Jump to content
oneBoro Forum
boksicdink

Summer Transfer Thread, (Closes 8pm tonight)

Recommended Posts

The club didn't even say they would be transparent about everything, that's a complete myth. They said they are 'keen' and they will 'endeavour' to provide transparency, but as Gibson himself said:

 

We want to be as open as possible with the fans, but know they will appreciate there are occasions when the inappropriate or premature release of information can be detrimental to getting a deal completed.

 

They've never once said they will provide the facts for every deal. It's just what everyone who's annoyed on the Gazette's behalf have read from their two written statements. Because they chose to step out for this one article and correct two fees mentioned.

 

The only thing they guaranteed was that the 'most accurate and up to date information' would be provided by the club website. And what's changed there? That's always been the case.

 

You're fighting a losing battle mate. "As open as possible" doesn't include not telling us costs of players. They could give us the costs. It really is that simple. Other clubs announce fees. We could. That makes the club more open than now so they aren't being as open as possible. Simple.

 

Jesus wept, I've even bolded the two bits of information from Gibson's quote that actually make a difference to his statement and what you should expect and the only bit you've read is the bit that is in plain text. Talk about missing the point.

 

How can announcing the cost of the deal be detrimental to the deal being completed? Once the deal is done it's done. How can releasing the cost hurt the deal then??? What the statement should read us

 

"I won't let anyone know the cost when i don't want to. I understand that this is contradictory to the previous sentence but...well...tough"

 

It can be detrimental if keeping the fee quiet is part of getting the deal done with the other club. The club might be in a position of needing to sell but not wanting to tell the fans the fee is lower than they might have hoped, so confidentiality clause inserted in order for the deal to proceed. After the deal is done, you abide by the confidentiality clause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ryan Kent has gone to Germany after all £1million plus all his wages

 

I don't think Kent would make or break our season. He'd be on the bench at best.

 

We have enough to go up. It's been a great summer of business.

 

We've cleared out a lot of the dross and brought in some good players.

 

Let's hope Monk can sort the team out (it will be pretty obvious what team to pick with a fully fit squad).

 

Got a feeling we're shortly going to go on a 10-11 game winning run.

 

UTB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The club didn't even say they would be transparent about everything, that's a complete myth. They said they are 'keen' and they will 'endeavour' to provide transparency, but as Gibson himself said:

 

 

They've never once said they will provide the facts for every deal. It's just what everyone who's annoyed on the Gazette's behalf have read from their two written statements. Because they chose to step out for this one article and correct two fees mentioned.

 

The only thing they guaranteed was that the 'most accurate and up to date information' would be provided by the club website. And what's changed there? That's always been the case.

 

You're fighting a losing battle mate. "As open as possible" doesn't include not telling us costs of players. They could give us the costs. It really is that simple. Other clubs announce fees. We could. That makes the club more open than now so they aren't being as open as possible. Simple.

 

Jesus wept, I've even bolded the two bits of information from Gibson's quote that actually make a difference to his statement and what you should expect and the only bit you've read is the bit that is in plain text. Talk about missing the point.

 

How can announcing the cost of the deal be detrimental to the deal being completed? Once the deal is done it's done. How can releasing the cost hurt the deal then??? What the statement should read us

 

"I won't let anyone know the cost when i don't want to. I understand that this is contradictory to the previous sentence but...well...tough"

 

It can be detrimental if keeping the fee quiet is part of getting the deal done with the other club. The club might be in a position of needing to sell but not wanting to tell the fans the fee is lower than they might have hoped, so confidentiality clause inserted in order for the deal to proceed. After the deal is done, you abide by the confidentiality clause.

 

And all of these deals coincidently involve Middlesbrough....strange that 90% of the deals that involve us have these clauses but only 23% (random figure selected but the real number is much smaller than 90%) of all deals contain one.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So say you have 2 deals on the go at the same time, 2 different players, 2 different clubs, both close to signing for your club.

 

One of them gets done, you lose 'x' amount of money from that deal which is sent to Club A. We publish that information. Most sources think you spent £8m before you let the public know it was £5m.

 

Club B check out how much 'x' is, realise that compared to what they expected it's a bit less, so think you have an extra £3m in the bank. Club B raise 'y' by up to £3m, holding off any deal until you respond, forcing further negotiation where a deal was considered done. Would you consider that detrimental? I know I would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You're fighting a losing battle mate. "As open as possible" doesn't include not telling us costs of players. They could give us the costs. It really is that simple. Other clubs announce fees. We could. That makes the club more open than now so they aren't being as open as possible. Simple.

 

Jesus wept, I've even bolded the two bits of information from Gibson's quote that actually make a difference to his statement and what you should expect and the only bit you've read is the bit that is in plain text. Talk about missing the point.

 

How can announcing the cost of the deal be detrimental to the deal being completed? Once the deal is done it's done. How can releasing the cost hurt the deal then??? What the statement should read us

 

"I won't let anyone know the cost when i don't want to. I understand that this is contradictory to the previous sentence but...well...tough"

 

It can be detrimental if keeping the fee quiet is part of getting the deal done with the other club. The club might be in a position of needing to sell but not wanting to tell the fans the fee is lower than they might have hoped, so confidentiality clause inserted in order for the deal to proceed. After the deal is done, you abide by the confidentiality clause.

 

And all of these deals coincidently involve Middlesbrough....strange that 90% of the deals that involve us have these clauses but only 23% (random figure selected but the real number is much smaller than 90%) of all deals contain one.....

 

Who cares. Why is it a thing. What good would it do us to know apart from being nosey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JordanGraham  gone  on loan to Fulham from Wolves . hes someone i would have liked us to have tried to get in .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day, we've spent what we've brought in - around 45mil. Sunderland sold Pickford for 30mil and haven't spent a penny of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far a brilliant window with decent money for players we didn't want to keep reinvested in some decent first 11 signings plus some bench options and even a few for the future. Oh and so far kept hold of the players we wanted to keep. What's not to like.

 

What's not to like .........your opening up a can of worms there mate :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So say you have 2 deals on the go at the same time, 2 different players, 2 different clubs, both close to signing for your club.

 

One of them gets done, you lose 'x' amount of money from that deal which is sent to Club A. We publish that information. Most sources think you spent £8m before you let the public know it was £5m.

 

Club B check out how much 'x' is, realise that compared to what they expected it's a bit less, so think you have an extra £3m in the bank. Club B raise 'y' by up to £3m, holding off any deal until you respond, forcing further negotiation where a deal was considered done. Would you consider that detrimental? I know I would.

 

Well in that very handily engineered situation the thing to do would be to not announce the fees until both are done, then announce them. Really easy to get around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happened to negredo. Is he still at Valencia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So say you have 2 deals on the go at the same time, 2 different players, 2 different clubs, both close to signing for your club.

 

One of them gets done, you lose 'x' amount of money from that deal which is sent to Club A. We publish that information. Most sources think you spent £8m before you let the public know it was £5m.

 

Club B check out how much 'x' is, realise that compared to what they expected it's a bit less, so think you have an extra £3m in the bank. Club B raise 'y' by up to £3m, holding off any deal until you respond, forcing further negotiation where a deal was considered done. Would you consider that detrimental? I know I would.

 

Well in that very handily engineered situation the thing to do would be to not announce the fees until both are done, then announce them. Really easy to get around.

 

But why do you want to know what good will it do ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Middlesbrough have made a late move to try and sign winger Wayne Routledge who has been made available #Boro #DeadlineDay #Swans #SwansFC https://t.co/4h4U0hLgLJ

 

Used to like him. Not sure what he's like now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So say you have 2 deals on the go at the same time, 2 different players, 2 different clubs, both close to signing for your club.

 

One of them gets done, you lose 'x' amount of money from that deal which is sent to Club A. We publish that information. Most sources think you spent £8m before you let the public know it was £5m.

 

Club B check out how much 'x' is, realise that compared to what they expected it's a bit less, so think you have an extra £3m in the bank. Club B raise 'y' by up to £3m, holding off any deal until you respond, forcing further negotiation where a deal was considered done. Would you consider that detrimental? I know I would.

 

So all other clubs get it wrong?? Must do. Our transfer policy must be the way to go. I mean come on. Even if you follow this rule then announce the amounts after the window closes. No longer detrimental to any deal ever.

 

The simple fact is we have made several signings over the past 5 seasons that were undisclosed fees. The amounts paid are not detrimental to any deals now at all. If we are as 'open as possible' all of these would now be made public. Guess what..they won't be. We will never know. And again the question I have is "why does the club want to keep this a secret?"

 

But that's it on the matter from me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who cares. Why is it a thing. What good would it do us to know apart from being nosey

 

I'm with you Rich.

 

We're not in Germany. We don't own 51% of the club. We're not shareholders. We shouldn't expect to be informed of all the details of a private company.

 

What I'm saying is, if you don't like it, make a *** load of cash and buy the club!

 

And if you did, I'm betting you wouldn't publish all the details of all transactions, for so many reasons that would become apparent once you're the owner of a multi-million pound company.

 

Just enjoy the footie.

 

UTB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Latest Posts

    • I fully expect that we will be back in full lockdown by mid January; at least in the North and Midlands (London and the South might get spared as putting them into another lockdown would be politically more damaging for the government in the longer-term due to voting patterns).  Allowing the Christmas window and then locking us down again after enables the government to be seen to be doing something about the virus and all the 'irresponsible' people in the North, and therefore keeps their core Southern voters happy.  I will admit that I have broken the current lockdown, but I have done so in a responsible way.  I live on my own and have no remaining family, so I do not have significant contact with people (not of the sort that would promote virus spread).  I have one friend who I saw a few times in the Summer, and there was one occasion we met up with a couple of other people outside at the picnic tables at the Dales Centre.  Other than that, I have not seen anyone properly since early March.  I am in the very vulnerable group (on medical grounds, not age) and was shielding until August.  Being trapped inside and never seeing anyone has been really bad for my mental health to the point where I have sometimes felt like I would be better off dead.  I have been doing 'non essential' trips out because I cannot cope with being shut in any more.  I have been driving to places on my own and not been in close contact with anyone other than passing on footpaths (on places like Hedleyhope and Waskerley) or on my weekly Greggs trip.  There are days when I have gone for a drive simply to get out of the house.  I need to go beyond my village to not feel shut in and sub-human.  I am not in a social bubble because most people are in bubbles with their parents or children and the the small number who aren't had formed themselves into friendship pair bubbles while I was still shielding.   The whole system assumes that everyone has a partner or family.
    • Do Sheffield United want Britt think he'd get along well with their strike force 🤪 
    • Yeah the fatigue thing cant be used as a mitigating factor as every team in the league is dealing with the same schedule, some with a couple of extra cup games earlier in the season and some with more than just 2 international players. Yes we have a smaller squad than some but we also have players in the squad who aren't getting minutes which is the managers decision. Fatigue management is just another facet of management and if we start to lose games because of it that's on the management team.
    • I think some of the players today looked fatigued, in my opinion. NW not picking certain players, not making substitutions earlier or even using all 5 allowed substitutions (recently), will further fatigue certain players as they will have to continue to play on. Howson, McNair, Dijksteel, Saville and Tav have all played over 1100 minutes so far this season. Only Brentford have the same amount of outfield players (5) as us, to have played over 1100 minutes. So although we both agree we are in the same predicament as every other team, our circumstances in terms of player numbers are certainly different. Regarding your other points they are well made, but I'm not sure why you have made them when the original discussion was regarding player fitness and how I thought it played a small part in today's performance.
×
×
  • Create New...