|
Post by SouthStandShrew on Mar 12, 2011 17:34:06 GMT 1
... The Robinson clause wasn't put it in?
|
|
|
Post by Feedo Gnasher on Mar 12, 2011 17:36:37 GMT 1
Apparantly we didn't have enough time due to a busy day, but Turner said he might not have bothered anyway.
Instead of working out who let it happen, I'd love to know why, I want to hear Turner's explanation at full-time. I just can't see an argument from STFC in favour of letting it happen.
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Mar 12, 2011 17:37:23 GMT 1
More to the point why was he allowed to go out on loan in the first place - not the most consistent of strikers but am sure we'd look more like scoring with him in the side
|
|
|
Post by Optimistic Shrew on Mar 12, 2011 17:39:15 GMT 1
We don't know the ins and outs but don't forget the deals were done very late.
I see no reason why Turner would be lying.
|
|
bradders
Midland League Division One
Posts: 332
|
Post by bradders on Mar 12, 2011 17:42:45 GMT 1
Who cares! It's happened and he could help us take points from clubs around us! It's not like we have lost just because of robinson! It's a team game!
|
|
|
Post by southshropblue on Mar 12, 2011 17:44:41 GMT 1
i am sure Turner is telling the truth however I would think the buck stops with the manager on something like this
|
|
|
Post by Ned on Mar 12, 2011 17:46:58 GMT 1
I would think GT.
|
|
|
Post by Stewie Shrew on Mar 12, 2011 17:47:36 GMT 1
Who cares! It's happened and he could help us take points from clubs around us! It's not like we have lost just because of robinson! It's a team game! Find me another player up and down the leagues who has joined one team on loand from another in the same league and been able to play against them like Robinson? THIS IS A COCK UP
|
|
|
Post by The Shropshire Tenor on Mar 12, 2011 17:50:10 GMT 1
The businesses I worked for had standard contracts for regular transactions, with all the necessary clauses included.
If one of the parties did not want a clause in then it would have to be negotiated out by mutual consent.
Hard to believe that there is not a similar situation in football with so many loans each season - they surely do not write each contract anew?
|
|
|
Post by poolieshrew on Mar 12, 2011 17:52:28 GMT 1
Who cares! It's happened and he could help us take points from clubs around us! It's not like we have lost just because of robinson! It's a team game! Exactly, the Robinson issue cant distract from some real problems GT needs to correct prior to saturday.
|
|
|
Post by Stewie Shrew on Mar 12, 2011 17:56:31 GMT 1
yes Poolie your right, but he should not of been able to play. It wont change the score, wont change the fact we lost, but who knows what would of happened ad a different player and not one thats ours would of been playing for them
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Mar 12, 2011 18:02:32 GMT 1
Would Man United have loaned Michael Owen to Chelsea and allowed him to play against them - properly not.
Letting our top scoring striker play against you is like using clip art for a club badge...oh hold on yes I forgot our administration is totally amateurish
|
|
|
Post by camdenshrew on Mar 12, 2011 18:02:40 GMT 1
I said it before and I'll say it again. This was a big, big mistake. Nothing to gain from letting it happen and everything to lose. This must have turned us into the laughing stock of Division 2.
|
|
|
Post by mrmagoo on Mar 12, 2011 18:03:42 GMT 1
Bickerton's fault
|
|
|
Post by champagneprince on Mar 12, 2011 18:13:50 GMT 1
I said it before and I'll say it again. This was a big, big mistake. Nothing to gain from letting it happen and everything to lose. This must have turned us into the laughing stock of Division 2. My feelings too. This was not in our interests at all. The only thing I can think of is that his transfer fee might have gone up a touch ! As for Robinson himself, where does this leave him ? I can't see him being too popular amongst the players or management at the moment, let alone some of our fans with one brain cell. I mean what's he doing as I type, what will he be doing tonight ? Celebrating with the Torquay lads or commiserating with our boys ? The lad has been put in a very difficult position. Jose Mourinho once told one of his players who went out on loan 'Never forget that you are a Chelsea player'. Interesting words. Pity our club couldn't be as professional about it. Completely p**sed off with a pathetic situation that was completely avoidable.
|
|
|
Post by Exkeeper on Mar 12, 2011 18:29:55 GMT 1
His transfer fee is unlikely to be affected. If we don't offer him a new contract, he will leave for free.
|
|
|
Post by Bordershrew on Mar 12, 2011 18:35:49 GMT 1
Wouldn't we still of lost 3-0 without his goals?
An error yes but not that costly, other results went our way and we were soundly beaten by more than just Jake Robinson
I don't get the "clause" hysteria.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2011 18:36:13 GMT 1
This is worse than Paul Simpson's handling of James Constable's loan saga
|
|
|
Post by Worthingshrew on Mar 12, 2011 19:07:46 GMT 1
as someone else has said, we had nothing to gain and everythng to lose by allowing him to play - big cock up. Be very intersted to know what other players felt about it.
we're lucky that other teams didn't take too much advantage of it.
By the way, anyone know how many Robinson has scored on loan against Collins goals??
|
|
|
Post by Feedo Gnasher on Mar 12, 2011 19:11:23 GMT 1
as someone else has said, we had nothing to gain and everythng to lose by allowing him to play - big cock up. Be very intersted to know what other players felt about it. we're lucky that other teams didn't take too much advantage of it. By the way, anyone know how many Robinson has scored on loan against Collins goals?? Collins 4, Robinson 5 (Torquay website says 3 but I presume it hasn't updated yet)
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Mar 12, 2011 19:20:53 GMT 1
Why are we searching for someone to blame ?
Salop were beaten by the better team today - and would have been without Robinson.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Mar 12, 2011 19:34:02 GMT 1
I could have played today instead of Robinson Torquay would still have won easy I might have scored the pen too
I suppose it shouldn't have happened It would be like running a company and giving a rival all your customers details Someone does need a bollocking
|
|
|
Post by blueandamberatkins on Mar 12, 2011 20:49:13 GMT 1
The result was nothing to do with Robinson, it was the way we performed...or didn't you may argue.
|
|
|
Post by camdenshrew on Mar 13, 2011 5:28:22 GMT 1
Yes, we may have lost without him but we'll never know. But remember this was a humiliation which was self-inflicted. Not only did he score twice, he played well and Grandison got sent off trying to tackle him. Of course he was going to be fired up with a point to prove. Torquay were going to be a tough nut to crack anyway without us helping them.
|
|
|
Post by bertymax on Mar 13, 2011 7:14:59 GMT 1
WTF...It had everything to do with Robinson! Sure we were crap but as Camden states he scored twice and the only time we got close to him was when jermaine cut him down and got sent off.
Sure, we probably would of got beat anyway the way we played and you got to give Torquay respect for making us look as useless as we did but we certainly didnt help ourselves. To be quite honest, Robo had a point to prove, and G.T declaring he wasnt concerned whether he played or not would of only served to fire him up some more, as its basicaly saying, yr not good enough for us to worry about you. Its a total lack of respect.
After he scored his second i personally wanted him to get his hat trick, we deserved that final kick in the teeth for our incompetence and naivity.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2011 8:58:09 GMT 1
Are we as amateurish as Torquay who played him when they should not have? At least Turner checked with the Football league over his d day signings. As Torquay are already on a warning, it will probably cost them 3 points.
|
|
|
Post by bertymax on Mar 13, 2011 9:10:57 GMT 1
well letting him play yesterday cost us 3 points
|
|
|
Post by floreatsalopia1 on Mar 13, 2011 10:05:06 GMT 1
I said it before and I'll say it again. This was a big, big mistake. Nothing to gain from letting it happen and everything to lose. This must have turned us into the laughing stock of Division 2. Thankfully then we still have Port vale!
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Mar 13, 2011 12:09:34 GMT 1
It's an embarrassment but also a complete red herring.
We got tatered yesterday and it wasn't a one man show. We could have got a similar leathering against Bury. Why? Do we give up when things don't go our way? Against Bury the missed chances, against Torquay the sending off and decisions going against us.
I don't much care for a pointless inquest on the Robinson deal, on which, as wookeywombat points out, Torquay are surely still likely to lose points. I'm sure it won't happen again, so what else would it achieve?
I do care for the much more serious problem of why our team caves in so readily (twice in 4 games), why we're shipping goals so alarmingly and why we're incapable of beating promotion rivals.
There are serious problems and distracting ourselves from sorting them out by wringing our hands about an obvious cock up will only make things worse.
|
|
|
Post by onthetrain92 on Mar 13, 2011 12:25:18 GMT 1
Robinson with 9/10 rating in all the sunday papers, maybe if he didn't play we migth have got soemthing, it was him we were having problems with mostly. Grandison that frustratingly fouled him to get sent off. It may have been his pace and movement that was the difference between them and us especially once down to 10 men. Pace is a great assett if used correctly in a game, it creates space for other players that are very good if having a little extra time to perform. Without that space created it would have been a more even game perhaps?
|
|