Guest Dutchy Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Who was the last person to get an extended trial? Kerkar anybody? Or was it that Swede, who didn't sign. I don't think he had an extention. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Who was the last person to get an extended trial? Kerkar anybody? Or was it that Swede, who didn't sign. I don't think he had an extention. It would seem Kerker is still on trial.:smile: 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,405 Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Looks like he's not impressed that much to be given an instant offer, but neither has he completely put Ally off - his trial has been extended by a week... Matter of fact, from what is being written, he's impressed. What I think holds up any deal is Aberdeen's claim to receive money for him, since "they developed" him and he's still under 23. Would be somewhat strange, since he's been a freebie for a few months now. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Matter of fact, from what is being written, he's impressed. What I think holds up any deal is Aberdeen's claim to receive money for him, since "they developed" him and he's still under 23. Would be somewhat strange, since he's been a freebie for a few months now. I've read that as far as Aluko is concerned, he feels his "development" was completed at Birmingham before he signed for Aberdeen and went straight into their first team. After all, he did play in the majority of their SPL games after he signed and had a cracking season. It sounds like Aiberdeen are trying to take the mickey again. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 I've read that as far as Aluko is concerned, he feels his "development" was completed at Birmingham before he signed for Aberdeen and went straight into their first team. After all, he did play in the majority of their SPL games after he signed and had a cracking season. It sounds like Aiberdeen are trying to take the mickey again. Why are they trying to take the mickey? They are due money for his development up until he is 23. If we don't want to pay it then we should not sign him. I would want Rangers to get money for the players we release if a richer club signed them. There is of course no chance of getting money from Forfar or the likes. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
54andcounting 0 Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 You know Charlie Adam isn't doing that well at Liverpool, right? And frankly I wasn't that impressed with him at Blackpool either. Anyone, opinions of Charlie Adam aside, you've failed to convince me that Sone Aluko is a decent player. That said we don't need a 'decent SPL player' - we need something a bit better because we already have quite a lot of better than decent SPL players. If we had a lot of better than decent SPL players then they'de be off to the English 2nd division for a stepping stone into the VASTLY overpaid overly hyped EPL....what we have are true grit wannabe's... and that's it. Right now we are going for another one in Sone Aluka, the guy will set our league on fire....that's were we are right now. Bring it on. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Why are they trying to take the mickey? They are due money for his development up until he is 23. If we don't want to pay it then we should not sign him. I would want Rangers to get money for the players we release if a richer club signed them. There is of course no chance of getting money from Forfar or the likes. Maybe it's just me pete, but I think they've been extracting the michael and it doesn't surprise me at all because they need support from their fans. It's a bit ironic really that they (supposedly) put a high price-tag on Ricky Foster's head if we wanted to buy him after his loan deal, then tried to endeer him to their fans again after we said thanks, but no thanks. Now they want "development" compensation for a player they signed at 18/19, put straight into their first team and played regularly? That's a bit cheaky if you ask me and if the rules say Aberdeen are due some money, then the rules obviously aren't comprehensive enough. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Maybe it's just me pete, but I think they've been extracting the michael and it doesn't surprise me at all because they need support from their fans. It's a bit ironic really that they (supposedly) put a high price-tag on Ricky Foster's head if we wanted to buy him after his loan deal, then tried to endeer him to their fans again after we said thanks, but no thanks. Now they want "development" compensation for a player they signed at 18/19, put straight into their first team and played regularly? That's a bit cheaky if you ask me and if the rules say Aberdeen are due some money, then the rules obviously aren't comprehensive enough. I am afraid it is just you mate.(maybe a few others) I would say that between 18 and 23 is probably the most important time in someone's development. What is wrong with giving him 1st team football is that not part of someone's development? I am afraid you are seeing this one through royal blue glasses mate but no matter how it hurts us Aberdeen have a right to a fee and as I said if the ball was on the other foot I would be looking for money from them. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,405 Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Can't really see any great ground for argument here. Aberdeen, like many other Scottish clubs lacking money, used a young player "discarded" by Birmingham and put him straight into their first team, where he essentially played 3 fulls seasons in their first team (average 27 per season). What his agent and he argues is (not we, sic!) that while developement he sure made by gaining experience on the park, the "development" that is targetted by the compensation rule is for actually teaching him the knick-knacks of football in training and his youth. That was done by Birmingham, not Aberdeen. At least that is the tone which comes out of Aluko's camp. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Can't really see any great ground for argument here. Aberdeen, like many other Scottish clubs lacking money, used a young player "discarded" by Birmingham and put him straight into their first team, where he essentially played 3 fulls seasons in their first team (average 27 per season). What his agent and he argues is (not we, sic!) that while developement he sure made by gaining experience on the park, the "development" that is targetted by the compensation rule is for actually teaching him the knick-knacks of football in training and his youth. That was done by Birmingham, not Aberdeen. At least that is the tone which comes out of Aluko's camp. I guess I am arguing when I don't really know the rules or if there are other precedents to judge on. Not really a good base to argue from I agree. I would imagine that there are many other precedents to judge on and Rangers will have a good idea of what they are. I just hope it does not end in another long drawn out tribunal. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.