Tommy Conway - Signs for 'Boro- Official

[Lrrr]

5 minutes ago, KegCity said:

He wants to leave. Seems pretty cut and dry to me. 

"Then he gave the indication he wants to move on, he doesn't want to re-sign and stay."

There’s a difference between not being committed and not signing a new deal, from what everyone’s seen of Tommy do people really believe he’s the type who wouldn’t give it his all? He’s very professional and he knows downing tools would be a poor indictment of him. Essentially all Tommy has said is he doesn’t want to play for City beyond the 24/25 season. 

[1960maaan]

From an article I read it implied he is not unhappy here, he wasn’t happy with the terms offered.

it becomes a case of who blinks first and City didn’t want to risk being caught short. We obviously won’t budge and TC looks like he has left it too late to back down.

Shame as he’s a good player, but I don’t think you can be held to ransom , or seen to back down.

i also don’t think we will see much from a move .

[Davefevs]

5 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

There’s a difference between not being committed and not signing a new deal, from what everyone’s seen of Tommy do people really believe he’s the type who wouldn’t give it his all? He’s very professional and he knows downing tools would be a poor indictment of him. Essentially all Tommy has said is he doesn’t want to play for City beyond the 24/25 season. 

And you know the character too.

[KegCity]

12 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

There’s a difference between not being committed and not signing a new deal, from what everyone’s seen of Tommy do people really believe he’s the type who wouldn’t give it his all? He’s very professional and he knows downing tools would be a poor indictment of him. Essentially all Tommy has said is he doesn’t want to play for City beyond the 24/25 season. 

He doesn't want to be here? I'm not being emotional because he's leaving just looking at it from a manager's point of view. Why would you want someone who no longer wants to be part of the team training or even playing with those who do?

I'm sure he would be professional and have a good run around and everything else, but if he doesn't buy into the goals of the squad and has decided he wants to leave why include him?

18 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

He can still be interested in playing too.  And it’s one side of the story.

He's not though is he? If he was he wouldn't have any intentions to move on.

[WorleRed89]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

It really isn’t.  It’s quite possible to see this as a bad decision (by who ever made it) because it’s a bad decision.  They make enough to give us opportunities to criticise them.

If as @ooRya says they have to draft him back in, what does that say.

(personally I think they’ll continue to banish him, if they don’t sell this window, I think they won’t want to go back on their decision)

I don't think its this deep. The club and Tommy both want the player to leave at this point, therefore he isn't involved with the first team because if he were it wouldn't show a true reflection of the squad. Why would someone who wants to leave be included in 1st team duties?

According to sources we've offered him a good deal, which he's decided not to sign for some reason, so best everyone moves on? If he doesn't leave this window I imagine after discussions he's reintegrated. 

[richwwtk]

2 minutes ago, KegCity said:

He doesn't want to be here? I'm not being emotional because he's leaving just looking at it from a manager's point of view. Why would you want someone who no longer wants to be part of the team training or even playing with those who do?

I'm sure he would be professional and have a good run around and everything else, but if he doesn't buy into the goals of the squad and has decided he wants to leave why include him?

He's not though is he? If he was he wouldn't have any intentions to move on.

But if he's not currently had any offers, then it does him no good at all to not be around the first team and playing.

He can make it clear the contract offer isn't good enough and if it doesn't improve he will move on next summer, but still be committed to the team for this season. A successful final season would see his earning potential and possible level of suitors skyrocket!

[Lrrr]

1 minute ago, KegCity said:

He doesn't want to be here? I'm not being emotional because he's leaving just looking at it from a manager's point of view. Why would you want someone who no longer wants to be part of the team training or even playing with those who do?

I'm sure he would be professional and have a good run around and everything else, but if he doesn't buy into the goals of the squad and has decided he wants to leave why include him?

He's not though is he? If he was he wouldn't have any intentions to move on.

Manning said Tommy has indicated he wants to leave..... because he won't sign a new contract, so again essentially Tommy has said he doesn't want to play for City beyond 24/25, Manning therefore says its better to move him on sooner rather than later. Now would Tommy take his move this summer if one came up.... yes like 99% of players. But that's not to say Tommy wouldn't be committed playing for City in 24/25 if he were still here after August. Its a difference between doesn't want to be here and won't sign a deal beyond his current one. 

[Major Isewater]

5 minutes ago, KegCity said:

Why would you want someone who no longer wants to be part of the team training or even playing with those who do?

Because he is being paid to play for the club. If he wants to be considered as a professional footballer then he would need to comport like one .

Also to interest potential suitors in his quality and professionalism. 
Once again I will add that I am not party to all the ins and outs of the situation. 

[KegCity]

4 minutes ago, richwwtk said:

But if he's not currently had any offers, then it does him no good at all to not be around the first team and playing.

He can make it clear the contract offer isn't good enough and if it doesn't improve he will move on next summer, but still be committed to the team for this season. A successful final season would see his earning potential and possible level of suitors skyrocket!

It's been quoted that he hasn't negotiated though, so doesn't appear to related to the terms of the contract.

 

5 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Manning said Tommy has indicated he wants to leave..... because he won't sign a new contract, so again essentially Tommy has said he doesn't want to play for City beyond 24/25, Manning therefore says its better to move him on sooner rather than later. Now would Tommy take his move this summer if one came up.... yes like 99% of players. But that's not to say Tommy wouldn't be committed playing for City in 24/25 if he were still here after August. Its a difference between doesn't want to be here and won't sign a deal beyond his current one. 

"Then he gave the indication he wants to move on, he doesn't want to re-sign and stay."

2 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

Because he is being paid to play for the club. If he wants to be considered as a professional footballer then he would need to comport like one .

Also to interest potential suitors in his quality and professionalism. 
Once again I will add that I am not party to all the ins and outs of the situation. 

So because he could be professional he should be in and around the squad? Liam's quote below makes sense to me:

"For me, I will always protect the group as we prepare to go into another relentlessly difficult season, we need people who are fully focused on us," he said.

The arguments to keep him in the squad are that the transfer fee would be higher (very valid) and that he will hopefully be professional and still put a shift in. For me, if a player has said they want to leave their heart isn't in it anymore and should be moved on. I'm sure he's a nice lad and wouldn't sit down in the centre circle and refuse to kick the ball if we played him but I'm not really interested in having players in the side who have told the manager they don't want to be here.

[Nogbad the Bad]

44 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Stop me if I’m wrong, but aren’t those sites just unreliable speculation and therefore should be disregarded

Just about every comment on this thread is 'unreliable speculation' including your comments, and indeed mine.

My speculation is that at 21 Conway is extremely reliant on good advice from older, more experienced, people around him, and imo he's not been getting it.

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, KegCity said:

It's been quoted that he hasn't negotiated though, so doesn't appear to related to the terms of the contract.

 

"Then he gave the indication he wants to move on, he doesn't want to re-sign and stay."

So because he could be professional he should be in and around the squad? Liam's quote below makes sense to me:

"For me, I will always protect the group as we prepare to go into another relentlessly difficult season, we need people who are fully focused on us," he said.

The arguments to keep him in the squad are that the transfer fee would be higher (very valid) and that he will hopefully be professional and still put a shift in. For me, if a player has said they want to leave their heart isn't in it anymore and should be moved on. I'm sure he's a nice lad and wouldn't sit down in the centre circle and refuse to kick the ball if we played him but I'm not really interested in having players in the side who have told the manager they don't want to be here.

Being facetious, what about all the other players win their final year of their contract?  Wells, Bajic, Naismith to name three.

I look forward to hearing Tommy’s side of it…I doubt we will though.

[Lrrr]

4 minutes ago, KegCity said:

"Then he gave the indication he wants to move on, he doesn't want to re-sign and stay."

There's your answer to why Manning says he wants to move on, Conways not putting a stipulation of demanding to move this summer

[KegCity]

Just now, Davefevs said:

Being facetious, what about all the other players win their final year of their contract?  Wells, Bajic, Naismith to name three.

I look forward to hearing Tommy’s side of it…I doubt we will though.

If they turn up to Manning's office and say they want to leave I would imagine they also wouldn't get picked.

It's not about contract length, it's about Conway deciding he doesn't want to play for Bristol City anymore. No hard feelings, but if he doesn't want to play then he shouldn't.

Just now, Lrrr said:

There's your answer to why Manning says he wants to move on, Conways not putting a stipulation of demanding to move this summer

But he has decided he doesn't want to play for Bristol City anymore. No problem, don't play then.

[Lrrr]

1 minute ago, KegCity said:

If they turn up to Manning's office and say they want to leave I would imagine they also wouldn't get picked.

The interpretation that Conway 'wants to leave' is because he won't sign a new deal, those other players probably haven't been offered new deals yet so for all Manning knows they plan on leaving next summer too, hardly any different.

It's not about contract length, it's about Conway deciding he doesn't want to play for Bristol City anymore. No hard feelings, but if he doesn't want to play then he shouldn't.

But he has decided he doesn't want to play for Bristol City anymore. No problem, don't play then.

Whose said Tommy wouldn't be fully committed to playing for City in the 24/25 season? Tommy has a contract until the end of 24/25 all he's decided is he'd like to move on after this season, nothing saying he's not fully prepared to play this season for us. 

.

[Silvio Dante]

4 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

Just about every comment on this thread is 'unreliable speculation' including your comments, and indeed mine.

My speculation is that at 21 Conway is extremely reliant on good advice from older, more experienced, people around him, and imo he's not been getting it.

Difference is Noggers, if a poster states continually that he doesn’t trust sites as they’re unreliable speculation then he shouldn’t use them to back up his argument.

And I agree to an extent - but with two caveats:

- Age doesn’t always mean wisdom

- If it does, then it should equally apply to employees of Bristol City as well as agents

To reiterate, nobody has an issue in selling a player in last year of contract. People do have an issue in circular firing squads.

There aren’t any winners here.

[WorleRed89]

I'm blown away by the amount of people that think Conway not signing a new deal does not indicate he doesn't want to be here.

 

He won't sign a new deal with Bristol City, he won't even negotiate by all accounts, negotiating would allow the club to protect their asset, big pay rise for this year and a release clause that gets the club a fee, but he wont negotiate. So based on that, no, he doesn't want to play for Bristol City... 

Not sure why people see this any differently.

[KegCity]

Just now, Lrrr said:

.

He's made the decision he doesn't want to play for us anymore. As said before, I'm sure he'd be professional and not take a dump in the food hall or anything but if his mind is made up, he doesn't buy into Manning's plans or the club's goals so shouldn't be in a squad with players who are committed and want to play for the club.

If he was happy to play for us this season, I doubt he'd tell the manager he wanted to leave.

[Ska Junkie]

12 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

Just about every comment on this thread is 'unreliable speculation' including your comments, and indeed mine.

My speculation is that at 21 Conway is extremely reliant on good advice from older, more experienced, people around him, and imo he's not been getting it.

Spot on Noggers!

[hinsleburg]

 

Will be interesting to see what happens if nobody blinks and Conway is still here after the deadline, I'd hope to see him reintegrated pretty much straightaway.

I think TC would realise that months not playing would hinder him and I'd like to think we wouldn't put the performance of the team at jeopardy due to stubbornness. Becomes more of a problem if our front line doesn't fire immediately and already creates an extra pressure on the two newbies plus Wells to perform immediately. 

Can only echo what others have said, I've had a couple of interactions with Tommy both of which have been really positive and he went above and beyond for my Son last year when he didn't need to. He probably can be a dick on a night out after a beer but find me a 21 year old that isn't and he's never once struck me as someone that would down tools.

[Lrrr]

4 minutes ago, KegCity said:

If he was happy to play for us this season, I doubt he'd tell the manager he wanted to leave

He just doesn't want to extend his contract beyond this season, that doesn't mean he's not happy to play for City this season until the end of his deal... jeez its not hard to understand. City have inferred that because he won't sign a deal now that he wants to leave. 

[BCFC31]

4 minutes ago, WorleRed89 said:

I'm blown away by the amount of people that think Conway not signing a new deal does not indicate he doesn't want to be here.

 

He won't sign a new deal with Bristol City, he won't even negotiate by all accounts, negotiating would allow the club to protect their asset, big pay rise for this year and a release clause that gets the club a fee, but he wont negotiate. So based on that, no, he doesn't want to play for Bristol City... 

Not sure why people see this any differently.

I agree, conway has said he doesn't want to play for bristol city anymore why should we waste any more time on him not sure why people have such a hard on for Conway he's bang average and to me seems like a petulant cocky little shit that's gone way above his station. Honestly I'm looking forward to him leaving he's now just an anwanted distraction for the club.

[Lrrr]

Just now, BCFC31 said:

I agree, conway has said he doesn't want to play for bristol city anymore why should we waste any more time on him not sure why people have such a hard on for Conway he's bang average and to me seems like a petulant cocky little shit that's gone way above his station. Honestly I'm looking forward to him leaving he's now just an anwanted distraction for the club.

He hasn't said that, all he's said is that he doesn't want to extend his deal beyond the 24/25 season, its not the same thing. 

[IAmNick]

3 minutes ago, KegCity said:

He's made the decision he doesn't want to play for us anymore. As said before, I'm sure he'd be professional and not take a dump in the food hall or anything but if his mind is made up, he doesn't buy into Manning's plans or the club's goals so shouldn't be in a squad with players who are committed and want to play for the club.

If he was happy to play for us this season, I doubt he'd tell the manager he wanted to leave.

I think he can still like the club, like Manning, like the players, like the goals etc. and want to do his best here and still want to leave.

Maybe he's just aware he's been at the club his whole life and wants to broaden his experience? Maybe he wants more money? Maybe he doesn't feel like he's going to get played in his best position, and that might affect his development?

None of that means he doesn't buy into the club or the plans, or would be less committed imo. He might just want a change for primarily positive reasons looking elsewhere, rather than overly negative ones about the club or anything.

Not saying you necessarily but I think a lot of people have an emotional reaction to "doesn't want to extend his contract" or "wants to leave" which is rooted in their own feelings for the club, when the reality is it's a job for the vast majority of players.

[Silvio Dante]

24 minutes ago, KegCity said:

He doesn't want to be here? I'm not being emotional because he's leaving just looking at it from a manager's point of view. Why would you want someone who no longer wants to be part of the team training or even playing with those who do?

I'm sure he would be professional and have a good run around and everything else, but if he doesn't buy into the goals of the squad and has decided he wants to leave why include him?

He's not though is he? If he was he wouldn't have any intentions to move on.

Just picking up here, and it’s a point raised previously - but if you’re sure he’d be professional and I’m also pretty sure everyone agrees Liam is of the same mind, then it’s actually in Liams interests to keep TC engaged on the following basis:

Liams shelf life here (good or bad) statistically lasts another season before he’s outstripping the average by some way. It’s one of the reasons for me he’s been reticent to play youth at prior clubs - he’s needed results either in a promotion push or relegation fight.

But, whatever the reasons, if he lasts until the end of 24/25 it’s his longest serving role anywhere. He’ll know, as with any manager, he’s only a poor run from the sack - and the longer you’re in a job (unless you’ve had loads of success) the truer that is.

So, we can acknowledge that he’s unlikely to be here next summer (Liam) based on odds/statistics. If he does well, great, but we know he jumps. If he does badly, not so great - but the chances of that are reduced by having TC on board. The club consider him our prime asset even if some fans may not (coloured by the situation IMO)

So, if as Liam you know that the scenario is likely you’ll be gone before the Conway scenario means you lose him, and in the meantime you have confidence he’s professional and committed (if not to the long term for the coming season which tallies with your likely statistical tenure), wouldn’t you want to use the player and keep him on board and have the ability for that tenure to end via a poaching and not a sacking?

I’m with Fevs in that he’s “sanctioned” the move he does take responsibility. But if you asked him, with the above considered, I’m pretty sure what he’d say - and that’s why I’m sure this wasn’t Liams “idea”.

[KegCity]

Just now, IAmNick said:

I think he can still like the club, like Manning, like the players, like the goals etc. and want to do his best here and still want to leave.

Maybe he's just aware he's been at the club his whole life and wants to broaden his experience? Maybe he wants more money? Maybe he doesn't feel like he's going to get played in his best position, and that might affect his development?

None of that means he doesn't buy into the club or the plans, or would be less committed imo. He might just want a change for primarily positive reasons looking elsewhere, rather than overly negative ones about the club or anything.

Not saying you necessarily but I think a lot of people have an emotional reaction to "doesn't want to extend his contract" or "wants to leave" which is rooted in their own feelings for the club, when the reality is it's a job for the vast majority of players.

Imo it does. Not trying to change your mind as we're only speculating but my view is that if a player has decided they want to move on, for whatever reason, then the best thing is for them to move on and not be around players who are happy at the club. I don't see how you can decide you want to leave and equally have the same buy-in as someone that wants to stay.

I don't think I'm being emotional (but if I was I still wouldn't), just that from a manager's point of view why would you want a player who's sat down with you and said they want to leave in your team?

[Lrrr]

Just now, KegCity said:

Imo it does. Not trying to change your mind as we're only speculating but my view is that if a player has decided they want to move on, for whatever reason, then the best thing is for them to move on and not be around players who are happy at the club. I don't see how you can decide you want to leave and equally have the same buy-in as someone that wants to stay.

I don't think I'm being emotional (but if I was I still wouldn't), just that from a manager's point of view why would you want a player who's sat down with you and said they want to leave in your team?

You're implying all other players are completely happy at the club? I'd wager a Tommy who wants to leave after 24/25 would still have been happier at the club then quite a few of others 

[KegCity]

3 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Just picking up here, and it’s a point raised previously - but if you’re sure he’d be professional and I’m also pretty sure everyone agrees Liam is of the same mind, then it’s actually in Liams interests to keep TC engaged on the following basis:

Liams shelf life here (good or bad) statistically lasts another season before he’s outstripping the average by some way. It’s one of the reasons for me he’s been reticent to play youth at prior clubs - he’s needed results either in a promotion push or relegation fight.

But, whatever the reasons, if he lasts until the end of 24/25 it’s his longest serving role anywhere. He’ll know, as with any manager, he’s only a poor run from the sack - and the longer you’re in a job (unless you’ve had loads of success) the truer that is.

So, we can acknowledge that he’s unlikely to be here next summer (Liam) based on odds/statistics. If he does well, great, but we know he jumps. If he does badly, not so great - but the chances of that are reduced by having TC on board. The club consider him our prime asset even if some fans may not (coloured by the situation IMO)

So, if as Liam you know that the scenario is likely you’ll be gone before the Conway scenario means you lose him, and in the meantime you have confidence he’s professional and committed (if not to the long term for the coming season which tallies with your likely statistical tenure), wouldn’t you want to use the player and keep him on board and have the ability for that tenure to end via a poaching and not a sacking?

I’m with Fevs in that he’s “sanctioned” the move he does take responsibility. But if you asked him, with the above considered, I’m pretty sure what he’d say - and that’s why I’m sure this wasn’t Liams “idea”.

My view is that a player who's decided they want to leave cannot be as committed as a player who wants to be at the club. I agree with Manning's quote below, not a problem if you don't. I take your point that Liam won't want to get sacked, I would be gobsmacked if Conway alone would be able to dictate that and that it wouldn't be down to wider team performances.

"For me, my energy, and the staff's energy, needs to go into the team that are going to be fighting for the club week in, week out.

 

1 minute ago, Lrrr said:

You're implying all other players are completely happy at the club? I'd wager a Tommy who wants to leave after 24/25 would still have been happier at the club then quite a few of others 

I'm not. I'm saying that if a player has openly said they want to leave, they probably want to leave.

[Silvio Dante]

1 minute ago, Lrrr said:

You're implying all other players are completely happy at the club? I'd wager a Tommy who wants to leave after 24/25 would still have been happier at the club then quite a few of others 

I’d wager he’s certainly happier than Bajic for one - French U21 keeper, moved to challenge Max and now (correctly IMV) Max isn’t being shifted. He certainly isn’t signing a new deal if he has any designs on a decent career.

[Robbored]

1 hour ago, Silvio Dante said:

Stop me if I’m wrong, but aren’t those sites just unreliable speculation and therefore should be disregarded - so even if there was interest stated on one of said platforms, then it wouldn’t be necessarily the truth. 
 

So, again working logically (and using your own logic), the sites not being reliable and having not stated interest means there must be interest in Tommy.

Youve not really thought any posts on this thread through have you…

 

You’ve missed my point Silvio……….

I take no interest in speculation and rumour from any unreliable source and why the OS is the only 100% reliable source. However - unreliable or otherwise there’s usually some kind of ‘hint’ that a club is ‘rumoured’ to be interested in TC but apparently there’s none………..

[Lrrr]

6 minutes ago, KegCity said:

I'm not. I'm saying that if a player has openly said they want to leave, they probably want to leave.

And you still miss the context of when Conway would be leaving by declining a new deal. Its then City who decided him being out this summer would be the best thing and have done almost a worse job of facilitating this then the Tory party did leading the country. 

[Ska Junkie]

Just now, Lrrr said:

And you still miss the context of when Conway would be leaving by declining a new deal. Its then City who decided him being out this summer would be the best thing and have done almost a worse job of facilitating this then the Tory party did leading the country. 

We can only sell if there's a buyer Lrrr, it appears there isn't one.

Wether the club has done wrong in their actions is down to opinion WTGR.

[Silvio Dante]

2 minutes ago, KegCity said:

My view is that a player who's decided they want to leave cannot be as committed as a player who wants to be at the club. I agree with Manning's quote below, not a problem if you don't. I take your point that Liam won't want to get sacked, I would be gobsmacked if Conway alone would be able to dictate that and that it wouldn't be down to wider team performances.

"For me, my energy, and the staff's energy, needs to go into the team that are going to be fighting for the club week in, week out.

 

I'm not. I'm saying that if a player has openly said they want to leave, they probably want to leave.

I kind of agree with the quote but…

The elephant in the room  is Dire Mebude. We had no intent of playing him (and hence he couldn’t be fighting week in, week out). Yet he still trained with the first team, we had no intent of keeping him so I’d argue Liam and team have set precedent and wasted energy on a player in the last six months who had a damn sight less of a chance to make an impact than Conway…

I’d also agree it’s down to wider team performances - but to reiterate, it’s not me and it’s not you that have seemingly priced Conway at a level which makes him a top striker at this level.

Thats the irony here - I think most of us are realistic about Tommys ability (there are a few - not including you from what I’ve seen - who now think he’s “shit”) - but the club seem to think he’s better. Fevs has intimated that we’ve asked for large amounts, and a striker worth that would indeed be a difference maker at this level!

 

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

We can only sell if there's a buyer Lrrr, it appears there isn't one.

Wether the club has done wrong in their actions is down to opinion WTGR.

Wanna by my £500k house for £5m?
 

 Shit, nobody wants to buy it!

Edited July 25 by Davefevs

[Robbored]

32 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Being facetious, what about all the other players win their final year of their contract?  Wells, Bajic, Naismith to name three.

I look forward to hearing Tommy’s side of it…I doubt we will though.

You’re right Dave, we won’t hear anything from TC

Your first ‘facetious’ point - how many of the three you refer to have been offered new contracts and turned them down?

[Silvio Dante]

9 minutes ago, Robbored said:

You’ve missed my point Silvio……….

I take no interest in speculation and rumour from any unreliable source and why the OS is the only 100% reliable source. However - unreliable or otherwise there’s usually some kind of ‘hint’ that a club is ‘rumoured’ to be interested in TC but apparently there’s none………..

Ahhh you were being inconsistent, incoherent and trolling. As you were

Just now, Davefevs said:

Wanna by my £500k house for £5m?

Stop stealing my analogies mate.

[KegCity]

Just now, Lrrr said:

And you still miss the context of when Conway would be leaving by declining a new deal. Its then City who decided him being out this summer would be the best thing and have done almost a worse job of facilitating this then the Tory party did leading the country. 

No I understand the context fine. My point is that he has sat down and told Manning he wants to leave, so it's best for him to leave ASAP. From a manager's point of view why would Manning want to include a player who doesn't want to be here?

For me it's that simple. Conway might be professional if he stays but it still doesn't change the fact that he no longer wants to here, even if he's not so desperate to leave that he'd go on strike, call one of the u12s a bastard or slap one of the kitchen staff. Manning will want a squad that are together, a player who has openly said he wants to move on, even if they might be willing to see out their contract won't have that togetherness. 

For the record, I think the points about the transfer fee or value on the pitch are good ones, I just don't think they're as important. Can see why some won't agree though.

[Davefevs]

Just now, Silvio Dante said:

Ahhh you were being inconsistent, incoherent and trolling. As you were

Stop stealing my analogies mate.

Don’t act like a purple brick!

[Ska Junkie]

Just now, Davefevs said:

Wanna by my £500k house for £5m?

In Downend? I'll stick to Barrs court thanks Dave.

Is that what we're asking for Tommy? 

[Lrrr]

2 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

We can only sell if there's a buyer Lrrr, it appears there isn't one.

Wether the club has done wrong in their actions is down to opinion WTGR.

Both points are down to City frankly

1 - Supply and demand, where there's not the demand you need to lower the price to find it, ie City have probably got a price thats too high to make clubs interested.... City's fault, no issue with starting high btw, but when there's clearly no interest hanging it out isn't helping. 

2 - The best thing to create interest in Tommy would have been having him front and centre, have him playing and scoring goals in pre-season to help generate interest. The fact he's hidden away and no other teams can see him now will actively put clubs off being interested in him.

Both are ways City have negatively impacted the ability to sell Tommy this summer. 

[Ska Junkie]

12 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Both points are down to City frankly

1 - Supply and demand, where there's not the demand you need to lower the price to find it, ie City have probably got a price thats too high to make clubs interested.... City's fault, no issue with starting high btw, but when there's clearly no interest hanging it out isn't helping. 

2 - The best thing to create interest in Tommy would have been having him front and centre, have him playing and scoring goals in pre-season to help generate interest. The fact he's hidden away and no other teams can see him now will actively put clubs off being interested in him.

Both are ways City have negatively impacted the ability to sell Tommy this summer. 

I agree on point 1 Lrrr but not point 2. I would rather see players that want to be here rather than those that want away. Just my opinion BTW. 

Far too many assumptions being made on either side of the argument to make a sound decision ( not aimed at you).

Nobody actually knows what's been said, what discussions have taken place and are guessing. Our Manager has taken what he deems as the best actions for BCFC and I'll back him for doing that. Is it right? I don't know as I don't know what's been discussed.

Has TC been badly advised? I've no idea but would guess that's possibly the case as discussed much earlier in this thread.

Edited July 25 by Ska Junkie

[Glen hump]

10 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

In Downend? I'll stick to Barrs court thanks Dave.

Is that what we're asking for Tommy? 

Not far off that I reckon’ cloud cuckoo land 

[Mr Popodopolous]

If come September 1st at midnight TC is still a City player what then? Just a general thought.

I'm not sure the top brass have thought this one through..I kind of hope they own the decision in the sense of stick to it and consequences good or bad that flow from it.

Otoh that may not be in the best interests of the club 

[Lrrr]

8 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

but not point 2. I would rather see players that want to be here rather than those that want away. Just my opinion BTW. 

Yeah that's fair, for me even just playing him the u21's he's visible to an extent where if other clubs scouts were interested in him as a box check for seeing him play live they could do so as that could be something that holds clubs back, a lot of the time a question will be have we seen him live? Now a lot will have, but how many would then have done reports on him? Last year probably more premier league clubs then Championship clubs. For a lot of the ones who could now buy him they'd have seen him as out of their market and quite likely not reported on him. 

[Davefevs]

21 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

In Downend? I'll stick to Barrs court thanks Dave.

Is that what we're asking for Tommy? 

Bromley Heath really, much higher

No, it’s not what we are asking for Tommy.  I’d understand it if that was the valuation they’d told other clubs.

7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

If come September 1st at midnight TC is still a City player what then? Just a general thought.

I'm not sure the top brass have thought this one through..I kind of hope they own the decision in the sense of stick to it and consequences good or bad that flow from it.

Otoh that may not be in the best interests of the club 

I remember a certain Mr Tinnion saying on the FBC pod that if Tommy doesn’t sign and runs his contract down they’ll get their value on the pitch.  Maybe he wasn’t on point with the decision made???

[Ska Junkie]

6 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

If come September 1st at midnight TC is still a City player what then? Just a general thought.

I'm not sure the top brass have thought this one through..I kind of hope they own the decision in the sense of stick to it and consequences good or bad that flow from it.

Otoh that may not be in the best interests of the club 

He can discuss a move to any club outside the English leagues in January and, if he's still here in September, he will be here in January. Compo from a non English club is just £300K iirc Mr P. That doesn't bode well for the club pal.

People saying 'it's not about money'. Why not sign a deal with a mutually agreed release clause then and play? Because he won't get a nice chunky signing on fee. Not about money? Garbage!

[Harry]

15 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Both points are down to City frankly

1 - Supply and demand, where there's not the demand you need to lower the price to find it, ie City have probably got a price thats too high to make clubs interested.... City's fault, no issue with starting high btw, but when there's clearly no interest hanging it out isn't helping. 

2 - The best thing to create interest in Tommy would have been having him front and centre, have him playing and scoring goals in pre-season to help generate interest. The fact he's hidden away and no other teams can see him now will actively put clubs off being interested in him.

Both are ways City have negatively impacted the ability to sell Tommy this summer. 

 

9 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

I agree on point 1 Lrrr but not point 2. I would rather see players that want to be here rather than those that want away. Just my opinion BTW. 

Far too many assumptions being made on either side of the argument to make a sound decision ( not aimed at you).

Nobody actually knows what's been said, what discussions have taken place and are guessing. Our Manager has taken what he deems as the best actions for BCFC and I'll back him for doing that. Is it right? I don't know as I don't know what's been discussed.

Has TC been badly advised? I've no idea but would guess that's possibly the case as discussed much earlier in this thread.

I have to agree with Lrrr here Ska. 
Point 2 is incredibly valid, for me. 
 

I’ve heard some figures on the rumour mill as to the valuation we hold for Tommy.

If we are wanting what I think we’re wanting, then this means we consider Tommy to be a key asset. 
Football is a finance driven world nowadays, whether we like it or not. 
If we have an expensive asset, and we want to maximise the value on that asset, the worst possible course of action is to freeze that asset out of the squad. 
Even if we don’t intend on starting him, he should at least be ‘visible’ in the squad. To the outside world, as soon as they see he’s been frozen out, then his value will drop. 
The club need to at least keep up the pretence that Tommy is still wanted. As soon as we publically stated that he’s not wanted then his valuation will have plummeted. 
and as I say, the ridiculous valuation we put on him already was a nonsense, so now that he’s frozen out, no one is ever gonna come anywhere near that valuation. 
 

The club have taken the worst possible stance on this. Not only freezing out their largest possible asset, but also publically stating the fact, for the whole of the football world to know. 
 

Best course of action would be to keep him in the squad and at least keep up the pretence that he’s a City player and that we still want him to stay. 

[Ska Junkie]

7 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Bromley Heath really, much higher

Lah dee bloody dah Dave. Bet you've got a butler n all.

I picture you like lord Ashfordleigh on heartbeat.

Edited July 25 by Ska Junkie

[Ska Junkie]

1 minute ago, Harry said:

 

I have to agree with Lrrr here Ska. 
Point 2 is incredibly valid, for me. 
 

I’ve heard some figures on the rumour mill as to the valuation we hold for Tommy.

If we are wanting what I think we’re wanting, then this means we consider Tommy to be a key asset. 
Football is a finance driven world nowadays, whether we like it or not. 
If we have an expensive asset, and we want to maximise the value on that asset, the worst possible course of action is to freeze that asset out of the squad. 
Even if we don’t intend on starting him, he should at least be ‘visible’ in the squad. To the outside world, as soon as they see he’s been frozen out, then his value will drop. 
The club need to at least keep up the pretence that Tommy is still wanted. As soon as we publically stated that he’s not wanted then his valuation will have plummeted. 
and as I say, the ridiculous valuation we put on him already was a nonsense, so now that he’s frozen out, no one is ever gonna come anywhere near that valuation. 
 

The club have taken the worst possible stance on this. Not only freezing out their largest possible asset, but also publically stating the fact, for the whole of the football world to know. 
 

Best course of action would be to keep him in the squad and at least keep up the pretence that he’s a City player and that we still want him to stay. 

No problem Harry. I don't agree but respect your view.

What is the fee we're asking for out of interest? Given he can pretty much go for 300 grand in January, anything over £2M is plain daft on the clubs part.

[Davefevs]

8 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

He can discuss a move to any club outside the English leagues in January and, if he's still here in September, he will be here in January. Compo from a non English club is just £300K iirc Mr P. That doesn't bode well for the club pal.

People saying 'it's not about money'. Why not sign a deal with a mutually agreed release clause then and play? Because he won't get a nice chunky signing on fee. Not about money? Garbage!

Because based on a fee City would like, they’d never got to a point of mutually agreeing one.  Tommy will want a low one, City would want a nigh one.

7 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Lah dee bloody dah Dave. Bet you've got a butler n all.

That’s why I say I live in downend, to play it down.  My butler has his own butler!

[Davefevs]

6 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

What is the fee we're asking for out of interest? Given he can pretty much go for 300 grand in January, anything over £2M is plain daft on the clubs part.

If it was only £2m, I’d not give a toss whether Tommy was put in the u8s!

And if it was £2m we’d have many clubs interested.

Edited July 25 by Davefevs

[Lrrr]

6 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

No problem Harry. I don't agree but respect your view.

What is the fee we're asking for out of interest? Given he can pretty much go for 300 grand in January, anything over £2M is plain daft on the clubs part.

If you're saying £2m is daft... 

[mozo]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

He can still be interested in playing too.  And it’s one side of the story.

I agree, and that's the point, I think.

Tommy was happy to play, see out his contract and leave for nowt. Or he was happy to leave now. Either way, he doesn't see his future here. Either way it was win win win for him.

The club have now taken one scenario away from him. So he can't just relax and wait to see if an offer comes in. He has to make plans in the here and now, and we all know he wants to play.

[Mr Popodopolous]

15 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

He can discuss a move to any club outside the English leagues in January and, if he's still here in September, he will be here in January. Compo from a non English club is just £300K iirc Mr P. That doesn't bode well for the club pal.

People saying 'it's not about money'. Why not sign a deal with a mutually agreed release clause then and play? Because he won't get a nice chunky signing on fee. Not about money? Garbage!

There are no real winning scenarios here IMO Ska unless a) A move for a fair price emerges or b) A new deal with mutually acceptable Release Clause materialises.

I'm struggling to see a positive way forward for anyone outside of those 2.

A new deal with a mutually agreeable release clause would be my favoured scenario.

[Harry]

26 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

No problem Harry. I don't agree but respect your view.

What is the fee we're asking for out of interest? Given he can pretty much go for 300 grand in January, anything over £2M is plain daft on the clubs part.

If you consider £2m to be plain daft, then we’re talking what you may describe as super daft, with bells on. 

[KegCity]

Just now, Harry said:

If you consider £2m to be plain daft, then we’re talking what you may describe as super daft, with bells on. 

Can we get a ballpark figure?

[Harry]

2 minutes ago, KegCity said:

Can we get a ballpark figure?

Yep. 
If £2m is plain daft, then we’re talking super daft with bells on. 

Edited July 25 by Harry

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 hour ago, KegCity said:

It's been quoted that he hasn't negotiated though, so doesn't appear to related to the terms of the contract.

 

"Then he gave the indication he wants to move on, he doesn't want to re-sign and stay."

So because he could be professional he should be in and around the squad? Liam's quote below makes sense to me:

"For me, I will always protect the group as we prepare to go into another relentlessly difficult season, we need people who are fully focused on us," he said.

The arguments to keep him in the squad are that the transfer fee would be higher (very valid) and that he will hopefully be professional and still put a shift in. For me, if a player has said they want to leave their heart isn't in it anymore and should be moved on. I'm sure he's a nice lad and wouldn't sit down in the centre circle and refuse to kick the ball if we played him but I'm not really interested in having players in the side who have told the manager they don't want to be here.

Was Liam Manning fully focused at Oxford when he became aware of our interest a long time before he was approached? 

[Merrick's Marvels]

20 minutes ago, KegCity said:

Can we get a ballpark figure?

Well say it was double 2M, would the "with bells on" bit have been necessary? I think not.

So it's at least 4M - but then don't forget it's also "daft", "super daft" in fact, before you even get to the "with bells on" bit.

So, what's at least 4M multiplied by "super daft" multiplied by "with bells on"?

Somewhere nearer 10M than 5M?

We are run by idiots. 

Edited July 25 by Merrick's Marvels

[Mr Popodopolous]

My ballpark guess figure wise based on this would be greater than the £5-8m mentioned earlier this summer.

Closer to £10m than £5m minimum.

Edited July 25 by Mr Popodopolous

[KegCity]

6 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Was Liam Manning fully focused at Oxford when he became aware of our interest a long time before he was approached? 

Doubt it mate hence why they didn't keep him around for another year.

[Ska Junkie]

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

My ballpark guess figure wise based on this would be greater than the £5-8m mentioned earlier this summer.

Closer to £10m than £5m minimum.

Bonkers then! 

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Bonkers then! 

I've literally at best as much knowledge as you, I just recall reading £5-8m in an article back in June.

[Silvio Dante]

My view is that we’ve been asking for £8m. I think that seems plausible if not in line with TCs actual value.

And working on that assumption (or even anything north of £5m) being correct, again bear in mind the following:

- Those who keep saying “release clause” have to bear in mind the clubs value is outside what we as fans probably think Tommy is worth, and crucially what the market thinks - so Tommy isn’t signing

- The value makes Tommy comfortably our best striker by value and makes the leaving him out of first team activities an act of self sabotage by that metric alone

- And again, bear in mind the correlation of value and wages. If Tommy is worth £5m/£8m/£10m (delete as appropriate) then if our contract isn’t in line with a player of that value, then why would he sign it?

Again, people can think what they want about Tommy. The story here is, and has always been, that if the club value him at £x everything gets driven from there.

 

[BobBobBobbin]

People are aware that both Alex Scott and Antoine Semenyo had told the club they wanted to leave way before they actually did, right?

And that their motivation in their final 6 months was as much about putting themselves in the shop window as it was professional pride and love of BCFC?

I'd argue that Tommy would be more motivated than ever this season to secure his dream move as a free transfer. If we screw getting money for him up, which feels quite likely, I hope he is reintegrated. 

as an aside, no issue with the not playing him in pre-season/until the window closes, but to a) kick him out of the training group and b) ban him from the changing room is overkill and unnecessary. You can do one without doing the other, quite easily. It's just vindictive.

[Ska Junkie]

13 minutes ago, BobBobBobbin said:

People are aware that both Alex Scott and Antoine Semenyo had told the club they wanted to leave way before they actually did, right?

And that their motivation in their final 6 months was as much about putting themselves in the shop window as it was professional pride and love of BCFC?

I'd argue that Tommy would be more motivated than ever this season to secure his dream move as a free transfer. If we screw getting money for him up, which feels quite likely, I hope he is reintegrated. 

as an aside, no issue with the not playing him in pre-season/until the window closes, but to a) kick him out of the training group and b) ban him from the changing room is overkill and unnecessary. You can do one without doing the other, quite easily. It's just vindictive.

You would imagine that the Manager made his decision after talks with Tommy.

I respect your opinion but I'm backing the Manager to make choices in the best interests of the football club rather than vindictiveness.

[BobBobBobbin]

12 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

You would imagine that the Manager made his decision after talks with Tommy.

I respect your opinion but I'm backing the Manager to make choices in the best interests of the football club rather than vindictiveness.

it's the equivalent of you putting your four week notice period in at work and being banned from using the canteen at lunch and being given a table in the corner of the on site creche!

[Ska Junkie]

4 minutes ago, BobBobBobbin said:

it's the equivalent of you putting your four week notice period in at work and being banned from using the canteen at lunch and being given a table in the corner of the on site creche!

Or gardening leave but still have use of the facilities.

[stortfordred]

I have been refreshing this thread from time to time. It’s now on Page 63; page 63 is very much like every one of the previous pages since he was banished. It’s soooooo boring. I’m going all Robbored and waiting until I read something on the official website cos basically this somewhat  speculation and Champ Manager style ‘he’s worth x’ ‘no he’s worth y’ repeated over and over is not helping the club, Tommy or anyone else. 

[Steve Watts]

1 hour ago, KegCity said:

Doubt it mate hence why they didn't keep him around for another year.

They also didn't demote him to work with the under 21's......

[Mr Popodopolous]

A little over 5 weeks to find a solution that works for everyone.

Transfer Deadline is 30th August 11pm this year.

Edited July 25 by Mr Popodopolous