OS says Francis couldn't agree terms with Bournemouth so deal looks to be off.
Which makes you wonder why the OS ran the story in the first place. Not a dig at the Comms team but why not just keep it quiet until it was done.
I know people moan about the OS "always being late" but this is just why the Club should only talk about done deals and not maybes.
Feel for the Club because they get blamed both ways. Either not telling us enough or too much. Still think Francis will be gone by end of the month anlong with Alan Mc.
to be fair henry, they just reported that they accepted a bid, the deal was done on our part.
Yes, that's correct but what was the point of saying they had accepted a bid when the player still had to agree terms.
The policy has always been to only announce completed deals so why the change?
i think it was well reported that we've accepted the bid from other sources. i don't know why they changed it but i think they knew it was already out.
The OS has been very strange with outgoing transfers this year. We've had a few pretty big departures and they've barely reported at all on them. Racon, Semedo, Dailly, they were all part of the spine of our team last year and them leaving barely got a mention tacked onto the end of an unrelated article. I really got the impression with that Francis article that they were trying to give off a 'matter of time' air, like it didn't matter who bid, but Francis is done just as soon as someone agrees terms with him. I don't really understand the change either
Maybe the club are under impression that we want him out, and therefore would show they're willingness to get rid, whilst also putting pressure on him to leave by making it so public!!
Maybe though think it might be more about putting pressure on him than appeasing the fans.
Presumably they were following instructions/told to run the story?
Totally
Feel for the Club because they get blamed both ways. Either not telling us enough or too much. Still think Francis will be gone by end of the month anlong with Alan Mc.
True but personally I don't blame them the other way and am only querying why they've done it this way this time.
Pretty clear Powell wants them out and maybe he is showing his "no more Mr Nice Guy" side.
Wouldn't be the worst thing if both stayed, unless we are desperate for the cash/money off wage bill. Both could do the occasional job and may push others to perform better due to (apparent) competition.
Maybe with the signing of other centre halves he or we decided that he would look elsewhere. He has said he wanted to be first choice and if we would not noffer than maybe he has done a randolph.
I guess it was the problem of signing them up on 2 year contracts , we're probably one of the highest Salary payers in the division , and other clubs plead poverty and say they can't match the wages , if i was either of these 2 players and i loved to play football , and didn't relish the thought of spending a year rotting , i'd ask the club to rip up my contract and find a new club , trouble is who is going to pay them the money we are , if anything it shows the point of signing players on the up , and with a decent resell potential rather than the other way round , perhaps a symptom that the club had got to the point of being run on a shoestring , with dodgy signings.
I guess it was the problem of signing them up on 2 year contracts , we're probably one of the highest Salary payers in the division , and other clubs plead poverty and say they can't match the wages , if i was either of these 2 players and i loved to play football , and didn't relish the thought of spending a year rotting , i'd ask the club to rip up my contract and find a new club , trouble is who is going to pay them the money we are , if anything it shows the point of signing players on the up , and with a decent resell potential rather than the other way round , perhaps a symptom that the club had got to the point of being run on a shoestring , with dodgy signings.
Good point, but by ripping up the contract they'd only need to agree wages with new clubs, something that they've had the option to do anyway. We agreed a deal with bourney, he just wanted more money. If he was a free agent, he'd for the same cash now.
If people were in their shoes would they do any different. We are assuming they are stalling over wages, although they were bought at a time when we had no money and were reducing budgets, soit maybe something totally different. However, lets assume its wages. Their options are :-
1. Move and take a cut in wages, assuming Charlton will not take up any shortfall.
2. Stay at Charlton and hope for a bit of luck and get another chance in the first team, probably through an injury crisis and put in performances that resurrect their Charlton career at their current wage level.
3. Stay at Charlton can't break back in, but get loaned out and perform well in shop window of Div 1 team going for promotion on current wage and pick up decent contract for next season.
4. Stay at Charlton rot in the stiffs and struggle to find new club.
Footballers have a belief in their own ability and I would expect both players would look to 2&3 as the realistic options,although 4 would be the risk.
If I was them, I'd definitely go for 2 & 3 and stuff what anyone else thinks.
It looks like the new owners have a differnt approach to releasing information. I think the club runs the risk of looking like it's hiding something if it fails to acknowledge things that are clearly in the public domain, especially when it concerns players that are under contract. In the case of Semedo and Racon the club didn't even need to be advised, let alone consulted on what the players were going to do. However I think if we agree a fee with a club for an under contract player I think it appropriate that the club make a public statement. It would also have left many difficult questions to avoid as the two players were not on the trip to Spain. I also think that in this day and age of Twitter etc. it is unrealistic to expect deals to be completed before it is common knowledge.
I also don't think it reflects badly on the club if the transfer then breaks down due to personal terms. I agree with BlackForestReds that it is likley that these two players are earning way more than they are worth, and have better working conditions (training ground facilities, travel arrangements for away games etc.) they their talent warrents so it is clear that they won't want to leave. Even with the cut backs we probably have as good facilities as most Premier League clubs, what player would want to leave that for Bournemouth or Dagenham, with all due respect to those clubs. It is unlikely that the player or the club would announce that having been to look at the training ground facilities etc. they are unwilling to go there under any circumstances. They signed their contracts with us in good faith and have every right to stay until they expire. We shouldn't have signed them, and certainly shouldn't have given them two year deals (what if we'd won promotion last season) but hindsight is useless in that you don't have it until after you have made the decision.
Think the club are doing all they can to facilitate these transfers going through but it appears an impasse has been reached at the moment. Some sort of contract settlement is involved here as no other club will offer the same wages and quite rightly neither player wants to lose out financially by moving and nor should they as they are under contract and not obliged to. Somewhere along the line something will have to give. I believe the Francis move will eventually happen and McCormack will move too. A year not playing will not do his career any good and he'll find it harder next summer to find a Club. As he tweeted it is just the matter of it being the right club for him.
If anyone has bought The Times today, check out Tony Casscarino's column in the Sports section. He mentions Curbishley as a model manager when it came to contract negotiation. That is, Curbs always tried to get players on a low basic with a big element for appearances and/or performance. He makes the comments in the context of sick note players but the principle applies I think to any new player signing a contract and avoids the Bogarde/Dyer/Gibson fiascos regarding injuries and also the McCormack/Francis type of problem where overpaid mediocre players are better off sitting out a contract rather than accepting employment elsewhere where they would have better prospects of 1st team football.
Comments
Presumably they were following instructions/told to run the story?
Feel for the Club because they get blamed both ways. Either not telling us enough or too much. Still think Francis will be gone by end of the month anlong with Alan Mc.
Pretty clear Powell wants them out and maybe he is showing his "no more Mr Nice Guy" side.
Has Dailly definitely gone?
I thought Powell invited him back to training.
One of the players tweeted that he hasn't been seen.
Good point, but by ripping up the contract they'd only need to agree wages with new clubs, something that they've had the option to do anyway. We agreed a deal with bourney, he just wanted more money. If he was a free agent, he'd for the same cash now.
It looks like the new owners have a differnt approach to releasing information. I think the club runs the risk of looking like it's hiding something if it fails to acknowledge things that are clearly in the public domain, especially when it concerns players that are under contract. In the case of Semedo and Racon the club didn't even need to be advised, let alone consulted on what the players were going to do. However I think if we agree a fee with a club for an under contract player I think it appropriate that the club make a public statement. It would also have left many difficult questions to avoid as the two players were not on the trip to Spain. I also think that in this day and age of Twitter etc. it is unrealistic to expect deals to be completed before it is common knowledge.
I also don't think it reflects badly on the club if the transfer then breaks down due to personal terms. I agree with BlackForestReds that it is likley that these two players are earning way more than they are worth, and have better working conditions (training ground facilities, travel arrangements for away games etc.) they their talent warrents so it is clear that they won't want to leave. Even with the cut backs we probably have as good facilities as most Premier League clubs, what player would want to leave that for Bournemouth or Dagenham, with all due respect to those clubs. It is unlikely that the player or the club would announce that having been to look at the training ground facilities etc. they are unwilling to go there under any circumstances. They signed their contracts with us in good faith and have every right to stay until they expire. We shouldn't have signed them, and certainly shouldn't have given them two year deals (what if we'd won promotion last season) but hindsight is useless in that you don't have it until after you have made the decision.