Walton update 10:41 - Dec 13 with 5072 views | SomethingBlue | From best-connected Brighton journalist:
Doesn't sound great does it, he is excellent and would love him to stay. But I also think a few things are going to be uprooted this January whatever happens and we might just have to go with it. [Post edited 13 Dec 2021 10:41]
| |
| | |
Walton update on 10:43 - Dec 13 with 3913 views | Marshalls_Mullet | What will be will be. | |
| |
Walton update on 10:45 - Dec 13 with 3851 views | Keno | I wonder how different the money side would be if were were sitting in the top two or even play off places? | |
| |
Walton update on 10:46 - Dec 13 with 3823 views | Herbivore | I doubt they'd call him back if they don't have a buyer lined up so will depend on whether anyone from the Championship can afford him and come in for him. What will be will be I guess, he's a very good keeper at this level and with how dire Hladky's form has been we will need to sign a replacement for sure. | |
| |
Walton update on 10:49 - Dec 13 with 3780 views | PhilTWTD | What sort of fee would we be talking about? Wouldn't be hugely beyond the figures we've spent so far, would it? Could see us pushing the boat out for him in order to keep him here. Thinking about it, wages might be more of an issue, I would guess, in terms of FFP rules. Re the summer, I was told he was all set to go to a Championship club, deal had been all but set up before the end of last season.
This post has been edited by an administrator | | | |
Walton update on 10:49 - Dec 13 with 3743 views | hoppy | If they’re saying we can afford a permanent move, how much would he cost? | |
| |
Walton update on 10:50 - Dec 13 with 3708 views | Battersea_Blue | Can't blame Brighton for this, in fact we should have seen this coming when we did the loan deal as ITFC must have known he's out of contract at the end of the season. Brighton just want a fee in January so he doesn't go for free in the summer. He's done pretty well for us, so the obvious thing is for us to try and agree a fee with Brighton to buy him in January. | | | |
Walton update on 10:51 - Dec 13 with 3682 views | ElderGrizzly |
Walton update on 10:49 - Dec 13 by PhilTWTD | What sort of fee would we be talking about? Wouldn't be hugely beyond the figures we've spent so far, would it? Could see us pushing the boat out for him in order to keep him here. Thinking about it, wages might be more of an issue, I would guess, in terms of FFP rules. Re the summer, I was told he was all set to go to a Championship club, deal had been all but set up before the end of last season.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
I'd assumed it would be the wages that are the problem, not the fee? | | | |
Walton update on 10:51 - Dec 13 with 3655 views | Herbivore |
Walton update on 10:49 - Dec 13 by hoppy | If they’re saying we can afford a permanent move, how much would he cost? |
I suspect wages might be the issue. | |
| | Login to get fewer ads
Walton update on 10:54 - Dec 13 with 3585 views | clive_baker | Our season will be dead in the water by January, if it isn't already, so I don't suppose it matters. Maybe an opportunity to look to next season anyway and see if Hladky can demonstrate he's the keeper we thought we were signing. | |
| |
Walton update on 10:57 - Dec 13 with 3491 views | jayessess | The logic is a bit funky here though, isn't it? Brighton would've been in a reasonable bargaining position to sell him in the Summer, with a year left on his contract. Evidently they couldn't find a suitor at any price. We're now 6 months on and their position is worse. Walton's 6 months from a free transfer and a juicy signing on fee, so has no motivation to take any move they negotiate for him. I can't see how Brighton reckon they're suddenly going to be in a position to demand a permanent fee that we couldn't pay and that someone else will? [Post edited 13 Dec 2021 10:58]
| |
| |
Walton update on 10:59 - Dec 13 with 3444 views | Fixed_It | I hate being us. Good things never happen - or if they do, they are never as good as hoped... | |
| |
Walton update on 11:00 - Dec 13 with 3414 views | Marshalls_Mullet |
Walton update on 10:50 - Dec 13 by Battersea_Blue | Can't blame Brighton for this, in fact we should have seen this coming when we did the loan deal as ITFC must have known he's out of contract at the end of the season. Brighton just want a fee in January so he doesn't go for free in the summer. He's done pretty well for us, so the obvious thing is for us to try and agree a fee with Brighton to buy him in January. |
I suspect ITFC had little choice. Will have been a case of take it or leave it at the time. | |
| |
Walton update on 11:05 - Dec 13 with 3316 views | PhilTWTD |
Walton update on 10:51 - Dec 13 by ElderGrizzly | I'd assumed it would be the wages that are the problem, not the fee? |
I added that having thought about it, but would surprise me if they couldn't do it, particularly as there are clearly plans to add to the squad in January. | | | |
Walton update on 11:11 - Dec 13 with 3216 views | jayessess |
Walton update on 11:05 - Dec 13 by PhilTWTD | I added that having thought about it, but would surprise me if they couldn't do it, particularly as there are clearly plans to add to the squad in January. |
For me, the logic of the situation points towards them forcing our hand, more than anything else. You'd have to be pretty desperate to pay a fee for a goalkeeper who'll move on a free in the Summer anyway. Who's going to be more desperate than the team who've currently got him in goal? | |
| |
Walton update on 11:16 - Dec 13 with 3118 views | PhilTWTD |
Walton update on 11:11 - Dec 13 by jayessess | For me, the logic of the situation points towards them forcing our hand, more than anything else. You'd have to be pretty desperate to pay a fee for a goalkeeper who'll move on a free in the Summer anyway. Who's going to be more desperate than the team who've currently got him in goal? |
That tweet suggests he added a year to his contract but I can't see anything to confirm that. | | | |
Walton update on 11:16 - Dec 13 with 3116 views | ElderGrizzly |
Walton update on 11:05 - Dec 13 by PhilTWTD | I added that having thought about it, but would surprise me if they couldn't do it, particularly as there are clearly plans to add to the squad in January. |
We can of course just invest extra money into the club to ensure we don't break FFP wage protocols. I know they've said they didn't want to do it, but it is the only real option I can see to keep wages anywhere near 60% of income | | | |
Walton update on 11:18 - Dec 13 with 3081 views | Battersea_Blue |
Walton update on 11:00 - Dec 13 by Marshalls_Mullet | I suspect ITFC had little choice. Will have been a case of take it or leave it at the time. |
Absolutely, I'm sure we had little choice if we wanted him. My only point is that we'd have known the situation and made the choice, therefore no blame attached to Brighton for floating this. Ashton must have been fully aware this was going to happen. | | | |
Walton update on 11:18 - Dec 13 with 3080 views | clive_baker |
Walton update on 11:05 - Dec 13 by PhilTWTD | I added that having thought about it, but would surprise me if they couldn't do it, particularly as there are clearly plans to add to the squad in January. |
Perhaps nervous about FFP? If we're not going up, perhaps prudent to keep our powder dry and go balls deep in the summer. Guess to some extent it depends on how we do over the Christmas period games. The top 8 don't seem to be showing much sign of showing down though, so catching them will take some doing. Plymouth aside, none of them have lost any of their past 5 games. | |
| |
Walton update on 11:18 - Dec 13 with 3095 views | PhilTWTD |
Walton update on 11:16 - Dec 13 by ElderGrizzly | We can of course just invest extra money into the club to ensure we don't break FFP wage protocols. I know they've said they didn't want to do it, but it is the only real option I can see to keep wages anywhere near 60% of income |
Other than a bit of wheeling and dealing with the squad. Wouldn't entirely surprise me if the squad was reduced by one or two in January, not necessarily permanent deals but loans. Does seem bigger than they intended. Obviously the new manager's thoughts will come into that. | | | |
Walton update on 11:18 - Dec 13 with 3081 views | PrideOfTheEast |
Walton update on 11:16 - Dec 13 by ElderGrizzly | We can of course just invest extra money into the club to ensure we don't break FFP wage protocols. I know they've said they didn't want to do it, but it is the only real option I can see to keep wages anywhere near 60% of income |
Exactly. And is surely what they're going to have to do if we're spending in January. | | | |
Walton update on 11:20 - Dec 13 with 3031 views | iamipswich |
Walton update on 11:05 - Dec 13 by PhilTWTD | I added that having thought about it, but would surprise me if they couldn't do it, particularly as there are clearly plans to add to the squad in January. |
Phil do you know what sort of chunk of his wages we are already paying as part of the loan deal? | |
| |
Walton update on 11:25 - Dec 13 with 2946 views | portmanpensioner |
Walton update on 10:51 - Dec 13 by Herbivore | I suspect wages might be the issue. |
If that’s the case if we let a couple of the others out e.g. Fraser to Swansea perhaps we can free up enough to not go over the FFP limit | | | |
Walton update on 11:34 - Dec 13 with 2856 views | itfcjoe | Guess we just see where we are come January - if the next 4 games don't go well then probably worth just letting him go back and moving forwards | |
| |
Walton update on 11:38 - Dec 13 with 2776 views | Keno |
Walton update on 11:34 - Dec 13 by itfcjoe | Guess we just see where we are come January - if the next 4 games don't go well then probably worth just letting him go back and moving forwards |
and it is really where this season has been mucked up very badly | |
| |
| |