orange county dosser Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 a few posters seem to be a wee bit concerned about signings from lower leagues , can i just remind everyone that we signed Dougie Arnott from Pollock Juniors !!! lets just wait and see what they can do on the park before we all hit the panic button Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
numpty Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 Heard he might be going to either Norwich or Doncaster!! Herald's reporting that Hughes has signed for Norwich. http://www.theherald.co.uk/sport/headlines...new_signing.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haggischomper Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 I still don't know what McGhee's plan was. I have analysed it carefully for some time now and I believe it was to bring in a centre-half over a certain height and who was better than we currently have - but it has to be the right guy at the right time. Etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazamfc Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 Herald's reporting that Hughes has signed for Norwich. http://www.theherald.co.uk/sport/headlines...new_signing.php i was on the norwich website and it doesn't say anything on it about stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MelvinBragg Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 McGhee took a lot of stick on here for leaving us in the situation we are currently in with the depleted squad. So Gannon's plan is to bring in 4 loan deals and 2 of the 3 players we've brought in have signed ONE year deals? Hmmm. Like yourself, I have a slight concern over the one year deals. If the players have a succesful season and attract interest from elsewhere, we could lose them again after only one year. But that means we'll have had a good season so can we really grumble? My real concern would lie with the fact that was stated that Gannon was on a percentage of transfer fees received for players he signs. Did I miss a meeting? Is there a secret forum somewhere I don't know about? I haven't read about this percentage before and it does alarm me, that to an extent one could argue that it would be in JG's best interests (financially at least) to be selling players off... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 He had the percentage deal at Stockport. I think the rest is speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 If Gannon was genuinely looking to make a few quid from transfer fees, it would surely make sense to get players signed on two or three year deals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
true_steelman Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Way I see it is, these guys would probably not consider signing for us but because they respect JG he managed to get them to sign, he would rather have them for a year than not at all. These guys are using us as a stepping stone (which is cool) and will most likely be off to bigger and better things. But other young english boys will see whats happened to these one year ones and know the football JG plays and now see us as a good option. Take a hit with these ones and get the rest of them signed up on longer contracts. Mon ra dossers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nethertonwellfan Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Herald's reporting that Hughes has signed for Norwich. http://www.theherald.co.uk/sport/headlines...new_signing.php If he has signed so much for 'I don't want to uproot ma family'. It looks like money talks again, which I haven't a problem with but don't be a lying wee prick about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dinnae-punt-it Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Purely judging by the squad numbers allocated these guys will be expected to be in the starting 11. I see from official page that Saunders and Slane are still in the under 19s. Is this maybe just a website update/age thing or more of an indication that they will be squad only and not regular starters - especially if 4+4 still to come. I am pretty certain what Gannon means is we will get 4 permanent signings...........of which we currently have three and 4 loan signings.....of which we have none, so only 5 new signings to come not 8! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuwell Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 If he has signed so much for 'I don't want to uproot ma family'. It looks like money talks again, which I haven't a problem with but don't be a lying wee prick about it. Think you are being a little harsh with you're comments nethertonwellfan, it could just be that no one up here (m'well included) were willing to pay the money he was looking for and so he had no option but to move south. Also since I'd rather see him down south than playing against us i wish him all the best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Diggle Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Way I see it is, these guys would probably not consider signing for us but because they respect JG he managed to get them to sign, he would rather have them for a year than not at all. These guys are using us as a stepping stone (which is cool) and will most likely be off to bigger and better things. But other young english boys will see whats happened to these one year ones and know the football JG plays and now see us as a good option. Take a hit with these ones and get the rest of them signed up on longer contracts. Mon ra dossers It was discussed earlier in this thread or somewhere else and I also think it was on one of Jennings interviews that - he moved north because of Gannon's interest in him as moving from Merseyside wasn't something that he was particularly keen on - but something he would consider after Jimbo's interest. A one year deal was struck so we can size him up and he can size up the SPL - that's how it was reported anyway. So if the 'give us a try' approach has been successful in attracting one player - then why not use it again to attract more players. The one year deals so far have options as far as I'm aware.. If there's no fee involved - and they move on for nowt at the end of the year then we've not really lost anything have we? If he brings in a few some will go some will stay - and he appears to have loads of leads - so those guys who go will be replaced. If we were shelling out a big transfer fee for a one year deal I'd be concerned. I'm OK with this approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobey_Dosser Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 I haven't heard anything about this percentage sell-on clause. Interesting. Not quite sure what to make of that. As Jay says though, if he was looking to make money off of players then he wouldn't be running the risk of losing them for nowt with 1 year contracts. While I'm not 100% comfortable with 1 year contracts, I'd like to think Gannon will look to extend such contracts come October/November if the player has settled in well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nethertonwellfan Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Think you are being a little harsh with you're comments nethertonwellfan, it could just be that no one up here (m'well included) were willing to pay the money he was looking for and so he had no option but to move south. Also since I'd rather see him down south than playing against us i wish him all the best. I agree with that but there is no need to come out and say it is one thing when he knows it's going to boil down to money at then end of the day. Because I don't think anyone in the SPL outside the old firm can afford to pay the 7k a week that Norwich a reported as paying him. I also agree with the sentiment that we don't want him playing against us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MelvinBragg Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 I am pretty certain what Gannon means is we will get 4 permanent signings...........of which we currently have three and 4 loan signings.....of which we have none, so only 5 new signings to come not 8! That's kind of how I read it too. Perhaps if Flow did the interview he could clarify... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Diggle Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Will be intersting to see if we officially respond to Shrewsbury and Northhampton via the website or through the media in any way. Quite strongly worded statements from both of them on the players and us as a club. I've got a funny feeling that both these clubs might be stuffed and that MFC will just wait for Association clearance on both. Interested to see Northamptons comments on 'verbal contracts' which are all well and good - but I'm of the understanding that a player's registaration with an association is logged with a copy of a signed contract. Stripped to the waist. marquess of Queensbury rules and all that The thot plickens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyRoss Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Looks like the transfer that is discussed every summer won't be hapening again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobey_Dosser Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Looks like the transfer that is discussed every summer won't be hapening again! Noticed that yesterday. Would absolutely love him at FP but it looks like it wont happen for a few years yet. Edit: hearts have denied the Beattie chat. http://sport.scotsman.com/heartofmidlothia...e-in.5480641.jp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fergi4 Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Will be intersting to see if we officially respond to Shrewsbury and Northhampton via the website or through the media in any way. Quite strongly worded statements from both of them on the players and us as a club. I've got a funny feeling that both these clubs might be stuffed and that MFC will just wait for Association clearance on both. Interested to see Northamptons comments on 'verbal contracts' which are all well and good - but I'm of the understanding that a player's registaration with an association is logged with a copy of a signed contract. Stripped to the waist. marquess of Queensbury rules and all that The thot plickens. I don't see any issue with the Humphrey transfer. While there is a legal issue pending with the Coke signing, it would probably be wise not to play him in any games until it is all settled. Last thing we want is to get kicked out the Europa for fielding an unauthorised player...I'm pretty sure the Scottish Cup has come up with situations like this from time to time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daver Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 I agree with that but there is no need to come out and say it is one thing when he knows it's going to boil down to money at then end of the day. Because I don't think anyone in the SPL outside the old firm can afford to pay the 7k a week that Norwich a reported as paying him. I also agree with the sentiment that we don't want him playing against us Following speculation linking Hughes with Aberdeena few weeks ago, McGhee was quoted as saying that Hughes was too expensive as he had been offered 7k a week (widely thought to be from Norwich) and turned that down. It seems he has been punted around and can't find, unsurprisingly, a better offer. I don't think anyone can blame him for taking that kind of money. A few seasons of that on top of what he's already earned and he should be made for life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
numpty Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11796_5448539,00.html Motherwell are weighing up a move for Manchester United youngster Ritchie De Laet, skysports.com understands. The SPL side are looking to bolster their squad ahead of the new season and they are thought to be exploring the option of signing De Laet on loan. Motherwell officials are believed to have watched the Belgian in recent weeks for United's reserves in pre-season action and have been impressed by De Laet. De Laet joined United from Stoke last January and made his Premier League debut on the final day of last season against Hull. Te 20-year-old is well down the pecking order at Old Trafford and United boss Sir Alex Ferguson could consider loaning him out so that he can get regular first-team action under his belt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nethertonwellfan Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11796_5448539,00.html Can we have Macheda as well please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxi Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Can we have Macheda as well please? and Petrucci, Welbeck, Fabio, fuck it just bring in half thier youth team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazamfc Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 does anybodyy know what position he plays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobey_Dosser Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 I recall him being a bizarre signing for United in January. Don't think he played for Stoke yet fergie made a move for him. I imagined he would be loaned back to Antwerp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts