Loanees

[countygump]

I don't do social media, what exactly did he say?

He pretty much accused Forest of reneging on their agreement when they took Yates back midway through the season.

[irishpete]

If it was agreed a season long loan deal,don't see how they could take him back,unless AH had an agreement in place for this

[Elite_Pie]

He pretty much accused Forest of reneging on their agreement when they took Yates back midway through the season.

If they did renege on the agreement he is justified, if they didn't he is wrong.

Do we know which is the truth?

[countygump]

If they did renege on the agreement he is justified, if they didn't he is wrong.

Do we know which is the truth?

Both: Forest did renege but sited a change of manager as the reason. As in the 'season loan agreement' was made under a manager who had been subsequently sacked so no longer stood.

[forwardmagpie]

Both: Forest did renege but sited a change of manager as the reason. As in the 'season loan agreement' was made under a manager who had been subsequently sacked so no longer stood.

Isn’t a loan agreement with a club and not a manager ?

[irishpete]

Both: Forest did renege but sited a change of manager as the reason. As in the 'season loan agreement' was made under a manager who had been subsequently sacked so no longer stood.

That would mean Notts can get rid of who they want then, 3 managers this season, most signed by KN

[JoePass]

Both: Forest did renege but sited a change of manager as the reason. As in the 'season loan agreement' was made under a manager who had been subsequently sacked so no longer stood.

The moral of the story, never trust a red back.

[Elite_Pie]

Both: Forest did renege but sited a change of manager as the reason. As in the 'season loan agreement' was made under a manager who had been subsequently sacked so no longer stood.

I'm only guessing, but I would have thought any loan agreement would have to be ratified under Football League rules, stipulating length of loan, payment terms, recall options etc. It seems a bit weird if a change of manager could negate an agreement, seeing as a change of manager is a common thing especially with us and them.

[countygump]

Isn’t a loan agreement with a club and not a manager ?

That's what was said at the time, Oirish, so that's all i can tell you. Most think Scunny offered Forest a damn site more money than we were paying towards his wages and that's why he went. Plus, at the time Forest offered to extend Yates's
contract but only if he agreed to the Scunny move. At the end of the day though it's all conjecture and rumour.

[MagpieTony]

Both: Forest did renege but sited a change of manager as the reason. As in the 'season loan agreement' was made under a manager who had been subsequently sacked so no longer stood.

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of that situation, which is debatable, there is a professional and mature way of dealing with it. Most people would acknowledge that Mr. Hardy showed neither of these attributes and conducted himself poorly, adding coals to the fire with a series of ill conceived Twitter comments which served only to drive a wedge between the two clubs and consequently closed the doors to any further mutually beneficial business that may have potentially been conducted