NEWS Dave strikes

[Gaz]

That's exactly what we did with Petero IIRC.

Set a deadline, they didn't accept, we told them the offer is off and we're looking elsewhere.

Wayne promised him Shanes money when he retired then reneged. I believe it to be one of Waynes lasting regrets.

 

[Nashy]

Good. No make sure they are enforced, and tell the flogs to **** off if they don't give an answer.

 

[broncsgoat]

We have two more years to re-sign Haas to a long deal. If its contract year then yes, stick to your deadline and then move on regardless of the player. Hopefully the club is in a much better position now moving forward that we wont even be letting the players enter the open market moving on as they are secured well before the 1 November deadline.

Yeah I was just using Haas as an example. It’ll be interesting to see if they have the conviction to back up the talk.

 

[Aldo]

If it's a more than fair offer, then a deadline should stand. I'd hate to think of the players we may have missed out on getting while waiting around for Fifita to make a fucking decision.

 

[Super Freak]

They do actually work Players/agents cant hold us for ransom anymore. When they have an offer its either sign it or look elsewhere. Also gives us plenty of time to look for suitable replacements should the need arise for such.

We don't need to impose deadlines to stop that from happening. All deadlines do is alienate players and then we'll end up losing players we need to keep/sign because we can't wait an extra couple of weeks.

There's also nothing stopping us from lining up a replacement while still negotiating.

I can't think of an instance where a deadline has actually worked.

 

[I bleed Maroon]

If it's a more than fair offer, then a deadline should stand. I'd hate to think of the players we may have missed out on getting while waiting around for Fifita to make a fucking decision.

The worst thing about Fifita is his mind should have been made up the moment we bailed his fat ass out of a Balinese Jail.

 

[Kimlo]

We don't need to impose deadlines to stop that from happening. All deadlines do is alienate players and then we'll end up losing players we need to keep/sign because we can't wait an extra couple of weeks.

There's also nothing stopping us from lining up a replacement while still negotiating.

I can't think of an instance where a deadline has actually worked.

It's not about keeping players no matter what. It's about the club retaining a good position to go to market. If you wait forever and the player doesn't sign anyway you just miss out on two players. If you set a deadline, either they re-sign, or you have time to go to market for a replacement.

 

[Cult]

We don't need to impose deadlines to stop that from happening. All deadlines do is alienate players and then we'll end up losing players we need to keep/sign because we can't wait an extra couple of weeks.

There's also nothing stopping us from lining up a replacement while still negotiating.

I can't think of an instance where a deadline has actually worked.

Not having deadlines hasn't worked either. We've been waiting most of the season to sign someone, whilst other players are signing elsewhere, only to not get that players signature and therefore miss out on what's available.

 

[john1420]

That's exactly what we did with Petero IIRC.

Set a deadline, they didn't accept, we told them the offer is off and we're looking elsewhere.

Yes that was sad, but not quite what I wrote

Agreed, such a thing should never happen to a club legend and 1 club veteran, you can definitely play harder with young up and comers

 

[Alec]

I remember with Petero there was the whole thing about him supposedly originally signing for less with the promise of receiving more once Webcke retired. They apparently didn't keep their word, which was why he left.