Re: Rocky : Thu Jul 25, 2019 7:50 am  

Good post fc , personally don’t think players , club officials , players family members should come on here to express opinions , IMO this is an extension of the pub or terrace and is all about gossip , opinion rumours .

If they do come on and make it obvious who they are then it changes the very purpose of the forum . Am sure that it’s galling to be criticised by the fans if you or yours are in the firing line, but provided it’s not illegal slanderous etc so what. Personally think all this fuss over Hampshire is pretty baffling, big issue is not getting relegated - in fact that’s the only issue the club etc should be worrying about .

Re: Rocky : Thu Jul 25, 2019 8:22 am  

Daddycool wrote:

I didn’t throw Ryan under a bus. I explained the truth. He had an offer in writing with a deadline date on it. And neither he nor his agent came back with anything? Should I have chased him before the deadline?

If you really wanted him to stay DC then yeah or followed up after the deadline passed, I imagine if it was Dave/Bill etc you would have chased them up?

It sounds like more could been done to tie down a young, versatile player who has played every game this year.

It is just a little worrying as a fan to see that we are potentially going to lose a player like Rocky and then apparently sign older players like Atkins, Westerman and recently linked with Ferres.

I am not meaning to come across as a critic, you saved this club and I trust you have the club's best interests at heart. I also appreciate and think it's great that you come on here from time to time and put the record straight.

Re: Rocky : Thu Jul 25, 2019 8:31 am  

RWB wrote:

If you really wanted him to stay DC then yeah or followed up after the deadline passed, I imagine if it was Dave/Bill etc you would have chased them up?

It sounds like more could been done to tie down a young, versatile player who has played every game this year.

It is just a little worrying as a fan to see that we are potentially going to lose a player like Rocky and then apparently sign older players like Atkins, Westerman and recently linked with Ferres.

I am not meaning to come across as a critic, you saved this club and I trust you have the club's best interests at heart. I also appreciate and think it's great that you come on here from time to time and put the record straight.

Well why hasn't Hampshire even responded ? 1 would assume he'd been trying to get more elsewhere which is fair game but what are trinity meant to do without even a response. You'd have thought Wakefield would be the perfect fit, club he supported , playing his best / most consistent rugby , good long deal on the table but didn't even have the dignity or integrity to give a response for over 2 months. If I was MC I'd be a little frustrated and bewildered.

Re: Rocky : Thu Jul 25, 2019 8:41 am  

RWB wrote:

It is just a little worrying as a fan to see that we are potentially going to lose a player like Rocky and then apparently sign older players like Atkins, Westerman and recently linked with Ferres.

.

This is so typical of that type of post that escalates and results in MC having to come on. I'll save him the job this time. We've "apparently" signed Alex Walker to replace Hampshire.

Re: Rocky : Thu Jul 25, 2019 9:03 am  

Wollo-Wollo-Wollo-Wayoo wrote:

This is so typical of that type of post that escalates and results in MC having to come on. I'll save him the job this time. We've "apparently" signed Alex Walker to replace Hampshire.

I'm well aware of that.. what has that got to do with my post? Would still rather have retained a known quantity who can/has covered halfback, hooker and the wing.

Do you not find it slightly worrying that we are linked with these older players who's best years are most likely behind them?

Re: Rocky : Thu Jul 25, 2019 9:05 am  

It often seems that these things would play out much more amicably if agents weren't in the middle, with the sole interest of leveraging as much money as they can possibly squeeze out of the club; they may claim they are acting in the players best interest, and some may well be, but when their fee is directly impacted by the salary the player gets, it's impossible to believe they are selfless advocates for their client. I have a similar situation with recruitment consultants - when I'm recruiting to a senior role, it's almost impossible now to do it without using one, and they can often sour the process of on-boarding someone by making unreasonable salary demands, or packaging up someone's pay, car allowance, bonus etc, to sound like salary, to get me to up my initial offer - because that's what their fee is based on.

One can't help but wonder if this situation - and most others - would be done and dusted without any conflict, if Chairman and player could sit down and thrash it out like grown-ups, without third party, vested interests being involved.

Re: Rocky : Thu Jul 25, 2019 9:13 am  

Towns88 wrote:

Well why hasn't Hampshire even responded ? 1 would assume he'd been trying to get more elsewhere which is fair game but what are trinity meant to do without even a response. You'd have thought Wakefield would be the perfect fit, club he supported , playing his best / most consistent rugby , good long deal on the table but didn't even have the dignity or integrity to give a response for over 2 months. If I was MC I'd be a little frustrated and bewildered.

Does he need to respond? If an offer has a lapse date and that has passed then it is gone. From there either party could have tried to begin negotiations - it doesn't sound like that has happened. It just seems bizarre that there hadn't been a follow up conversation considering that he will have been in training most days etc. Particularly before trying to do the swap deal with Hudds.

Even if the club weren't going to offer an improved deal, surely we'd want some feedback on why players aren't signing a deal that has been offered.

Re: Rocky : Thu Jul 25, 2019 9:15 am  

bren2k wrote:

It often seems that these things would play out much more amicably if agents weren't in the middle, with the sole interest of leveraging as much money as they can possibly squeeze out of the club; they may claim they are acting in the players best interest, and some may well be, but when their fee is directly impacted by the salary the player gets, it's impossible to believe they are selfless advocates for their client. I have a similar situation with recruitment consultants - when I'm recruiting to a senior role, it's almost impossible now to do it without using one, and they can often sour the process of on-boarding someone by making unreasonable salary demands, or packaging up someone's pay, car allowance, bonus etc, to sound like salary, to get me to up my initial offer - because that's what their fee is based on.

One can't help but wonder if this situation - and most others - would be done and dusted without any conflict, if Chairman and player could sit down and thrash it out like grown-ups, without third party, vested interests being involved.

I agree, it must be much easier to get deals done this way.

However its a short career really, I understand that players want/need the best deals possible. Without an agent that knows what other players are earning elsewhere etc it would be hard for a player to truly know their worth.

Re: Rocky : Thu Jul 25, 2019 9:18 am  

RWB wrote:

I agree, it must be much easier to get deals done this way.

However its a short career really, I understand that players want/need the best deals possible. Without an agent that knows what other players are earning elsewhere etc it would be hard for a player to truly know their worth.

Indeed - maybe if there was a proper players union, rather than people like John Wilkin tinkering round the edges, they could have played that role?

[PopTart]

Re: Rocky : Thu Jul 25, 2019 9:21 am  

RWB wrote:

I agree, it must be much easier to get deals done this way.

However its a short career really, I understand that players want/need the best deals possible. Without an agent that knows what other players are earning elsewhere etc it would be hard for a player to truly know their worth.

Indeed. I don't like how some agents operate but without them the power just shifts to the employer and players 'could' be mistreated. It's just an extension of the union principle. Good in many ways, bad when they are not acting for you.