Grant next ?

[kill_the_drum]

But does it bite us on the bum?
We’ve had two players for half a season of the calibre we couldn’t have hoped to sign and we’re second in the league.
I don’t think there are any lessons to be learned as I would certainly take two players of that calibre next season and run the risk of losing them in Jan!

[keldsyke]

But does it bite us on the bum?
We’ve had two players for half a season of the calibre we couldn’t have hoped to sign and we’re second in the league.
I don’t think there are any lessons to be learned as I would certainly take two players of that calibre next season and run the risk of losing them in Jan!

Spot on, the way to look at it is they have helped us into a position where we have a good chance of being promoted. We have to now capitalise on this.

[bloodred]

But does it bite us on the bum?
We’ve had two players for half a season of the calibre we couldn’t have hoped to sign and we’re second in the league.
I don’t think there are any lessons to be learned as I would certainly take two players of that calibre next season and run the risk of losing them in Jan!

at last a voice of reason.

[countygump]

[countygump]

[BigFatPie]

But does it bite us on the bum?
We’ve had two players for half a season of the calibre we couldn’t have hoped to sign and we’re second in the league.
I don’t think there are any lessons to be learned as I would certainly take two players of that calibre next season and run the risk of losing them in Jan!

All that is true. However the key thing here for me is putting into writing that they were staying for the season. They’re claiming that it was Warburton who put that in writing and so they’re no longer bound by it. May or may not be true. And 500 grand for Grant is decent money.

But it’s a bit like a winning a bet with a mate. Does he have any legal obligation to honour it? Absolutely not. Would you think he was a bellend and probably not trust his word ever again if he didn’t? Of course.

[countygump]

All that is true. However the key thing here for me is putting into writing that they were staying for the season. They’re claiming that it was Warburton who put that in writing and so they’re no longer bound by it. May or may not be true. And 500 grand for Grant is decent money.

But it’s a bit like a winning a bet with a mate. Does he have any legal obligation to honour it? Absolutely not. Would you think he was a bellend and probably not trust his word ever again if he didn’t? Of course.

This ^^^^^^^^

[magpie_mania]

All that is true. However the key thing here for me is putting into writing that they were staying for the season. They’re claiming that it was Warburton who put that in writing and so they’re no longer bound by it. May or may not be true. And 500 grand for Grant is decent money.

But it’s a bit like a winning a bet with a mate. Does he have any legal obligation to honour it? Absolutely not. Would you think he was a bellend and probably not trust his word ever again if he didn’t? Of course.

'They’re claiming that it was Warburton who put that in writing and so they’re no longer bound by it'.

Where's that from?

[i961pie]

All that is true. However the key thing here for me is putting into writing that they were staying for the season. They’re claiming that it was Warburton who put that in writing and so they’re no longer bound by it. May or may not be true. And 500 grand for Grant is decent money.

But it’s a bit like a winning a bet with a mate. Does he have any legal obligation to honour it? Absolutely not. Would you think he was a bellend and probably not trust his word ever again if he didn’t? Of course.

Notts would probably do the same, especially if the 500 grand offer is true.

[pedrolane]

So why doesn't AH match the bid if he wants the player that bad, Forest are well withing their rights to sell or loan to whom they want, its business.