@NiceCarrots said:
The reason we do not reveal injuries is the same reason why we don't reveal fees (n.b. Posh Co-owner) i.e. in order to gain a competitive advantage.
Would you want to walk in and play a hand of poker when the house knows exactly what you've got in your pocket?
In both instances, they are a game of bluff, look at the agent-leaked puff over the transfer window.
A small, competitive advantage may, or may not, deliver a new player which may, or may not, deliver the club's entire P+L for a year.
In the words of a gasroom 1 poster, "it really is that simple".
Clearly you do understand my point, else you would not have posited that people are somehow going to instinctively know that certain clubs have bigger budgets than Wycombe. Funnily enough, all those clubs currently have their fans baffled as without any knowledge of the transfer fees and wages that they have been paying over the last couple of decades, they have quite unaccountably been plummeting through the leagues.
I don’t think you need to be a qualified accountant or have access to the accounts of Sunderland, Wigan, Charlton etc to realise that clubs who have wealthy owners, big crowds and a Premier League history are likely to have significantly bigger funds than Wycombe.
And yet here they all are in the same division, how to explain that without reference to profligacy in the transfer market and payingtop flight wages to third flight players? Which is why football fans take a perfectly natural and healthy obsessive interest.
@glasshalffull said:
But the Trust has representation on the board of directors who will, I assume, know exactly what we have spent on players. I don’t see why that information needs to become public knowledge.
We’re all curious, of course, but that doesn’t give us a right to know.
Not so sure about that as The Trust have to raise monies, (25%) to match the Couhigs. That money is most often requested/garnered from the supporters/us. So I can see that there would be a hunger for some of the facts?
@glasshalffull said:
But the Trust has representation on the board of directors who will, I assume, know exactly what we have spent on players. I don’t see why that information needs to become public knowledge.
We’re all curious, of course, but that doesn’t give us a right to know.
Not so sure about that as The Trust have to raise monies, (25%) to match the Couhigs. That money is most often requested/garnered from the supporters/us. So I can see that there would be a hunger for some of the facts?
The trust are raising money in case we need to match the Couhigs in putting more £ in at some point, and to support other initiatives as needed. One of the better ways of avoiding this requirement is to help the club be profitable. So not spending silly money when the manager doesn't want to is fine by me, as is keeping commercially sensitive information quiet, mostly though - as is keeping the manager happy. If he's being denied the funds he wants and feels he deserves he keeps it quiet well.
@arnos_grove said:
More transparency around injuries would probably stop the sort of frenzied rumours that we’ve seen re Anthony Stewart in recent days. I don’t see the point of the intense secrecy but it doesn’t bother me that much either.
It’s not a recent thing here though. See also, Sean Devine’s knee and Gavin Grant’s cold.
As for transfer fees and wages. None of my business.
Evidently it wouldn’t. The head of media at the club stated he had a knock. People still believed he was going, despite no evidence of that.
@glasshalffull said:
But the Trust has representation on the board of directors who will, I assume, know exactly what we have spent on players. I don’t see why that information needs to become public knowledge.
We’re all curious, of course, but that doesn’t give us a right to know.
Not so sure about that as The Trust have to raise monies, (25%) to match the Couhigs. That money is most often requested/garnered from the supporters/us. So I can see that there would be a hunger for some of the facts?
The trust are raising money in case we need to match the Couhigs in putting more £ in at some point, and to support other initiatives as needed. One of the better ways of avoiding this requirement is to help the club be profitable. So not spending silly money when the manager doesn't want to is fine by me, as is keeping commercially sensitive information quiet, mostly though - as is keeping the manager happy. If he's being denied the funds he wants and feels he deserves he keeps it quiet well.
I get that and agree with the sentiment. The problem comes when fans are asked to put in funds but not told how the club/Couhigs are spending, I can see an odd issue arising.
I just think there's an odd dichotomy between on the one hand talking up all our players and how special they are, and then never mentioning the fact that we haven't seen them for months
Idle mid week musing on a slow news day. With Scotty K and Alex S gone I wonder if any other players got the “taxi for xxxxxx” call but either declined or no club came calling? Perhaps that injury to Nick F has kept him in a Wycombe shirt? Of course we’ll never know.
Regarding transfer fees, the more I read about the crack pot cases of Barca and Real Madrid, the more I think transfer fee numbers that are banded about are largely bunkum, in that the headline figures of player A going from team X to team Y for 150m, 150m isn’t transferee from one club to another’s bank account.
At best there’s an initial fee but payments are spread over 5 years or agreed milestones.
More often than not there’s money owed between clubs for years at a time and with players moving around, teams just take on the debt owed rather than paying out any money.
Or if I’m year one Liverpool sell a player to Barca for 150m, Barca give them 20m initially and then next year, Barca sell a player to Liverpool for 50m- but instead of paying anything, the 130m balance is reduced to 70m.
This gets even more complicated when three or 4 clubs are involved and we hear that one player won’t move until the buying club offloads another player and they also need to move a player etc etc. Much like house buying really and the chain you enter in. The debt (mortgage) money get moved from bank to bank to bank and the appropriate debt is attributed to each club.
Tl:dr of the above is that whatever transfer figure you read about is completely pointless. It means nothing. No club is paying the amount of money the papers say they are because it’s more complicated than that, and more likely to just be debt sharing and spread payments
With our transfer fees being significantly smaller the amounts actually paid isn’t worth talking about in detail.
The posters above are spot on. I have seen player transfer forms (huge documents) and believe me Alan Turing would have found the Enigma Code simple by comparison. There are so many clauses it’s almost impossible to arrive at a simple figure and that’s why I ignore any fees published in the media.
On the Anthony Stewart "rumours", they simply didn't exist outside of a couple of Wycombe fans pulling it out of their rear end.
I don't really understand why people would want to know wages of players, other than to use it as a stick to beat higher paid players with if they "don't perform"
@perfidious_albion said:
Idle mid week musing on a slow news day. With Scotty K and Alex S gone I wonder if any other players got the “taxi for xxxxxx” call but either declined or no club came calling? Perhaps that injury to Nick F has kept him in a Wycombe shirt? Of course we’ll never know.
I know you are not calling for Nick to be shown the door but I do find it odd that his name is mentioned in this context. Every time he’s played this season he’s performed well and would have been a great cover for RWB.
I hope he recovers soon from his xxxx injury and is back in xxxx weeks.
The transfer stuff gets even more merky when you realise that big clubs are tax right offs for American corporate types and PR machines for dubious regimes. The very idea of breaking even is for small clubs only and even then it often depends on how much your owners will chip in, even if it's all above board. Add in a bit of FFP that doesn't really help anyone and is easily bypassed and then lawyers, agents and players can make a lot of money but any objective comparisons or thoughts of decency or best practice are all a bit alien.
@perfidious_albion said:
Idle mid week musing on a slow news day. With Scotty K and Alex S gone I wonder if any other players got the “taxi for xxxxxx” call but either declined or no club came calling? Perhaps that injury to Nick F has kept him in a Wycombe shirt? Of course we’ll never know.
I know you are not calling for Nick to be shown the door but I do find it odd that his name is mentioned in this context. Every time he’s played this season he’s performed well and would have been a great cover for RWB.
I hope he recovers soon from his xxxx injury and is back in xxxx weeks.
If anything it's McCarthy's injury that helped Nick's place in the squad. Possibly unlikely to get in ahead of some of the midfield options now in the current formation unfortunately although could do a decent job I'm sure.
The Stewart stuff stemmed from them saying McCleary was out and forgetting or omitting to mention Stewart.
@perfidious_albion said:
Idle mid week musing on a slow news day. With Scotty K and Alex S gone I wonder if any other players got the “taxi for xxxxxx” call but either declined or no club came calling? Perhaps that injury to Nick F has kept him in a Wycombe shirt? Of course we’ll never know.
It’s fairly obvious why nick F stayed as scotty K and Alex went isn’t it?
Nick F can play in the role behind the front man (a role taken by Gmac, Horgan and Anis currently but also Kaikai) and can fill in as a RWB too. Whereas Alex and Scott’s role would be up top, which:
A: Scott needs a strike partner to play off directly alongside someone’s fit with the current system
B: there are better options for a willing runner and hold up players in the squad than Alex S (Vokes, hanlon, Bayo)
@perfidious_albion said:
Idle mid week musing on a slow news day. With Scotty K and Alex S gone I wonder if any other players got the “taxi for xxxxxx” call but either declined or no club came calling? Perhaps that injury to Nick F has kept him in a Wycombe shirt? Of course we’ll never know.
It’s fairly obvious why nick F stayed as scotty K and Alex went isn’t it?
Nick F can play in the role behind the front man (a role taken by Gmac, Horgan and Anis currently but also Kaikai) and can fill in as a RWB too. Whereas Alex and Scott’s role would be up top, which:
A: Scott needs a strike partner to play off directly alongside someone’s fit with the current system
B: there are better options for a willing runner and hold up players in the squad than Alex S (Vokes, hanlon, Bayo)
Bearing in mind Freeman was shipped off on loan last season, i'd imagine the only obvious difference between him and the other 2, is that other teams came in for them.
Injuries aside, where will Freeman play regularly?
Other fans 'Toeing the party line' 'A bit Orwellian for me' ?
You know at the end of the day this is just football dontcha @eric_plant ?
(I know I need to apologise to Bill Shankly...)
Pretty well anywhere in my book @Malone. Surprised and delighted and disappointed in quick succession after the previous lack of recognition. Disappointed, obviously, that a possibly partially self-inflicted injury has temporarily stopped him in his tracks.
@Wendoverman said:
Other fans 'Toeing the party line' 'A bit Orwellian for me' ?
You know at the end of the day this is just football dontcha @eric_plant ?
(I know I need to apologise to Bill Shankly...)
If Freeman has a fairly serious knee injury, clearly that would have killed any outgoing transfer possibility instantly.
Probably Freeman was the most likely contracted leaver at start of summer but to be fair to him he has shown some promise in the back up RWB role at the start of this season. Wouldn't have been surprised to see him retained for that possibility even without injury.
@perfidious_albion said:
Idle mid week musing on a slow news day. With Scotty K and Alex S gone I wonder if any other players got the “taxi for xxxxxx” call but either declined or no club came calling? Perhaps that injury to Nick F has kept him in a Wycombe shirt? Of course we’ll never know.
It’s fairly obvious why nick F stayed as scotty K and Alex went isn’t it?
Nick F can play in the role behind the front man (a role taken by Gmac, Horgan and Anis currently but also Kaikai) and can fill in as a RWB too. Whereas Alex and Scott’s role would be up top, which:
A: Scott needs a strike partner to play off directly alongside someone’s fit with the current system
B: there are better options for a willing runner and hold up players in the squad than Alex S (Vokes, hanlon, Bayo)
Bearing in mind Freeman was shipped off on loan last season, i'd imagine the only obvious difference between him and the other 2, is that other teams came in for them.
Injuries aside, where will Freeman play regularly?
I would have a guess that timing and hindsight had a lot to play in answering this question.
He went on loan just before/around the time we switched the formation/setup of the side so may now find more playing options in more favoured positions now than he did in the first half of last season/when the decision to loan him out was made.
There’s also the drop in quality into league one. He may be considered a decent to good option for league one, where as an average one in the championship. The availability to us as a club, from other teams of players in his role last season may have been better than it is this season.
He may have also just needed some minutes in his legs.
The reported fairly serious knee injury would have ended any possibility of Freeman leaving. Even without that the initially promising performances at RWB perhaps would have resulted in retaining and giving him opportunity to prove himself in that position anyway.
Comments
In the words of a gasroom 1 poster, "it really is that simple".
I don’t think you need to be a qualified accountant or have access to the accounts of Sunderland, Wigan, Charlton etc to realise that clubs who have wealthy owners, big crowds and a Premier League history are likely to have significantly bigger funds than Wycombe.
And yet here they all are in the same division, how to explain that without reference to profligacy in the transfer market and payingtop flight wages to third flight players? Which is why football fans take a perfectly natural and healthy obsessive interest.
Not so sure about that as The Trust have to raise monies, (25%) to match the Couhigs. That money is most often requested/garnered from the supporters/us. So I can see that there would be a hunger for some of the facts?
But we are the Trust!
Exactly.
The trust are raising money in case we need to match the Couhigs in putting more £ in at some point, and to support other initiatives as needed. One of the better ways of avoiding this requirement is to help the club be profitable. So not spending silly money when the manager doesn't want to is fine by me, as is keeping commercially sensitive information quiet, mostly though - as is keeping the manager happy. If he's being denied the funds he wants and feels he deserves he keeps it quiet well.
Evidently it wouldn’t. The head of media at the club stated he had a knock. People still believed he was going, despite no evidence of that.
I get that and agree with the sentiment. The problem comes when fans are asked to put in funds but not told how the club/Couhigs are spending, I can see an odd issue arising.
Jesus. Bit touchy on here today.
I’ll take 24 hours in the sin-bin and think about my behaviour.
Not touchy. You’re saying the club should tell us to avoid speculation. They did. Speculation still happened!
Sorry. I think it was not mentioning it in the preview, while mentioning other absences, that started the mild (better?) speculation.
Cat was out of the bag by the time Matt mentioned it.
Anyway, I think my point is either give full disclosure or nothing. But personally, I couldn’t give a monkeys either way.
I just think there's an odd dichotomy between on the one hand talking up all our players and how special they are, and then never mentioning the fact that we haven't seen them for months
It's a bit Orwellian for me.
Idle mid week musing on a slow news day. With Scotty K and Alex S gone I wonder if any other players got the “taxi for xxxxxx” call but either declined or no club came calling? Perhaps that injury to Nick F has kept him in a Wycombe shirt? Of course we’ll never know.
Regarding transfer fees, the more I read about the crack pot cases of Barca and Real Madrid, the more I think transfer fee numbers that are banded about are largely bunkum, in that the headline figures of player A going from team X to team Y for 150m, 150m isn’t transferee from one club to another’s bank account.
At best there’s an initial fee but payments are spread over 5 years or agreed milestones.
More often than not there’s money owed between clubs for years at a time and with players moving around, teams just take on the debt owed rather than paying out any money.
Or if I’m year one Liverpool sell a player to Barca for 150m, Barca give them 20m initially and then next year, Barca sell a player to Liverpool for 50m- but instead of paying anything, the 130m balance is reduced to 70m.
This gets even more complicated when three or 4 clubs are involved and we hear that one player won’t move until the buying club offloads another player and they also need to move a player etc etc. Much like house buying really and the chain you enter in. The debt (mortgage) money get moved from bank to bank to bank and the appropriate debt is attributed to each club.
Tl:dr of the above is that whatever transfer figure you read about is completely pointless. It means nothing. No club is paying the amount of money the papers say they are because it’s more complicated than that, and more likely to just be debt sharing and spread payments
With our transfer fees being significantly smaller the amounts actually paid isn’t worth talking about in detail.
Oh, dick measuring.
That’s literally the only reason people want to talk about how much their club has “paid” for a player.
“We’re a massive club, we paid 7473838464 bajallion for Andy Trailist”
The posters above are spot on. I have seen player transfer forms (huge documents) and believe me Alan Turing would have found the Enigma Code simple by comparison. There are so many clauses it’s almost impossible to arrive at a simple figure and that’s why I ignore any fees published in the media.
On the Anthony Stewart "rumours", they simply didn't exist outside of a couple of Wycombe fans pulling it out of their rear end.
I don't really understand why people would want to know wages of players, other than to use it as a stick to beat higher paid players with if they "don't perform"
I know you are not calling for Nick to be shown the door but I do find it odd that his name is mentioned in this context. Every time he’s played this season he’s performed well and would have been a great cover for RWB.
I hope he recovers soon from his xxxx injury and is back in xxxx weeks.
The transfer stuff gets even more merky when you realise that big clubs are tax right offs for American corporate types and PR machines for dubious regimes. The very idea of breaking even is for small clubs only and even then it often depends on how much your owners will chip in, even if it's all above board. Add in a bit of FFP that doesn't really help anyone and is easily bypassed and then lawyers, agents and players can make a lot of money but any objective comparisons or thoughts of decency or best practice are all a bit alien.
If anything it's McCarthy's injury that helped Nick's place in the squad. Possibly unlikely to get in ahead of some of the midfield options now in the current formation unfortunately although could do a decent job I'm sure.
The Stewart stuff stemmed from them saying McCleary was out and forgetting or omitting to mention Stewart.
It’s fairly obvious why nick F stayed as scotty K and Alex went isn’t it?
Nick F can play in the role behind the front man (a role taken by Gmac, Horgan and Anis currently but also Kaikai) and can fill in as a RWB too. Whereas Alex and Scott’s role would be up top, which:
A: Scott needs a strike partner to play off directly alongside someone’s fit with the current system
B: there are better options for a willing runner and hold up players in the squad than Alex S (Vokes, hanlon, Bayo)
Bearing in mind Freeman was shipped off on loan last season, i'd imagine the only obvious difference between him and the other 2, is that other teams came in for them.
Injuries aside, where will Freeman play regularly?
Other fans 'Toeing the party line' 'A bit Orwellian for me' ?
You know at the end of the day this is just football dontcha @eric_plant ?
(I know I need to apologise to Bill Shankly...)
Pretty well anywhere in my book @Malone. Surprised and delighted and disappointed in quick succession after the previous lack of recognition. Disappointed, obviously, that a possibly partially self-inflicted injury has temporarily stopped him in his tracks.
Cricket thoroughly absorbing but ASDA calls!
I agree! Which is why I find the secrecy absurd
If Freeman has a fairly serious knee injury, clearly that would have killed any outgoing transfer possibility instantly.
Probably Freeman was the most likely contracted leaver at start of summer but to be fair to him he has shown some promise in the back up RWB role at the start of this season. Wouldn't have been surprised to see him retained for that possibility even without injury.
I would have a guess that timing and hindsight had a lot to play in answering this question.
He went on loan just before/around the time we switched the formation/setup of the side so may now find more playing options in more favoured positions now than he did in the first half of last season/when the decision to loan him out was made.
There’s also the drop in quality into league one. He may be considered a decent to good option for league one, where as an average one in the championship. The availability to us as a club, from other teams of players in his role last season may have been better than it is this season.
He may have also just needed some minutes in his legs.
The reported fairly serious knee injury would have ended any possibility of Freeman leaving. Even without that the initially promising performances at RWB perhaps would have resulted in retaining and giving him opportunity to prove himself in that position anyway.