If I had done well in my job and was offered a pay cut I'd leave too.
If you want to spin it you could well describe the sequence of events like this:
In the summer of 2012 you were given a massive pay rise. You then had three months off sick during the most important time of your company's year - on full pay You still had the whole summer holiday - on full pay You then had another six weeks off sick during the same time the following year - again on full pay You are getting close to retirement and are not going to be able to perform your duties as well as you have been It is, generally, believed that your sickness record will continue, if not worsen, due to your age and health
You refuse to stay with your employer unless they give you another massive pay rise.
I think this adequately explains why you cannot compare professional football with any other occupation and use it to justify a players actions.
The truth is that the player wanted the money more than he wanted to play for us. I have no problem with this. I suspect that he was gambling and would have stayed for a little less than Bournemouth paid, but we will never know. I do have a problem with him making the spat public, however.
RD could have kept him until the end of the season on his current contract. It is unlikely that Kermorgant would have refused to play for the rest of the season - even if he did refuse to play at Huddersfield. If he had a contract that guaranteed us another season then he might have had to stay for another year. The decision to sell him, what ever the real reason, removed him from selection (which is what I think was a mistake) but we could have kept him without giving him a pay rise. Thus we have to assume that it was about money or a principle to teach the player (or those that come along afterwards) who is the boss.
What I don't find acceptable is the player using the media to have snipes at the club after he'd gone. It was unprofessional and has probably sparked the increase in 'leaks' from the club about his behavior before he left.
Relegation seems to have been fought off, but I have no doubt that we would have had a better chance of reaching the FA Cup Semi-Final and a £2m jackpot had we kept Kermorgant. This is where (with hindsight) RD made the biggest misjudgment.
But make no mistake, the club had no obligation to give him a pay rise. I suspect that he was more than happy with the contract that guaranteed him the same money in 2014/15 (at 32) that he was on two years earlier. The fact that he was not keen to honour it (even though I'm sure he would have demanded that the club did if he wasn't playing as well then) says more a lot about the man.
1. You state as a fact that he refused to play at Huddersfield. It is not a fact, is it, but an assertion by NLA. With all due respect to NLA, you might not wish to rush to judgement so quickly on such "evidence"
2. You say the player has used the media to make snipes and that this has sparked the leaks from the club. Well certainly I was in receipt of such leaks long before he went, let alone before he spoke to the press. Then I would like to ask you this: If YK is the grabbing, honourless mercenary that you have judged him to be, why would he talk to the media at all? He had his money, which you say is all he cares about. Why bother?
Prague let's get it right I am not the one who stated yann refused to play I am the one that posted what we were told after I verified it from three separate sources those sources stated it
It was then as I have said three times in here reported by others on here to back the info up
One who was a staunch Powell supporter on here with links to all the coaching team ( I won't post his name as it's unfair )
And one with great links to the grounds team and someone who knows a hell of a lot of what goes on the playing side Because they are in and around it more than anyone in here
I also know that others heard it from within the club and not from where you and I first heard it
I can 100 % say with no degree of uncertainty that what I have posted about yann was not to discredit yann or to justify his sale
It was to put the other side of the story to the one that was coming out that afternoon
Remember the one where yann was being sold without powells knowledge
The criticism being aimed at the owner for selling him was unfair based on the only side of the story being told so I tried to balance it
Since then there has been a concerted effort to discredit RD and his motives without anyone supplying any evidence as to why this needs to be done
RD has stopped the leaks and that to me is great as now we can watch the football and see the change in results with our own eyes
We can judge RD on his actions over the next 18 months as the man should be given two years to get it right or at least for us to see the direction
Then I will form my own opinion on him and decide my view
For some reason the network watching and the RD second guessing is consuming some of our fans
Yet they are unwilling to tell the rest of us why
The 4 million if we go down take. Off the sake price should be seen as a positive yet even that is being looked at as to a reason behind team selection performances and sales of players and signings
The implication that if cafc throws games to ensure that RD gets his money
Is one I find scandalous
And if that was the case keep Powell we were going down that was evident
He would've kept most happy including me keeping Powell ( even though performance wise I couldn't back him anymore ) but on a leader and pride in your mgr point of view I would've never sacked him
KHA, in your analogy above, the sickness you refer to is actually "industrial injury" or "accident at work", it is not as if Kermo ever threw a sickie blaming a dodgy curry.
Obviously Prague's 'leaks' are far more accurate than anybody else's 'leaks', which are not to be trusted, oh no.
Except Prague was told exactly the same thing as myself by someone at the club and chose not to believe it even though it stacks up with everything that NLA states. This was acknowledged earlier in the thread and hairs were split as to whether Kermorgant feigned injury or whether he simply refused to show up.
Either the club is wasting its time spinning against an ex-player or alternatively it's true!
Far from being the enemy of the fans, Duchatelet and the fans have much in common in terms of wanting to see a winning team in front of growing crowds. We all want the best players to sign new contracts and we all want Riga to succeed although some are struggling with their loyalty to Powell
What comes across as complete nonsense is the never ending spin against Duchatelet and how everything is his fault... from being a feeder club, to making Chris Powell play Liege players (as opposed to asking why they aren't played) to Duchatelet wanting us relegated to save £4M(?) on the acquisition of the club.
You won't find any sign of me seeking to discredit RD, for the same reason that I choose not - yet - to believe your version of YK. I don't have enough information. At times NLA you give the impression that anyone publicly asking questions about the network or other aspects of RDs strategy is automatically against him or seeking to undermine him. I think you should pull back from that attitude.
Then re YK, I am simply saying that to claim or imply that a player refused to play is about as serious as it gets, and I am unwilling to believe it until I hear it direct, and being able to look the person in the eye. No offence to NLA, who has the clubs best interest at heart. But for me it's a matter of principle.
@seriously_red I understand your point about anti-RD spin. There are those who refuse to see any potential benefit of his ownership and want to cast him only as a villain.
However, on the other hand, there is definitely a notable element of those on the other side - who refuse to accept any criticism of his decisions thus far or concerns over the direction of the club moving forward.
For my money, I think the business conducted in the January transfer window may have left the squad bigger, but it was certainly not stronger. I think questions should be asked about who called the shots on those transfers, and why they were made.
I'd say the extreme views currently sit on both sides of the fence right now.
But the reality is, that there's been some bad stuff and some good stuff.
Am I the only person getting fed up with the Yann and Dale stories. They have both gone to new clubs. Whatever the reason, it has happened. Hopefully we will stay up, If not would we if these two players stayed? I hope what ever happens, this thread can stop in the summer and we can look forward to new players and next season.
I've not seen anyone post on here who hasn't at sometime questioned some of the decisions made by the new ownership team - whereas there are some people who have criticised just about everything they've tried to do, despite remaining remarkably quiet whilst the old regime bled the Club dry. The lack of acknowledgement for what the new team has achieved so far against the negativity coming out from some fans (who seem to have forgotten all the things that have moved the Club forward) astounds me.
For my mind the January window was an issue. I see perfectly well why two players were sold - despite the fact I felt we needed to keep the talisman YK. However at the end of the day it made good business sense for the Club to let him go.
If the talked about purchases had happened, then I don't think this thread would be here. If the money mentioned that was going to be spent is true, then it has me licking my lips in anticipation for the summer 'ins'.
The one error that jumps out at me is the fact the quality of the Championship was underestimated at the time the Club was purchased and some of the loans/buys have not had the impact that was expected. That mistake won't happen again.
You can question all you like 'who called' the shots, but the bottom line is it's the man who pays the bills.
Obviously Prague's 'leaks' are far more accurate than anybody else's 'leaks', which are not to be trusted, oh no.
Except Prague was told exactly the same thing as myself by someone at the club and chose not to believe it even though it stacks up with everything that NLA states. This was acknowledged earlier in the thread and hairs were split as to whether Kermorgant feigned injury or whether he simply refused to show up.
Either the club is wasting its time spinning against an ex-player or alternatively it's true!
Far from being the enemy of the fans, Duchatelet and the fans have much in common in terms of wanting to see a winning team in front of growing crowds. We all want the best players to sign new contracts and we all want Riga to succeed although some are struggling with their loyalty to Powell
What comes across as complete nonsense is the never ending spin against Duchatelet and how everything is his fault... from being a feeder club, to making Chris Powell play Liege players (as opposed to asking why they aren't played) to Duchatelet wanting us relegated to save £4M(?) on the acquisition of the club.
Don't be so naive. Do you honestly think that's any different? Either way he was trying to influence team selection and undermine Powell.
I guess it's a question of perception. I've seen a lot of acknowledgement for what Riga has achieved as well as negativity towards the new regime.
My point is that it shouldn't be one vs the other. As I said, there's been good and bad. You may disagree, but I do think some people on both sides of the argument have their blinkers on.
In reply to your last point, I would be astounded if RD - not exactly the world's biggest football fan by certain accounts - felt equipped to make decisions regarding transfers without at least some form of consultation.
Every match thread every time someone who once played for us scores everytime we concede everytime something happens somewhere within the network someone maybe not you but someone with the same seeming mistrust of RD mentions the network
In a tone or manor where it is casting doubt on its validity
This has come after two/three years of the same questioning of TJ and MS where things were more apparent
High profile staff leaving lack of contracts to players bills not being paid and court cases coming thick and fast
There are many myself included who wants it to just be about the football from now to the end of the season
Forget about all of the watching and wondering and questioning
I thought it would pass after the G21 realised that it didn't have the body of support it was looking for
Yet it is still there everywhere you look people questioning every aspect of what is happening either here or in one of the other countries where RD owns or has interest in football clubs
It's too much not just for me but for many many others
Go to Bournemouth ask yann he will say it never happened like that
Ask RD he will say it certainly came across like that
But if you based your opinion like I try to on the weight of probability
Surely the mere fact there were two games left in which to play before the window closed and yann would have meant an auto yrs extension yet it didn't happen and yann weren't injured he was " unwell or rested " is slightly dubious
However it's done he is gone we know have finally got someone in the team who has scored more league goals than him means we can leave yann to Bournemouth and their fans to wax lyrical over and we can move on
There is a miss trust of RD in many many posts on here it can not be denied or hidden
And for parts of this thread and the network watch stuff, I just can't be joining the trust at the moment
I'll assume that's a criticism aimed at me, so I will reply. Re the tangible criticism, "the network watch", I'd love to understand better what your problem is with it. I presume - but do correct me if I'm wrong - that you object to it because you think it implies criticism of RD. You'd be wrong, as I've said above.
Earlier this week another well known and respected fan criticised our network watch too. However his criticism was that reporting the results implied that we should all be happy-clappy Standard or Ujpest fans. He was wrong too, but he's still prepared to sit down and talk about it with us.
People come at things from different angles, I guess.
And for parts of this thread and the network watch stuff, I just can't be joining the trust at the moment
I'll assume that's a criticism aimed at me, so I will reply. Re the tangible criticism, "the network watch", I'd love to understand better what your problem is with it. I presume - but do correct me if I'm wrong - that you object to it because you think it implies criticism of RD. You'd be wrong, as I've said above.
Earlier this week another well known and respected fan criticised our network watch too. However his criticism was that reporting the results implied that we should all be happy-clappy Standard or Ujpest fans. He was wrong too, but he's still prepared to sit down and talk about it with us.
People come at things from different angles, I guess.
i cant see anything wrong with the network watch. if you have the time and the anaylsis then its surely a benefit to other fans to be provided with the information. if you dont want the info then dont look. i dont see that as being controversial at all. Can seem to some as a bit busy-body maybe but where would we have been in the 90s but for busy-bodies?
my twopennorth on the huddersfield game is that it i have heard directly from 3 different people that an unprofessional stance was taken by YK that day. unprofessional in terms of representing the club you are contracted to play for. Yet also understandable in that playing would have meant that contract continued at set terms, such terms being not equal to what YK has subsequently been achieved at Bournemouth.
As I've already said, I take your sourced comments seriously and with respect. It's just that it is such a huge accusation, (when was the last time a CAFC player had such an accusation levelled at him - Parker?) that I want to be sure. When I'm over this weekend, I'lll do my best to meet with people whom I would trust if they tell me "Really, that is how it was" or even "Really if you were RD, you'd believe it, even if YK was just giving it the Gallic big one"
You probably didn't notice, but you didn't hear a peep of complaint from me about Dale Stephens. Whereas I was quite vocal about the well sourced info that Jiminez blocked the sale of Stephens 18 months ago because he thought he could call Villa's bluff and get more than 2m. Of course, because we know that CP didn't rate DS as having Premiership quality (might even have got that from you!) whereas I am quite sure that Cousins as well as Poyet will both be there quite soon. And Ajdarevic was at least an arrival who directly replaced most of what Stephens gave us. So hopefully you'll continue to give me credit for being objective, rather than joining a bandwagon. Bandwagons are always destructive. There was one against Callum a week ago, remember.....
I have also heard that SCP knew before Sheffield Utd that it was his last game because he hadn't followed RD's instructions , no wonder the mood and performnace that day was so wank
That was said ooohaah and at the time I believed it as I still believe that now
Prague my distain was from the wording of your post this afternoon read it back it may surprise you how it sounds
I don't have any complaints of people not jumping on bandwagons I do not do that myself after Barnsley I was fuming with Riga and Harriott as it was as unfair to leave Callum out there as it was unfair to expect fans watching to not be annoyed to the max of a player who couldn't run walk pass shoot or head a ball he was that bad real bad
In the same vein as his miss and subsequent performance in the sheff u game
It was on Tuesday night the game had we won and had Callum scored a chance so easy that today we would be safe and thinking if next season and it's changes
Players in and out where we can strengthen where we don't need to
I can fully understand and vitriol or bile aimed at Harriott
It was a terrible performance
I look forward to hearing a third view on yann as so far there are two
One it didn't happen and one it did so let us know what you hear
1. You state as a fact that he refused to play at Huddersfield. It is not a fact, is it, but an assertion by NLA. With all due respect to NLA, you might not wish to rush to judgement so quickly on such "evidence"
2. You say the player has used the media to make snipes and that this has sparked the leaks from the club. Well certainly I was in receipt of such leaks long before he went, let alone before he spoke to the press. Then I would like to ask you this: If YK is the grabbing, honourless mercenary that you have judged him to be, why would he talk to the media at all? He had his money, which you say is all he cares about. Why bother?
1. No I don't! I never stated it as a fact. I deliberately did the opposite!
"It is unlikely that Kermorgant would have refused to play for the rest of the season - even if he did refuse to play at Huddersfield." even if he did refuse to play at Huddersfield. Not as he did refuse to play, not even though he refused to play at Huddersfield. EVEN IF he refused to play at Huddersfield. That is not a fact, it is a question.
You have completely misquoted me and, by definition, attributed to me a statement that I never made!
2. Again, I think you might have read my sentence a little quickly and come up with a different conclusion to what I said (or definitely meant).
"What I don't find acceptable is the player using the media to have snipes at the club after he'd gone. It was unprofessional and has probably sparked the increase in 'leaks' from the club about his behavior before he left."
He went to local press and provided a nice story saying that he wanted to stay but that the club as good as forced him out (please note I'm paraphrasing so I'm not making a direct quote or stating a fact). I made the point that the increase in the 'leaks' from the club about what he did before he left probably happened due to the fact that he came out and blamed the club for 'forcing him out'.
As well as the rumor that he refused to play at Huddersfield there have been mentions of the salary that he was offered at Bournemouth. The club even stated that he was offered a two and a half year deal (this was put on the website after the transfer went through).
If he'd accepted an increase in his money and said he was sorry to be leaving a club where he'd been very happy and he wished us all the best but he had to do what was best for his family then I'm sure that everyone would have been happier, both with him and with those running our club. It was not necessary for the drama to be played out in the public eye. Maybe it was his agent that forced the move, maybe it was a deliberate attempt by the club to move him on but either way the player was the only person to make a direct statement about it, and that was unnecessary, and in my view unprofessional.
KHA, in your analogy above, the sickness you refer to is actually "industrial injury" or "accident at work", it is not as if Kermo ever threw a sickie blaming a dodgy curry.
True, but through no fault of his own (maybe) he was out injured for a long time in successive seasons after he turned 30. Irrespective as to who, or what, was to blame it is, in my view, more likely that he will suffer those kind of lay offs again. This has to be taken into account when his wages are considered. That was the only point I was making.
i read those interviews with YK as trying to atone for some indiscretion. none of what he said made sense or added up given the facts more widely known.
you cant please everyone and the 2nd SLP interview smacked of YK trying to do exactly that. trouble is it was all a croc of shite.
1. You state as a fact that he refused to play at Huddersfield. It is not a fact, is it, but an assertion by NLA. With all due respect to NLA, you might not wish to rush to judgement so quickly on such "evidence"
2. You say the player has used the media to make snipes and that this has sparked the leaks from the club. Well certainly I was in receipt of such leaks long before he went, let alone before he spoke to the press. Then I would like to ask you this: If YK is the grabbing, honourless mercenary that you have judged him to be, why would he talk to the media at all? He had his money, which you say is all he cares about. Why bother?
I don't remember saying any of this either. Just for clarification!
1. You state as a fact that he refused to play at Huddersfield. It is not a fact, is it, but an assertion by NLA. With all due respect to NLA, you might not wish to rush to judgement so quickly on such "evidence"
2. You say the player has used the media to make snipes and that this has sparked the leaks from the club. Well certainly I was in receipt of such leaks long before he went, let alone before he spoke to the press. Then I would like to ask you this: If YK is the grabbing, honourless mercenary that you have judged him to be, why would he talk to the media at all? He had his money, which you say is all he cares about. Why bother?
I don't remember saying any of this either. Just for clarification!
I misunderstood your earlier 'refused to play' remark. Genuine mistake on my part, but I accept that I misinterpreted it. Probably my overall take on your post was coloured by this. Unfortunately a lot of people are cheerfully portraying him exactly that way, and to me, such a footballer - and they certainly exist - wouldn't bother with such interviews after they have left. People of such character would only do it if there was something in it for them. What was in it for YK, a 32 year old who has just signed probably his last big deal in football? I just don't see the motivation.
KHA they did state they offered him a two-year deal, but they didn't say when that was offered. I thought it was common understanding that RD didn't offer him anything and in fact it was TJ and MS that last offered him a contract?
Comments
In the summer of 2012 you were given a massive pay rise.
You then had three months off sick during the most important time of your company's year - on full pay
You still had the whole summer holiday - on full pay
You then had another six weeks off sick during the same time the following year - again on full pay
You are getting close to retirement and are not going to be able to perform your duties as well as you have been
It is, generally, believed that your sickness record will continue, if not worsen, due to your age and health
You refuse to stay with your employer unless they give you another massive pay rise.
I think this adequately explains why you cannot compare professional football with any other occupation and use it to justify a players actions.
The truth is that the player wanted the money more than he wanted to play for us. I have no problem with this. I suspect that he was gambling and would have stayed for a little less than Bournemouth paid, but we will never know. I do have a problem with him making the spat public, however.
RD could have kept him until the end of the season on his current contract. It is unlikely that Kermorgant would have refused to play for the rest of the season - even if he did refuse to play at Huddersfield. If he had a contract that guaranteed us another season then he might have had to stay for another year. The decision to sell him, what ever the real reason, removed him from selection (which is what I think was a mistake) but we could have kept him without giving him a pay rise. Thus we have to assume that it was about money or a principle to teach the player (or those that come along afterwards) who is the boss.
What I don't find acceptable is the player using the media to have snipes at the club after he'd gone. It was unprofessional and has probably sparked the increase in 'leaks' from the club about his behavior before he left.
Relegation seems to have been fought off, but I have no doubt that we would have had a better chance of reaching the FA Cup Semi-Final and a £2m jackpot had we kept Kermorgant. This is where (with hindsight) RD made the biggest misjudgment.
But make no mistake, the club had no obligation to give him a pay rise. I suspect that he was more than happy with the contract that guaranteed him the same money in 2014/15 (at 32) that he was on two years earlier. The fact that he was not keen to honour it (even though I'm sure he would have demanded that the club did if he wasn't playing as well then) says more a lot about the man.
1. You state as a fact that he refused to play at Huddersfield. It is not a fact, is it, but an assertion by NLA. With all due respect to NLA, you might not wish to rush to judgement so quickly on such "evidence"
2. You say the player has used the media to make snipes and that this has sparked the leaks from the club. Well certainly I was in receipt of such leaks long before he went, let alone before he spoke to the press. Then I would like to ask you this: If YK is the grabbing, honourless mercenary that you have judged him to be, why would he talk to the media at all? He had his money, which you say is all he cares about. Why bother?
Prague let's get it right I am not the one who stated yann refused to play I am the one that posted what we were told after I verified it from three separate sources those sources stated it
It was then as I have said three times in here reported by others on here to back the info up
One who was a staunch Powell supporter on here with links to all the coaching team ( I won't post his name as it's unfair )
And one with great links to the grounds team and someone who knows a hell of a lot of what goes on the playing side
Because they are in and around it more than anyone in here
I also know that others heard it from within the club and not from where you and I first heard it
It was to put the other side of the story to the one that was coming out that afternoon
Remember the one where yann was being sold without powells knowledge
The criticism being aimed at the owner for selling him was unfair based on the only side of the story being told so I tried to balance it
Since then there has been a concerted effort to discredit RD and his motives without anyone supplying any evidence as to why this needs to be done
RD has stopped the leaks and that to me is great as now we can watch the football and see the change in results with our own eyes
We can judge RD on his actions over the next 18 months as the man should be given two years to get it right or at least for us to see the direction
Then I will form my own opinion on him and decide my view
For some reason the network watching and the RD second guessing is consuming some of our fans
Yet they are unwilling to tell the rest of us why
The 4 million if we go down take. Off the sake price should be seen as a positive yet even that is being looked at as to a reason behind team selection performances and sales of players and signings
The implication that if cafc throws games to ensure that RD gets his money
Is one I find scandalous
And if that was the case keep Powell we were going down that was evident
He would've kept most happy including me keeping Powell ( even though performance wise I couldn't back him anymore ) but on a leader and pride in your mgr point of view I would've never sacked him
Either the club is wasting its time spinning against an ex-player or alternatively it's true!
Far from being the enemy of the fans, Duchatelet and the fans have much in common in terms of wanting to see a winning team in front of growing crowds. We all want the best players to sign new contracts and we all want Riga to succeed although some are struggling with their loyalty to Powell
What comes across as complete nonsense is the never ending spin against Duchatelet and how everything is his fault... from being a feeder club, to making Chris Powell play Liege players (as opposed to asking why they aren't played) to Duchatelet wanting us relegated to save £4M(?) on the acquisition of the club.
Then re YK, I am simply saying that to claim or imply that a player refused to play is about as serious as it gets, and I am unwilling to believe it until I hear it direct, and being able to look the person in the eye. No offence to NLA, who has the clubs best interest at heart. But for me it's a matter of principle.
However, on the other hand, there is definitely a notable element of those on the other side - who refuse to accept any criticism of his decisions thus far or concerns over the direction of the club moving forward.
For my money, I think the business conducted in the January transfer window may have left the squad bigger, but it was certainly not stronger. I think questions should be asked about who called the shots on those transfers, and why they were made.
I'd say the extreme views currently sit on both sides of the fence right now.
But the reality is, that there's been some bad stuff and some good stuff.
I've not seen anyone post on here who hasn't at sometime questioned some of the decisions made by the new ownership team - whereas there are some people who have criticised just about everything they've tried to do, despite remaining remarkably quiet whilst the old regime bled the Club dry. The lack of acknowledgement for what the new team has achieved so far against the negativity coming out from some fans (who seem to have forgotten all the things that have moved the Club forward) astounds me.
For my mind the January window was an issue. I see perfectly well why two players were sold - despite the fact I felt we needed to keep the talisman YK. However at the end of the day it made good business sense for the Club to let him go.
If the talked about purchases had happened, then I don't think this thread would be here. If the money mentioned that was going to be spent is true, then it has me licking my lips in anticipation for the summer 'ins'.
The one error that jumps out at me is the fact the quality of the Championship was underestimated at the time the Club was purchased and some of the loans/buys have not had the impact that was expected. That mistake won't happen again.
You can question all you like 'who called' the shots, but the bottom line is it's the man who pays the bills.
I guess it's a question of perception. I've seen a lot of acknowledgement for what Riga has achieved as well as negativity towards the new regime.
My point is that it shouldn't be one vs the other. As I said, there's been good and bad. You may disagree, but I do think some people on both sides of the argument have their blinkers on.
Every match thread every time someone who once played for us scores everytime we concede everytime something happens somewhere within the network someone maybe not you but someone with the same seeming mistrust of RD mentions the network
In a tone or manor where it is casting doubt on its validity
This has come after two/three years of the same questioning of TJ and MS where things were more apparent
High profile staff leaving lack of contracts to players bills not being paid and court cases coming thick and fast
There are many myself included who wants it to just be about the football from now to the end of the season
Forget about all of the watching and wondering and questioning
I thought it would pass after the G21 realised that it didn't have the body of support it was looking for
Yet it is still there everywhere you look people questioning every aspect of what is happening either here or in one of the other countries where RD owns or has interest in football clubs
It's too much not just for me but for many many others
Go to Bournemouth ask yann he will say it never happened like that
Ask RD he will say it certainly came across like that
But if you based your opinion like I try to on the weight of probability
Surely the mere fact there were two games left in which to play before the window closed and yann would have meant an auto yrs extension yet it didn't happen and yann weren't injured he was " unwell or rested " is slightly dubious
However it's done he is gone we know have finally got someone in the team who has scored more league goals than him means we can leave yann to Bournemouth and their fans to wax lyrical over and we can move on
There is a miss trust of RD in many many posts on here it can not be denied or hidden
Earlier this week another well known and respected fan criticised our network watch too. However his criticism was that reporting the results implied that we should all be happy-clappy Standard or Ujpest fans. He was wrong too, but he's still prepared to sit down and talk about it with us.
People come at things from different angles, I guess.
my twopennorth on the huddersfield game is that it i have heard directly from 3 different people that an unprofessional stance was taken by YK that day. unprofessional in terms of representing the club you are contracted to play for. Yet also understandable in that playing would have meant that contract continued at set terms, such terms being not equal to what YK has subsequently been achieved at Bournemouth.
As I've already said, I take your sourced comments seriously and with respect. It's just that it is such a huge accusation, (when was the last time a CAFC player had such an accusation levelled at him - Parker?) that I want to be sure. When I'm over this weekend, I'lll do my best to meet with people whom I would trust if they tell me "Really, that is how it was" or even "Really if you were RD, you'd believe it, even if YK was just giving it the Gallic big one"
You probably didn't notice, but you didn't hear a peep of complaint from me about Dale Stephens. Whereas I was quite vocal about the well sourced info that Jiminez blocked the sale of Stephens 18 months ago because he thought he could call Villa's bluff and get more than 2m. Of course, because we know that CP didn't rate DS as having Premiership quality (might even have got that from you!) whereas I am quite sure that Cousins as well as Poyet will both be there quite soon. And Ajdarevic was at least an arrival who directly replaced most of what Stephens gave us. So hopefully you'll continue to give me credit for being objective, rather than joining a bandwagon. Bandwagons are always destructive. There was one against Callum a week ago, remember.....
Prague my distain was from the wording of your post this afternoon read it back it may surprise you how it sounds
I don't have any complaints of people not jumping on bandwagons I do not do that myself after Barnsley I was fuming with Riga and Harriott as it was as unfair to leave Callum out there as it was unfair to expect fans watching to not be annoyed to the max of a player who couldn't run walk pass shoot or head a ball he was that bad real bad
In the same vein as his miss and subsequent performance in the sheff u game
It was on Tuesday night the game had we won and had Callum scored a chance so easy that today we would be safe and thinking if next season and it's changes
Players in and out where we can strengthen where we don't need to
I can fully understand and vitriol or bile aimed at Harriott
It was a terrible performance
I look forward to hearing a third view on yann as so far there are two
One it didn't happen and one it did so let us know what you hear
"It is unlikely that Kermorgant would have refused to play for the rest of the season - even if he did refuse to play at Huddersfield." even if he did refuse to play at Huddersfield. Not as he did refuse to play, not even though he refused to play at Huddersfield. EVEN IF he refused to play at Huddersfield. That is not a fact, it is a question.
You have completely misquoted me and, by definition, attributed to me a statement that I never made!
2. Again, I think you might have read my sentence a little quickly and come up with a different conclusion to what I said (or definitely meant).
"What I don't find acceptable is the player using the media to have snipes at the club after he'd gone. It was unprofessional and has probably sparked the increase in 'leaks' from the club about his behavior before he left."
He went to local press and provided a nice story saying that he wanted to stay but that the club as good as forced him out (please note I'm paraphrasing so I'm not making a direct quote or stating a fact). I made the point that the increase in the 'leaks' from the club about what he did before he left probably happened due to the fact that he came out and blamed the club for 'forcing him out'.
As well as the rumor that he refused to play at Huddersfield there have been mentions of the salary that he was offered at Bournemouth. The club even stated that he was offered a two and a half year deal (this was put on the website after the transfer went through).
If he'd accepted an increase in his money and said he was sorry to be leaving a club where he'd been very happy and he wished us all the best but he had to do what was best for his family then I'm sure that everyone would have been happier, both with him and with those running our club. It was not necessary for the drama to be played out in the public eye. Maybe it was his agent that forced the move, maybe it was a deliberate attempt by the club to move him on but either way the player was the only person to make a direct statement about it, and that was unnecessary, and in my view unprofessional.
you cant please everyone and the 2nd SLP interview smacked of YK trying to do exactly that. trouble is it was all a croc of shite.