|
|
Post by RonD on Jul 15, 2017 15:42:03 GMT
Alabi has scored five for Tranmere today against Lairds. They are 10-0 up! :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by MPW on Jul 15, 2017 15:42:34 GMT
Alabi scored 5 first half goals for Tranmere at Camell Laird's today, it was 9-0 at half time and was apparently involed with nearly all of those goals.
Maybe they'll pay up now?
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Jul 15, 2017 15:57:59 GMT
Wow. Crazy! It was 8-0 inside 25 minutes. I know it's Cammel Lairds but that will have his confidence booming. the 2nd half team that Tranmere had would probably compete in the conference as well. Strength in depth is on another level.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lobster on Jul 15, 2017 17:35:41 GMT
Lairds were struggling to field a team at all towards the end of last season I think. Their West Cheshire League side kept forfeiting games.
A good confidence boost, but you don't really gain or learn a lot from a game where you're 8-0 up after 25 minutes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hannibal on Jul 16, 2017 9:12:31 GMT
Lairds were struggling to field a team at all towards the end of last season I think. Their West Cheshire League side kept forfeiting games. A good confidence boost, but you don't really gain or learn a lot from a game where you're 8-0 up after 25 minutes. Shame about Cammell Lairds. Average crowd of about 50 last season. Going the same way as Vauxhalls I fear. |
|
|
|
Post by RonD on Jul 16, 2017 10:05:12 GMT
Lairds were struggling to field a team at all towards the end of last season I think. Their West Cheshire League side kept forfeiting games. A good confidence boost, but you don't really gain or learn a lot from a game where you're 8-0 up after 25 minutes. What you say is right, but in this case it's more an annual friendly against a local side, which I'm sure Lairds make a good few quid from. |
|
mjc82
New Member
Posts: 11 
|
Post by mjc82 on Jul 16, 2017 10:49:12 GMT
Lairds were struggling to field a team at all towards the end of last season I think. Their West Cheshire League side kept forfeiting games. A good confidence boost, but you don't really gain or learn a lot from a game where you're 8-0 up after 25 minutes. What you say is right, but in this case it's more an annual friendly against a local side, which I'm sure Lairds make a good few quid from. That's exactly why Tranmere do it.. would have been a few hundred there yesterday. |
|
|
|
Post by Lobster on Jul 16, 2017 11:19:53 GMT
Lairds were struggling to field a team at all towards the end of last season I think. Their West Cheshire League side kept forfeiting games. A good confidence boost, but you don't really gain or learn a lot from a game where you're 8-0 up after 25 minutes. Shame about Cammell Lairds. Average crowd of about 50 last season. Going the same way as Vauxhalls I fear. It is tough for traditional West Cheshire League teams to make the jump to a higher level, with so much more in the way of travel expenses and ground requirements. Saying that, Runcorn Town seem to be making a decent fist of it, which is surprising as they were never one of the bigger WCL clubs as Mond Rangers. Speaking of the WCL, I see Helsby have had to resign from it citing lack of players and volunteers. I do fear for the future of local amateur teams as it seems like the people that keep them going are getting older and older and gradually the clubs will die along with the people that ran them, as miserable as that sounds. |
|
|
|
Post by bluboy79 on Jul 17, 2017 10:20:49 GMT
With the Alibi situation going to tribunal would it not be a good idea for player to be ineligible to play until matter is sorted ? Tranmere gain clear advantage by signing our leading and while we struggle to strengthen our squad until we get tribunal money which we probably be later in season ! How is this fair ? Also they don't want to pay for Alibi but want big money for Cook !!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Jul 17, 2017 11:35:04 GMT
They will pay for Alabi, it's only a matter of time plus if he is a success there it will only help our case at the Tribunal. We will get more than Barnet offered in January it Just depends if we can get any clauses in the contract.
|
|
|
|
Post by thebluecamp on Jul 17, 2017 11:39:24 GMT
With the Alibi situation going to tribunal would it not be a good idea for player to be ineligible to play until matter is sorted ? Tranmere gain clear advantage by signing our leading and while we struggle to strengthen our squad until we get tribunal money which we probably be later in season ! How is this fair ? Also they don't want to pay for Alibi but want big money for Cook !!! Tend to agree with your assessment. In such cases, if a fee cannot be agreed then the player should not be allowed to play until a tribunal has fixed a fee. That way, neither club has an advantage. |
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Jul 17, 2017 11:48:18 GMT
If we can get 8K for Kingsley James with no offers beforehand, you'd think with Alabi's age and the interest that's been shown in him will make sure the Club is looked after.
|
|
|
|
Post by eyeswideopen on Jul 17, 2017 11:51:48 GMT
With the Alibi situation going to tribunal would it not be a good idea for player to be ineligible to play until matter is sorted ? Tranmere gain clear advantage by signing our leading and while we struggle to strengthen our squad until we get tribunal money which we probably be later in season ! How is this fair ? Also they don't want to pay for Alibi but want big money for Cook !!! Tend to agree with your assessment. In such cases, if a fee cannot be agreed then the player should not be allowed to play until a tribunal has fixed a fee. That way, neither club has an advantage. I sort of see the issue with both clubs here.
Its not our fault JA has rejected his contract, its not his fault that we can insist on a fee and its not Tranmeres fault that our estimation of his price is higher than theirs ( Of course we would do the same if vice versa) But to not allow the player to play until a tribunal has agreed a fee is also detrimental, in this case it would be Tranmere who would suffer, but it quite easily could be us. In the Kingsley James case, it took around 4 months, so in effect the player would be out of the game for that long, imagine how much longer it would take to get him match fit after that too, its all well and good training but it doesn't replicate matchtime.
The real culprits here are the lawmakers in taking so long in actually getting a tribunal together, in real terms it shouldn't take any longer than a fortnight tops. but this is the National league and the money involved down this level is absolute peanuts compared to the Premier league, but he ho its only vital to clubs like us to actually operate on this sort of money.
|
|
|
|
Post by wxmred on Jul 17, 2017 21:14:44 GMT
Tend to agree with your assessment. In such cases, if a fee cannot be agreed then the player should not be allowed to play until a tribunal has fixed a fee. That way, neither club has an advantage. I sort of see the issue with both clubs here.
Its not our fault JA has rejected his contract, its not his fault that we can insist on a fee and its not Tranmeres fault that our estimation of his price is higher than theirs ( Of course we would do the same if vice versa) But to not allow the player to play until a tribunal has agreed a fee is also detrimental, in this case it would be Tranmere who would suffer, but it quite easily could be us. In the Kingsley James case, it took around 4 months, so in effect the player would be out of the game for that long, imagine how much longer it would take to get him match fit after that too, its all well and good training but it doesn't replicate matchtime.
The real culprits here are the lawmakers in taking so long in actually getting a tribunal together, in real terms it shouldn't take any longer than a fortnight tops. but this is the National league and the money involved down this level is absolute peanuts compared to the Premier league, but he ho its only vital to clubs like us to actually operate on this sort of money.
Well said.
|
|
|
|
Post by bethnalblue on Jul 18, 2017 4:33:37 GMT
Maybe Alabi would of decided a lot sooner where he was going if he couldnt play until a fee was agreed or a Tribunal makes a ruling.
The only party disadvantaged here is Chester.
|
|
|
|
Post by sqzl on Jul 18, 2017 7:59:06 GMT
Don't see how Alabi not playing would be fair on the player himself either. Ultimately if someones offering you twice the wages for example, you're going to take it. For someone to then say well you can't play is a bit farfetched. He wasn't even our player, he was out of contract and had he been a bit older, he would have signed for another club no complications. Anything we get for Alabi is a bonus in my eyes, he's not our player, so really this is purely development compensation we will be getting. We shouldn't be basing playing budget on the Alabi fee either way, as it wouldn't be much, probably 12k tops...
|
|
|
|
Post by rcb on Jul 18, 2017 12:28:08 GMT
I don't know who said "you can't have your cake and eat it", but they didn't think about tribunals. At the moment Tranmere have the player and the money and that can't be right. Surely it would be fairer for Tranmere to have to submit a reasonable estimate to a third party until a resolution has been reached. A sort of footy Paypal.
|
|
