by Crowthorne Royal » 15 May 2007 08:21
by RoyalBlue » 15 May 2007 08:31
by Stranded » 15 May 2007 08:38
by cmonurz » 15 May 2007 08:39
by Blue Blood » 15 May 2007 08:41
by jelly » 15 May 2007 08:42
by Blue Blood » 15 May 2007 08:43
cmonurz Imho, we will not get a player of Sidwell's calibre in replacement for a lower wage than that anyway.
by Stranded » 15 May 2007 08:45
Blue Bloodcmonurz Imho, we will not get a player of Sidwell's calibre in replacement for a lower wage than that anyway.
Imho we have one already.........Gunnarsson
by Slightly Hungover » 15 May 2007 08:49
by noise » 15 May 2007 08:50
Blue Bloodcmonurz Imho, we will not get a player of Sidwell's calibre in replacement for a lower wage than that anyway.
Imho we have one already.........Gunnarsson
by Slightly Hungover » 15 May 2007 09:03
by Dirk Gently » 15 May 2007 09:08
by nivek elyod » 15 May 2007 09:09
by Dirk Gently » 15 May 2007 09:12
nivek elyod What's puzzling me is why he wanted to leave (apart from money). We have shown ourselves to be the 8th best team in the best league in the world, he has been a major part of that, and yet still he wants to leave. Strange...
by papereyes » 15 May 2007 09:12
And yes, we would have got more a season ago, but we needed him to play this season - what would you rather have for our first season in the Prem? Sidders out there showing how good he is or £2.5M in the bank at a time when we couldn't get players to join us?
by Behindu » 15 May 2007 09:34
by aaronrfc » 15 May 2007 09:40
Dirk Gently I can't criticise the club's stance on this.
If they'd paid Sidders what he demanded, then the wages for the other players would have needed to go up too, so it would have cost a lot more than just the extra we'd be paying him. No-one is bigger than the club.
And yes, we would have got more a season ago, but we needed him to play this season - what would you rather have for our first season in the Prem? Sidders out there showing how good he is or £2.5M in the bank at a time when we couldn't get players to join us?
Even more so because (as pointed out) 40% would go to Arsenal. And let's not forget also, that because Sidders didn't sign the new contract, he was on about £8 K a week less than he wold have been on the new contract. That's another £400K saved to set against this mythical £2.5M minus 40%.
Nope, Coppell and Hammond have got it spot on - and fair play to Sidders for giving it his all this season, too.
by cmonurz » 15 May 2007 09:54
by Yorkshire Royal » 15 May 2007 09:56
by Royalee » 15 May 2007 10:08
Users browsing this forum: ankeny, Bing [Bot], Clyde1998, Four Of Clubs, Google [Bot], Jammy Dodger, Mr Sitter, Orion1871, stealthpapes, Tinpot Royal, WestYorksRoyal and 303 guests