Changing Times 12,219 Posted January 6, 2020 Share Posted January 6, 2020 13 minutes ago, Smogzilla said: Aye just worked it out. Right here It can't be there cos that space is empty derrrrrrr 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Changing Times 12,219 Posted January 6, 2020 Share Posted January 6, 2020 1 minute ago, Adamjr9 said: There’s a person in it, they’re either going in or pulling out Do we know what position they play though? Link to post Share on other sites
wilsoncgp 9,230 Posted January 6, 2020 Share Posted January 6, 2020 3 minutes ago, Adamjr9 said: There’s a person in it, they’re either going in or pulling out Sounds like something SmogDane would do. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites
ABH 468 Posted January 6, 2020 Share Posted January 6, 2020 12 minutes ago, smogsterking the Inspirati said: Is that KMs vehicle in the distance? No if you look closely you can see KM in the bush behind the van 1 Link to post Share on other sites
DurhamRed 2,043 Posted January 6, 2020 Share Posted January 6, 2020 This is why you've gotta love the transfer window who'd of thought we'll be sat studying parking bays 😆 Link to post Share on other sites
LinoJo3 3,098 Posted January 6, 2020 Share Posted January 6, 2020 Tbf there could be all sorts of reasons why he’s up here, he’s probably been to rockliffe a few times since leaving. Link to post Share on other sites
Brunners 7,952 Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 17 minutes ago, DurhamRed said: This is why you've gotta love the transfer window who'd of thought we'll be sat studying parking bays 😆 I did think the pic would get the thread going, I didn't necessarily think we'd have detectives like this though! Link to post Share on other sites
BoroMart 139 Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 This all comes down to the financial fair play 3 year window. The quicker we get the biggest earners out of the club the better long in the long run. Once you accept that we are not going up this season then we need to make this seasons wages as low as possible, and transfer +/- as high as possible, that gives us leverage for investment in a couple of seasons. The sooner we get wages out, the sooner those wages drop off the FFP window. By summer the transfer splurge and first season wages for Britt, Christie, Howson, Braithwaite, Randolph, Fletcher, Shotton and Johnson all become history. Once we file this summers FFP figures, we can forget about Randolphs 5mill transfer fee when we bought him AND his first years 2mill wages and signing on and agents fees which will have cost a good 500k. So 7.5 mill will drop of the FFP equation. All that will exist in the next set of FFP due in summer 21 will be 1.5 years of Randolph wages at about 3mill AND 4mill incoming (and possibly depending what you believe a 1.2mill liability to West Ham form our purchase of Randolph being removed). So from an FFP perspective he will turn from a massive black hole into a 2.2mill positive in the FFP. If we kept him for the remainder of his contract he would have cost 3mill in wages, and possible loyalty bonuses. Do we want a 3mill+ negative on the FFP calculations or a 2.2mill positive? The answer is obvious. Now however good a keeper he was, we are not getting promoted this year, so why bother overspending to gain 2 more league spots into 10th place? Take the opportunity for Pears to gain experience. He will learn a lot quicker in our first team than loaned out to League One/Two. The 66 championship games he may get for us instead of Randolph could save us millions. 8 Link to post Share on other sites
Smogzilla 7,385 Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 13 minutes ago, Brunners said: I did think the pic would get the thread going, I didn't necessarily think we'd have detectives like this though! It's serious business this transfer window lark 🧐🧐 Link to post Share on other sites
BoroMart 139 Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, TeaCider24 said: Can you name one save he's made that you wouldn't expect a keeper to make? That's an over simplification: Technical/Tactical: The first rule of goalkeeping is being in the right part of the goal to make the save, positioning is everything. He has shown excellent positioning thus far. He has shown decent technique in ensuring that he parries the ball away from goal. Physical: Seems to be a bit taller than his dad, and shown good strength under pressure, and quick feet, to move around his 6 yard. Nimble reflexes too. Psychological: This is one of the most impressive elements, he has been thrown in very young, but his decision making has been good, didn't wobble after a barracking from West Brom fans at time wasting. Happy to scream and shout at the more experienced players around him. Social: Couldn't really comment, but I'm sure with his dad, he will be level headed, professional and likeable. There are a lot of positives, and yes, he will face stiffer challenges in his career, but he has shown remarkable positioning, distribution, game management, and mental strength. If Randolph had stayed and retaken the first team shirt, it would have felt like a chance wasted with Pears dropping to the bench or off on loan to some lower league backwater. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
Changing Times 12,219 Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 42 minutes ago, BoroMart said: This all comes down to the financial fair play 3 year window. The quicker we get the biggest earners out of the club the better long in the long run. Once you accept that we are not going up this season then we need to make this seasons wages as low as possible, and transfer +/- as high as possible, that gives us leverage for investment in a couple of seasons. The sooner we get wages out, the sooner those wages drop off the FFP window. By summer the transfer splurge and first season wages for Britt, Christie, Howson, Braithwaite, Randolph, Fletcher, Shotton and Johnson all become history. Once we file this summers FFP figures, we can forget about Randolphs 5mill transfer fee when we bought him AND his first years 2mill wages and signing on and agents fees which will have cost a good 500k. So 7.5 mill will drop of the FFP equation. All that will exist in the next set of FFP due in summer 21 will be 1.5 years of Randolph wages at about 3mill AND 4mill incoming (and possibly depending what you believe a 1.2mill liability to West Ham form our purchase of Randolph being removed). So from an FFP perspective he will turn from a massive black hole into a 2.2mill positive in the FFP. If we kept him for the remainder of his contract he would have cost 3mill in wages, and possible loyalty bonuses. Do we want a 3mill+ negative on the FFP calculations or a 2.2mill positive? The answer is obvious. Now however good a keeper he was, we are not getting promoted this year, so why bother overspending to gain 2 more league spots into 10th place? Take the opportunity for Pears to gain experience. He will learn a lot quicker in our first team than loaned out to League One/Two. The 66 championship games he may get for us instead of Randolph could save us millions. I don't think that's how it works, mate. FFP is a continual assessment over a three year period, not an assessment every three years. I don't think that's how the transfer fees are accounted for either. The summer transfer splurge isn't one big amount. Each transfer fee is spread out over the length of contract for FFP purposes. In terms of Christie and Braithwaite, because they've already left the club then they already show as a final profit/loss figure. The players who are still here however will continue to be part of the assessment. So for example, Howson signed for £5m and on a four year deal therefore he will still have a book value here, the same goes for Assombalonga, Fletcher, Shotton etc. In terms of Randolph, not having to pay the £1.2m left is actually a bad thing for us, if I'm understanding this correctly. If we'd made West Ham pay us £5.2m, instead of £4m, and agreed to pay them the difference as previously agreed, then we'd have a larger profit for FFP purposes as the value in our accounts would show as £5.2m minus the book value rather than £4m minus the book value. I don't know which book value is correct for Randolph, the last set of full accounts where he will show as £2.5m or the end of the current year where he will show as £1.25m. £5.2m minus either of those figures is better than £4m minus them. The fact that we don't have to pay West Ham the extra £1.2m doesn't change the value that Randolph shows on our accounts as that will still be based on the transfer fee we agreed in the first place. Someone will have to check me on that though as that's just how I figured it works. Obviously wages show as you'd expect them to show though. Selling Randolph and playing Pears should indeed save us a few million quid but we can say the same about a lot of players and I doubt people are going to be quite so positive about making those changes - let's sell Ayala and play Wood. Let's sell Howson and play Spence. Let's sell Fletcher and play Walker. Let's sell Assombalonga and play, well, anyone 😉 The primary issue shouldn't be about saving money, it should be about getting the best team on the field. Hopefully selling Randolph can help us do that, allowing us to use resources elsewhere but we'll see. Link to post Share on other sites
BoroMart 139 Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 (edited) 47 minutes ago, Changing Times said: I don't think that's how it works, mate. FFP is a continual assessment over a three year period, not an assessment every three years. I don't think that's how the transfer fees are accounted for either. The summer transfer splurge isn't one big amount. Each transfer fee is spread out over the length of contract for FFP purposes. In terms of Christie and Braithwaite, because they've already left the club then they already show as a final profit/loss figure. The players who are still here however will continue to be part of the assessment. So for example, Howson signed for £5m and on a four year deal therefore he will still have a book value here, the same goes for Assombalonga, Fletcher, Shotton etc. In terms of Randolph, not having to pay the £1.2m left is actually a bad thing for us, if I'm understanding this correctly. If we'd made West Ham pay us £5.2m, instead of £4m, and agreed to pay them the difference as previously agreed, then we'd have a larger profit for FFP purposes as the value in our accounts would show as £5.2m minus the book value rather than £4m minus the book value. I don't know which book value is correct for Randolph, the last set of full accounts where he will show as £2.5m or the end of the current year where he will show as £1.25m. £5.2m minus either of those figures is better than £4m minus them. The fact that we don't have to pay West Ham the extra £1.2m doesn't change the value that Randolph shows on our accounts as that will still be based on the transfer fee we agreed in the first place. Someone will have to check me on that though as that's just how I figured it works. Obviously wages show as you'd expect them to show though. Selling Randolph and playing Pears should indeed save us a few million quid but we can say the same about a lot of players and I doubt people are going to be quite so positive about making those changes - let's sell Ayala and play Wood. Let's sell Howson and play Spence. Let's sell Fletcher and play Walker. Let's sell Assombalonga and play, well, anyone 😉 The primary issue shouldn't be about saving money, it should be about getting the best team on the field. Hopefully selling Randolph can help us do that, allowing us to use resources elsewhere but we'll see. It's not a continual assessment, it's an annual review. Agreed that most transfers are not paid up front, but FFP is supposed to stop gambling and financial over-reaching. I'm sure I read something about it being about when liabilities are incurred rather than when payments are due to stop the incurring of years of liabilities that might you then struggle to pay. But there have been quite a few changes since FFP came in, so not sure of the current specifics around this. Edited January 7, 2020 by BoroMart Link to post Share on other sites
BoroMart 139 Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 18 minutes ago, Changing Times said: Selling Randolph and playing Pears should indeed save us a few million quid but we can say the same about a lot of players and I doubt people are going to be quite so positive about making those changes - let's sell Ayala and play Wood. Let's sell Howson and play Spence. Let's sell Fletcher and play Walker. Let's sell Assombalonga and play, well, anyone 😉 The primary issue shouldn't be about saving money, it should be about getting the best team on the field. Hopefully selling Randolph can help us do that, allowing us to use resources elsewhere but we'll see. Sell Britt and play Fletcher every week with the Man city kid as reserve. Ayala for Wood, too early, Wood is just 18 and hasn't proven himself in first team as much as Pears so far. Spence cannot play CB, RB, RW, RWB and CM. Walker needs to go out on loan. Anyway, we failed to smash the league, we have to take our medicine. It's pointless having a 35k/week keeper in a midtable team. Link to post Share on other sites
SzilardNemethsCurtains 2,844 Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 35 minutes ago, BoroMart said: Sell Britt and play Fletcher every week with the Man city kid as reserve. Ayala for Wood, too early, Wood is just 18 and hasn't proven himself in first team as much as Pears so far. Spence cannot play CB, RB, RW, RWB and CM. Walker needs to go out on loan. Anyway, we failed to smash the league, we have to take our medicine. It's pointless having a 35k/week keeper in a midtable team. Exactly this, in what world do people think we can continue to pay massive wages? Link to post Share on other sites
Mfcdanny 770 Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 It was Ben Gibsons nannas party at Rockcliffe Hall. That's why his car was there 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now