Transfer Talk (2021-2022)

[gru]

if the players are happy to sign a contract in the first place, then they should be prepared to see it out . If not they Carnt complain if a club makes them see the contract out in full.

If Smith doesn't extend his contract he goes for nothing next summer. He's got a value his age lowers it. £1 million even if it's with add ons he can go. Panic sets in near end of transfer window as long as it gives us time to get a replacement he can go.

[Grist_To_The_Mill]

I would have thought that the club has a plan B just in case he goes

Also if he stays PW needs to start playing formations without Smith if he doesn't sign a transfer extension. To see what works and what doesn't

[CASPER-64-FRANK]

I would have thought that the club has a plan B just in case he goes

Also if he stays PW needs to start playing formations without Smith if he doesn't sign a transfer extension. To see what works and what doesn't

Plan B was the trialist last night.

Sadlier can play as a number 10 alongside a target man, Ogbene can play down the middle.

Beating that if the worst comes and Smith leaves why not put Ben Wiles up front...

[Stovicmiller]

If Smith doesn't extend his contract he goes for nothing next summer. He's got a value his age lowers it. £1 million even if it's with add ons he can go. Panic sets in near end of transfer window as long as it gives us time to get a replacement he can go.

get where you are coming from. Yes Rotherham can get a replacement in but will that player have the same attributes as smith ?. Keep smith this season and he goes for nothing at the end of the season. But if he’s the difference between Rotherham having a good season and maybe getting promotion what would that be worth to Rotherham, 5million?.

[Grist_To_The_Mill]

get where you are coming from. Yes Rotherham can get a replacement in but will that player have the same attributes as smith ?. Keep smith this season and he goes for nothing at the end of the season. But if he’s the difference between Rotherham having a good season and maybe getting promotion what would that be worth to Rotherham, 5million?.

We don't want a replacement with the same attributes as Smith, it just encourages hoof ball

[KerrAvon]

How is it unreasonable, players are still allowed to move on, but by setting a deadline date, the club can then act to
replace a player.
What comes first the player or the club, we lose Smith on deadline day, so left with Kayode has a frontman, who has
still to make his mark on a team place.
The club like I said in another post, will be running round like headless chickens to get a forward in.

It's unreasonable and, more importantly, counter-productive to block player's careers.

Setting a deadline is unrealistic. Signing a player can be like buying a house in a chain. The selling club may not be willing to part with a player until they have someone else coming in and so on. That can create a whole cat's cradle (or house of cards) of deals where none can proceed until all can proceed. Trying to rush it simply won't work.

[KerrAvon]

if the players are happy to sign a contract in the first place, then they should be prepared to see it out . If not they Carnt complain if a club makes them see the contract out in full.

That's fine if you want to risk paying players to sulk and get a lot of 'injuries' that stop them from playing.

We had an expensive example at the club a few years ago (albeit in different circumstances).

It's fine too if you want the club to have a reputation that it is willing to treat players badly and block their progression when they have signed on the dotted line.

[Stovicmiller]

We don't want a replacement with the same attributes as Smith, it just encourages hoof ball

so you don’t want a player who will run his blood to water for the team . You also don’t want a player who is hard to knock of the ball . Someone who has good ball control. Also good at heading. Sounds like you’d prefer Rotherham sign a lazy **** who Carnt tackle,head the ball or score a few goals.

[Stovicmiller]

That's fine if you want to risk paying players to sulk and get a lot of 'injuries' that stop them from playing.

We had an expensive example at the club a few years ago (albeit in different circumstances).

It's fine too if you want the club to have a reputation that it is willing to treat players badly and block their progression when they have signed on the dotted line.

expecting a player to see his contract out by a club is treating them badly?. Has for yr reference to blackstock it’s got nothing to do with it .plus would you sign a sulky player?like you say word gets round.it works both ways.

[Masbroughstreet]

if the players are happy to sign a contract in the first place, then they should be prepared to see it out . If not they Carnt complain if a club makes them see the contract out in full.

In theory that should be correct, but in the real world it doesn't work like that.