Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Great guy and proving a lot of people wrong at Blackpool - to go out with a team of nobodies and play Man City off the park, to win at Anfield and St James, he's got to have something. LOL at the mongs who thought he wasn't good enough for us a couple of years ago!

Posted
He shoots from the hip, and often without looking at the target, but the fans up here love him.

 

A sort of thinking man's Strachan (but with tactics).

 

That Charlie Adam is a helluva player.

Posted

Dislike him and have noticed a point he's got wrong already.

A car dealership would NOT be able to take a car back off you after four years - you have proof of ownership, correct.

Wayne Rooney had a CONTRACT, that lasted for a certain amount of time. Man United do not "own" him.

Posted
Dislike him and have noticed a point he's got wrong already.

A car dealership would NOT be able to take a car back off you after four years - you have proof of ownership, correct.

Wayne Rooney had a CONTRACT, that lasted for a certain amount of time. Man United do not "own" him.

 

Noticed this too. Still the point he is making is IMO morally correct. You shouldn't be able to spend such vasts ammount of money on someone for them to leave for free whether their contract is up or not. The fact that a development fee is paid for players 23 and under but stops at 24 is ridiculous.

An example - Wayne Rooney stays at Everton until the end of his contract when he is 23 and leaves for Man Utd.

Utd pay a development fee plus a fee based on the value of the player. Everton would recieve about £10million.

If Rooney stayed one year longer Everton get £0. They've developed him for a further year but they recieve nothing.

 

As Holloway says. Wrong.

Posted
Dislike him and have noticed a point he's got wrong already.

A car dealership would NOT be able to take a car back off you after four years - you have proof of ownership, correct.

Wayne Rooney had a CONTRACT, that lasted for a certain amount of time. Man United do not "own" him.

 

It is wrong though, you pay a contract, pay a 'fee' for a player and expect him to be at the club for as long as the length of his contract. That to me is just fair and how it works.

 

I don't see how players are allowed to just pay up the remaining two years as and when they see fit, its just rediculous. If i was a manager and someone gave me that ultimatum for next to no reason i would let them rot. It really makes me sick.

 

In fact the more i think about Rooneys cheating, arrogance, thuggery, the outburst against fans in the world cup and now this i just hope the w*nker f*cks off.

Posted
Noticed this too. Still the point he is making is IMO morally correct. You shouldn't be able to spend such vasts ammount of money on someone for them to leave for free whether their contract is up or not. The fact that a development fee is paid for players 23 and under but stops at 24 is ridiculous.

An example - Wayne Rooney stays at Everton until the end of his contract when he is 23 and leaves for Man Utd.

Utd pay a development fee plus a fee based on the value of the player. Everton would recieve about £10million.

If Rooney stayed one year longer Everton get £0. They've developed him for a further year but they recieve nothing.

 

As Holloway says. Wrong.

 

Why is it wrong? You know the situation when you sign the player and it is a calculated risk that has to be managed. The price a club pays will always reflect the calculated risk that buying a particular player will entail.

 

I can't stand Holloway, he's a weird, big-mouthed, attention seeking cretin. Done a great job at Blackpool, can't take that away from him, but his opinions are no-way near as original, amusing or intelligent as he obviously thinks they are.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...