Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: 5minstogo on March 04, 2010, 01:22:25 pm
-
SO'D says could be another 4 weeks before we find out if Stock can play again this season.
Also Shack likely to be out for 8-12 weeks which effectively ends his season and maybe his time at Rovers.
-
I hope it's not the case that we never see The Shack in a Rovers shirt again.
Simply an awesome defender.
Mills left a huge gap to fill and he more than filled it, in fact I won't insult Shack by drawing any further comparisons.
It has been a privilege to watch the bloke play.
-
Elliott Ward has come in and will assist in the cover but he is not has commmanding has Shackell. WE have no ready replacement of quality for Stock and the midfield is not has good without him. We managed before with Gillett but we could not afford to pay his wages so now we are at our budget again we will have to manage with what we have lets hope the midfield is good enough to get another 13 points at least.
-
steve@dcfd wrote:
We managed before with Gillett but we could not afford to pay his wages so now we are at our budget again
Im not inclined to think thats true,I Believe Southampton demanded a fee for Gillett after initially agreeing to let him leave on a free.Seems they may have been trying to be sly and greedy or they have thrown out the teddy because we would sell Stock to them on the cheap!I would not be surprised to see Gillett a again at the end of the season.
-
Drover wrote:
steve@dcfd wrote:
We managed before with Gillett but we could not afford to pay his wages so now we are at our budget again
Im not inclined to think thats true,I Believe Southampton demanded a fee for Gillett after initially agreeing to let him leave on a free.Seems they may have been trying to be sly and greedy or they have thrown out the teddy because we would sell Stock to them on the cheap!I would not be surprised to see Gillett a again at the end of the season.
Also there's a difference between \"can't afford\" and \"won't pay\". His demands may have been within our capabilities but we just didn't feel it was good value.
-
DonnyNoel wrote:
Drover wrote:
steve@dcfd wrote:
We managed before with Gillett but we could not afford to pay his wages so now we are at our budget again
Im not inclined to think thats true,I Believe Southampton demanded a fee for Gillett after initially agreeing to let him leave on a free.Seems they may have been trying to be sly and greedy or they have thrown out the teddy because we would sell Stock to them on the cheap!I would not be surprised to see Gillett a again at the end of the season.
Also there's a difference between \"can't afford\" and \"won't pay\". His demands may have been within our capabilities but we just didn't feel it was good value.
So therefore we cannot complain when we have Wilson and Hird in midfield who we can afford or accept wages we offer. Improvement in squad or acceptance of wages.
-
steve@dcfd wrote:
DonnyNoel wrote:
Drover wrote:
steve@dcfd wrote:
We managed before with Gillett but we could not afford to pay his wages so now we are at our budget again
Im not inclined to think thats true,I Believe Southampton demanded a fee for Gillett after initially agreeing to let him leave on a free.Seems they may have been trying to be sly and greedy or they have thrown out the teddy because we would sell Stock to them on the cheap!I would not be surprised to see Gillett a again at the end of the season.
Also there's a difference between \"can't afford\" and \"won't pay\". His demands may have been within our capabilities but we just didn't feel it was good value.
So therefore we cannot complain when we have Wilson and Hird in midfield who we can afford or accept wages we offer. Improvement in squad or acceptance of wages.
Fair point, but without knowing exactly what SG wanted its hard to comment in any detail. I'd hope the board are aware to sign Sharp or Shack we need to revise the wage structure but I also don't think Gillett was worthy of becoming one of our top earners (again, assuming thats what he was asking for).