Think you are reading a little more into it than is there Mr. Hopper. Still needs to prove himself yet ... one game does not make a player.
We probably could have made it a permanent signing initially but with our financial situation we decided to do it for a month and now we’ve added a second month onto that.
The Valley boss added: “He certainly had his best game the other night.
“I think he was unlucky he came into the team when his match fitness was short and it coincided with the team having a dip in form as well.
“But it was pleasing for him to come in and play well and get a clean sheet.
“Initially Fulham wanted a fee but talks since then have been more about them wanting some sort of sell on agreement if anyone was going to sign him.
“But as you know in football things change, so we will cross that bridge when we come to it.”
Now looking for a sell on I can see the logic of but weren't Fulham extracting the urine asking a fee for a player that they haven't given a contract to.
Whether people rate the kid or not that is so unfair on Omo as it limits who might take him on when they have already said that they aren't going to pay him.
I wasn't at Brighton but he certainly got better as the game went on against Bristol Rovers following a ropey start after coming off the bench that night.
Now looking for a sell on I can see the logic of but weren't Fulham extracting the urine asking a fee for a player that they haven't given a contract to.
Whether people rate the kid or not that is so unfair on Omo as it limits who might take him on when they have already said that they aren't going to pay him.
The player is out of contract at Fulham, so of course on the face of it, he wouldn't command a fee.
Except ........ he's under 24, and Fulham are entitled to a "player development fee", like we paid Barnet for future Charlton legend Dean Sinclair.
Question is come Jan will we really need Omusuzi? Richardson does have injury problems but Youga has filled in well, Basey has done excellently at left back recently and Solly is not too far from fitness.
Also if we are going to have to pay a fee (very unfair rule imo as the player has been released rather than a situation like Sinclair where his contract had just ended), would the money not be better invested elsewhere?
Comments
We probably could have made it a permanent signing initially but with our financial situation we decided to do it for a month and now we’ve added a second month onto that.
The Valley boss added: “He certainly had his best game the other night.
“I think he was unlucky he came into the team when his match fitness was short and it coincided with the team having a dip in form as well.
“But it was pleasing for him to come in and play well and get a clean sheet.
“Initially Fulham wanted a fee but talks since then have been more about them wanting some sort of sell on agreement if anyone was going to sign him.
“But as you know in football things change, so we will cross that bridge when we come to it.”
Now looking for a sell on I can see the logic of but weren't Fulham extracting the urine asking a fee for a player that they haven't given a contract to.
Whether people rate the kid or not that is so unfair on Omo as it limits who might take him on when they have already said that they aren't going to pay him.
The player is out of contract at Fulham, so of course on the face of it, he wouldn't command a fee.
Except ........ he's under 24, and Fulham are entitled to a "player development fee", like we paid Barnet for future Charlton legend Dean Sinclair.
I wonder if Robbo was at the game on Tuesday?
Also if we are going to have to pay a fee (very unfair rule imo as the player has been released rather than a situation like Sinclair where his contract had just ended), would the money not be better invested elsewhere?
So barnet were prepared to pay him.
Fulham have not given Omo a contract arent paying him but are holding on to his registration so as to get money out of him.