Yep. Fans are very quick to tell me that money pots and deals etc done at other clubs “has nothing to do with Walsall FC whatsoever!”. If that is the case this was a monumental balls up for Walsall FC then. If it hadn’t been Drogheda and a completely separate club, we essentially triggered an extension clause and presumably paid at least some portion of wages last season for literally no reason whatsoever.
If the answer to that is “But they also own Drogheda, that was why they did it” I never want to hear the argument that the clubs “money pots” aren’t at least somewhat linked ever again.
Yeah, I don’t claim to know how it all works. I’m sure they have to separate finances somehow. They have a finite amount of money, though. They can choose where they spend that money.
There is nothing unusual in sending out on loan a player in the last year of his contract but it is highly unusual to extend the contract by one year to allow it to happen. You either don’t extend or do so by longer than the loan spell to ensure that nothing like this happens.
Sorry, but I don’t see anything sinister here. Trivela tried something, but it didn’t work. The only person who can be happy is the player, because he probably would never have reached such a high level in England, but that’s life.
I didn’t say sinister, I said incompetent. To be sinister, you have to be competent. Which looking at the facts of the matter is not subjective. From our point of view we needlessly renewed a player, loaned him out and presumably paid a portion of his wage for no reason, because at the end of the year we lost him anyway, and they were mistaken in thinking we/they would be due compensation if he chose to leave.
It’s not a competency issue. It’s not stupidity, either. In my view, the fact that the club tried something is not the issue. It didn’t work, but to mitigate this, more players should be in a similar position. Sooner or later, one of them will prove to be a valuable asset. Not all investments are earth-shattering events.
Of course it is! They thought a rule existed that doesn’t That’s literally what competency means.
How many times, it’s not that they “tried something”. Trying something doesn’t mean it was a good idea, and now with the benefit of hindsight, we know it wasn’t.
He wasn’t an investment, we could have let him go last summer. We weren’t signing an unknown. We had watched him be shit for months.
What rule? Anyway, regardless of how you see him, every player is an investment. Some will strengthen the team; others will be sold later. But many will come and go, not fitting into any category. At least DJT can be happy with how it ended.
Maybe it’s a cultural difference. It’s strange because the US leagues are tightly controlled, and I doubt you’d be allowed to own two or more NBA or NFL teams. Having a few teams in different leagues? I don’t think it’s common, but I suppose it exists. Trivela started strangely, as if they didn’t know how to swim before jumping into the water, but there must be reasons why.
Ok the DJT thing, the one rule everyone thinks they didn’t know about comes from one journalist who had an opinion not a fact !!
However, last year the club had the coaching staff including Richard Okelly saying that there might be a player in there but needs a run of games which he wouldn’t have got here.
At most clubs it would have meant goodbye DJT, however due to the tie with Drogheda we had the option to give him game time in Ireland, and see if we got a player worth keeping back.
At that point it was seen as we either have first option on a DJT who would be good enough for our squad (he didn’t achieve that level) or if he returned to England we could offer the same contract we would get compensation, if he wanted to stay in Ireland we could move money or Trivela ensure neither us or Drogheda lose out. The only circumstance that we wouldn’t get anything from this calculated gamble was if he moved abroad to another club (at the time possible the least likely option ) so a gamble with a 75% chance of reward. So I don’t see it as a terrible decision to give it a go.
The only query I have is who paid his wages whilst over there, and to be honest that’s important as Walsall fan if it’s come out our money pot (as most likely each club has its own budget/fund/investment pot). From Trivela point of view it’s less of an issue but more of an accounting exercise
Just my take tbh
And the point of an investment is to get a return, we neither got a return in respect of
anything he contributed on the pitch, nor any financial benefit. If we are actually down financially which seems highly likely, then that’s precious budget wasted for no logical reason other than Trivela thought they were going to get some compo - and were wrong as @el_nombre has said.
Yeah, I think that’s the bit that worries more than anything! F***ing hell is that the defence of this? Wow.
So?
I mean, that’s a nice number you have plucked out of thin air there, but that’s exactly what did happen Oh and we have probably paid some portion of his wages for a year for nothing.
It weren’t because he signed for an Irish team; I think I’ve seen a video in which he said that different clubs were interested, some of which could be in England. It was a small cost (that money was already in the system), but it could be a significant gain. Other players also changed ships in this transfer window, so it looks like Trivela is pretty rough when handling players.
I’m sorry, I really don’t understand your post. Yes it is because he signed for an Irish team.
I’ve no idea how you have calculated that or what “in the system” means. But if you think we have money to chuck at players for no return fair enough. I disagree and can’t be arsed to explain why again.
That’s literally what competency means.