Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 9:31 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Agreed and I think we can all separate the "wish" stuff from those with a hint of reality. There is a difference between the Robbie Farah stuff from the Daryl Clark/Rob Burrow stuff.

The club appears to be very loyal to its players but it cannot stand still also. Things in life change and they do in RL - matters may have been correct at a point in time when they were posted but things have changed which no longer make them correct - that's reality. The poster - who ever that may be - genuinely accepted what they were told e.g. Burrow to Cas but matters have moved to say somebody is lying because circumstances have changed i.e. Aiton leaving is harsh I think?

True circumstances can change, the case of Burrow to Cas and Aiton leaving sounds possible.

However Leeds signing Brierley if Leigh didn't get promoted isn't. Especially when we apparently agreed at the last minute to let him stay at Leigh in 2016 on loan even though Leigh's promotion campaign was wobbling more than a fat lass on a treadmill and Sutcliffe was a doubt to be fit for the start of 2016....no logical reason for us to change yet apparently we did.

[Frosties.]

Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 9:49 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

Sorry must have misread all the times you said Brierley will definitely be a Leeds player in 2016 if Leigh don't get promoted.

Oh no I didn't.

Correct I did say that, which I did actually correct myself after the deal had been changed, however that doesn't mean I am wrong.

Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 9:54 pm  

Middleton_Loiner wrote:

That's because it's Wires Year

How very original.

Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 9:56 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

I thought that from what I've seen on the Wire board previously. Add to it his tweet a few days ago saying "Yorkshire bound for the weekend"......which would be a very strange thing to write if he still lived here. But I'm not "in the know" so feared being shot down.

I had no choice but to comment as I was amazed at the rubbish that was being posted. I expected the usual comments & wasn't disappointed

Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 10:03 pm  

After all Leighs puffy chest beating antics of ignoring salary caps and the like and dropping their academy for 2016 i doubt they would gladly let Brierly go, in fact now more than ever i think it would take a monumental effort of RB throwing his toys out the pram to get him in.

Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:23 pm  

A lot of the heat in these threads is caused by certain posters stating things with seemingly absolute certainty, despite being either third hand accounts of events or based on casual chats with people associated with the club. If you just toned down your language, and didn't react hysterically when questioned then there wouldn't be half the level of outrage.

The bottom line is that there are lots of deals looked at by all clubs, some come off, some don't. But none of them are finalised until contracts are signed. Before that literally anything can happen, so it's really stupid to talk about 'done deals' when the very definition of such a thing isn't met.

I'm happy with rumours, and the talk should be about should we sign Westerman, not whether we have or not.

Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:50 pm  

It would have been easier to say we are in negotiations with Westerman, that is a whole different statement to done deal.

Re: Joe Westerman : Wed Oct 21, 2015 7:11 am  

BrisbaneRhino wrote:

A lot of the heat in these threads is caused by certain posters stating things with seemingly absolute certainty, despite being either third hand accounts of events or based on casual chats with people associated with the club. If you just toned down your language, and didn't react hysterically when questioned then there wouldn't be half the level of outrage.

The bottom line is that there are lots of deals looked at by all clubs, some come off, some don't. But none of them are finalised until contracts are signed. Before that literally anything can happen, so it's really stupid to talk about 'done deals' when the very definition of such a thing isn't met.

I'm happy with rumours, and the talk should be about should we sign Westerman, not whether we have or not.

Spot on. Half the attraction of the board, is the rumour mill and subsequent discussions. Providing the subjects are never erroneously forced beyond speculation, long may it continue.

In fairness to some of those that are outraged, much of the discord has not been about what constitutes the truth but certain posters bagging the club on the basis of hearsay relating to alleged mismanagement of a scenario that was, at best, improbable.

Re: Joe Westerman : Wed Oct 21, 2015 8:05 am  

The Neutral Zone wrote:

After all Leighs puffy chest beating antics of ignoring salary caps and the like and dropping their academy for 2016 i doubt they would gladly let Brierly go, in fact now more than ever i think it would take a monumental effort of RB throwing his toys out the pram to get him in.

Which is amazing really.

Why, 'loyalties' aside, would you want to be pissing about in the Championship when the biggest club in SL wants you?

You would make things happen, make sacrifices (monetary or otherwise) in the short-term for long-term success.

Contracts are only worth the paper they are written on - everyone has a price.

Unless you like being a big fish in a little pond?

Re: Joe Westerman : Wed Oct 21, 2015 10:49 am  

The bigger question isn't whether frosties is right or wrong, but why leeds are going to such effort to bring in what will be a 25 year old half with no top flight experience.

Especially when we have Sutcliffe coming through and Lilley already knocking on the door.