, gosh, dash and blast, feck this that and the other..................just filling in till the Shull brigade and the weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee man fae arbroaf arrives.  [emoji41]
Nice to see him back though, bodes well for the team COYS............................. Kyle that is, no the weeeeeeeeeee nyaf fae abroaf


^^^^^ replying to his own posts [emoji1]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tommy said:

The official site saying we resigned McAllister for a undisclosed fee  :huh:   Surprise we paid some cash for him. 

It is a token gesture that helps Derby save face . . .  nothing more, other than the possibility of a percentage back to them if we sell him on (But who knows what's in the players contract)

Can we complain? We got a tidy sum for him a couple of years back and they have trained him for the last 2 - now he is back and signed on a 3 year deal.

Win win win win all day long (So long as he keeps fit and contributes to his capability) . . .:magic

Edited by Sweeper07
changed a d for an s
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Sweeper07 said:

It is a token gesture that helps Derby save face . . .  nothing more, other than the possibility of a percentage back to them if we sell him on (But who knows what's in the players contract)

Can we complain? We got a tidy sum for him a couple of years back and they have trained him for the last 2 - now he is back and signed on a 3 year deal.

Win win win win all day long (So long as he keeps fit and contributed to his ability) . . .:magic

How much did we pay then & what is the sell on percentage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Tommy said:

The official site saying we resigned McAllister for a undisclosed fee  :huh:   Surprise we paid some cash for him. 

Maybe there was a token figure, maybe it was a percentage if he is sold on, either way gets him off Derbys books and we get a player the fans love and he can play a bit too.

Good business for the team and just proves what idle gits TF, GM and the backroom staff are ....................... NOT.  😃

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Kemp said:

How much did we pay then & what is the sell on percentage?

Not very much in terms of what he is worth - hence why I said token gesture. Do you think we would be paying a fee of £50,000 or more? 

And I don't know the details in the contract for sell on and said as much - "the possibility"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a token gesture that helps Derby save face . . .  nothing more, other than the possibility of a percentage back to them if we sell him on (But who knows what's in the players contract)
Can we complain? We got a tidy sum for him a couple of years back and they have trained him for the last 2 - now he is back and signed on a 3 year deal.
Win win win win all day long (So long as he keeps fit and contributes to his capability) . . .:magic


That “Token gesture” will more than pay for itself if he performs to the level we know he can, and we avoid the playoffs this season.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not very much in terms of what he is worth - hence why I said token gesture. Do you think we would be paying a fee of £50,000 or more? 
And I don't know the details in the contract for sell on and said as much - "the possibility"


Okay, so you made up the bit about the sell on.

But what was the actual fee we paid Derby?

Or did you just make up that it was “token” as well?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Viagra is melting your small brain, cut down the quantity, ya halfwit. default_laugh.png

 

Here I’ll make it simple for you you gimp.

 

McLoughlin, Waters and McAllister weren’t available to sign before the League Cup began ( and maybe the rest weren’t either).

 

Do you think we should have signed lesser players just for the League Cup instead of signing these 3?

 

8 of the starting 11 against Hibs were available for the League Cup as were Baird and McGinn who have been regulars for the past 2 years.

 

They should have been good enough to qualify from that group and allow the management team time to get in the players they really wanted.

 

You clown! [emoji1]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Wendy Saintss said:

 

Here I’ll make it simple for you you gimp. Thanks

 

McLoughlin, Waters and McAllister weren’t available to sign before the League Cup began ( and maybe the rest weren’t either). Maybe they were.

 

Do you think we should have signed lesser players just for the League Cup instead of signing these 3? No, do you? 

 

8 of the starting 11 against Hibs were available for the League Cup as were Baird and McGinn who have been regulars for the past 2 years. That's nice. 

 

They should have been good enough to qualify from that group and allow the management team time to get in the players they really wanted. Indeed, the management team failed miserably in getting players to perform to their potential. 

 

You clown! emoji1.png You're a clown. 🤡

^^^^^^^^ Almost in tears. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Really surprised at the logic behind this. Why are St Mirren giving a player experience that will not be of any benefit to St Mirren but will benefit a rival team next season? Surely we should have let him go and signed someone else at left back and if they were ok then give them a contract for next season. In the meantime any new player will be gelling with the team.  It is not as if Waters is wonderful. Even a loan would be a better option for us. I am hoping Akin now takes over left back and Waters is only used as a sub.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really surprised at the logic behind this. Why are St Mirren giving a player experience that will not be of any benefit to St Mirren but will benefit a rival team next season? Surely we should have let him go and signed someone else at left back and if they were ok then give them a contract for next season. In the meantime any new player will be gelling with the team.  It is not as if Waters is wonderful. Even a loan would be a better option for us. I am hoping Akin now takes over left back and Waters is only used as a sub.
We signed him on a year long loan. The only way this could have been terminated was at Kilmarnock's request for a recall.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Sonny said:

Really surprised at the logic behind this. Why are St Mirren giving a player experience that will not be of any benefit to St Mirren but will benefit a rival team next season? Surely we should have let him go and signed someone else at left back and if they were ok then give them a contract for next season. In the meantime any new player will be gelling with the team.  It is not as if Waters is wonderful. Even a loan would be a better option for us. I am hoping Akin now takes over left back and Waters is only used as a sub.

Might be concerns over familiarity. Decent chance we’ll have two different CB for a number of games second half of the season. Would we also want to bed in a new LB as well? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funnily enough I am aware it is a season-long loan with Kilmarnock having a Jan recall option. However the wording of the press release stated that 'it had been agreed' suggesting that the decision was not just down to Kilmarnock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...