• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Geertruida

Quinninho said:
It is.

Le Bris was asked about this in a press conference a couple weeks ago and said that his appearances were being 'managed' because of the clause.

It might have been the pre - Villa presser, maybe the embargoed section... can't remember exactly.

I do remember it was Barnes asking the questions.
Click to expand...
Just watched that one, Phil Smith asked quite a lot of questions about him but a clause wasn’t mentioned.
Skimmed the normal presser for Barnes’s bit and couldn’t see anything there.

Maybe it was a different press conference but I’ve not seen it mentioned
 

Lucky1985 said:
It seems like such a missed opportunity that he’s not going to want to stay because we keep picking other players instead of him. He must feel like he’s so far down the pecking order, when really he is the next best player.
Click to expand...

Issue is that his cost is 18 mil, and wages are 80k pw. so they say.
Maravilla said:
Clearly not rated/trusted by Le Bris for some reason but does seem bizarre how he hasn't even played a single minute since the derby given how good he was that day.
Click to expand...
I smell a clause of must buy because of appearances.
 
Last edited:
Lucky1985 said:
It seems like such a missed opportunity that he’s not going to want to stay because we keep picking other players instead of him. He must feel like he’s so far down the pecking order, when really he is the next best player.
Click to expand...
He's not one of those players that if he plays a certain amount of games we have to sign him is he.?
 
richest said:
Massive wage is the issue
Click to expand...
80k if true is pretty much nowt these days, he really covers two or three with his versatility. Just a shame when he’s in form he’s clearly quality, I think the fact it’s been clear to him he’s not being signed for a while and then the club blocking his move to Liverpool hasn’t helped but he also hasn’t had a sustained run in the side. A bit like talbi he seems to get dropped after his better showings in reality I’d have played him way more this season ahead of the likes of onien and Hume especially in that hybrid mode and at points I think he’d have been a better choice at right back than Hume who’s found it hard to get back to his early season form.
 
Last edited:
richest said:
Issue is that his cost is 18 mil, and wages are 80k pw. so they say.

I smell a clause of must buy because of appearances.
Click to expand...
We can do better for that sort of money is the stark reality. Shame if it is clause related though. Don’t like it when clubs do that sort of thing.
 
connolly_31 said:
And I completely get your point too about him not being in future plans. But we’re in the here and now, so just play your best team. If there was a young’un he was keeping out the team we wanted to try for a few games, then absolutely don’t play him but that isn’t the case.

I fear its attitude related (pure guesswork from me) mainly based on the above.
Click to expand...
It depends. If there's a trigger that costs us additional money, or causes to buy him when he doesn't want to stay, then I absolutely understand why we wouldn't play him and waste time and money.
 
There has clearly been an attitude issue with him, potentially around the Liverpool transfer situation, i would have thought he would have featured a lot more for us after that but did he spit dummy out and have a disagreement around that time? I'm not sure but there must have been attitude/falling out issue down the line

I also wouldn't be surprised if there is a clause in loan to activate transfer after so many appearances which could be another reason why he isn't even making an appearance from the bench in games you would expect him and should do.
 
Jesus christ man,for me he for the most part as floated around almost in a coma.He did have a half decent game against the mags but I agree with RLB on this .We need another huge window ,mostly to add goals to the squad and as such wont be wasting money on non starters.
 
It’s very clear he is t getting the minutes that his abilities are deserving of looking at how well he has played when called upon. I just think it has to do with the clauses in his contract which might be a case of both player and club are happy to let him go. That said if he is under contract here then it would be best to use him while he is here.
 
Mowbray Boss Gilet said:
There has clearly been an attitude issue with him, potentially around the Liverpool transfer situation, i would have thought he would have featured a lot more for us after that but did he spit dummy out and have a disagreement around that time? I'm not sure but there must have been attitude/falling out issue down the line

I also wouldn't be surprised if there is a clause in loan to activate transfer after so many appearances which could be another reason why he isn't even making an appearance from the bench in games you would expect him and should do.
Click to expand...
In the last few pages the answer has been that’s it’s clearly a clause, clearly an attitude issue and then also others questioning his performances.

Maybe the reasons aren’t that clear after all
 
The unbothered said:
What more do you need to know about Hume?
Click to expand...

What connections and link ups he can play with newer players and how they fit into a team going forward.

Every training session and every game is an opportunity to improve as a team. If he isn't going to be here next season then I'd rather give game time to those who will be.

Especially when his form / attitude has arguably being inconsistent. I like him as a player and would loved to have signed him permanently...but if it's a no go, then I can see why he isn't playing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top