Mountain Bear 0 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Realism isn't negativity. Which of the three did we give a 4 year contract to, increasing each year till the last is more than 120% than the first? C'mon, you're being deliberately obtuse and you know it. DB's point was that just because a player has no resale value it doesn't make him a bad signing. The Sandaza signing can't be described as anything close to a success, but he was pretty decent for the Arabs and was the best player in a very good St Johnstone team which played a passing game through midfield, so it was perfectly reasonable to think he was a player who could have helped us progress through the leagues. A salary ratchet based on league progression is a perfectly sensible mechanism in our circumstances. I deliberately didn't listen to the recording, but even assuming he said his salary increased BY 120% after 4 years (as opposed being 120% of the original figure, which barely covers inflation over the period), then if the base salary is "a lot less" than £7k as mentioned earlier, then there is nothing wrong with the structure of the deal, just that the player hasn't delivered. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Moon 1,291 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Sometimes gers fans make me angry. Sandaza was hopeless fgs! Yes I expect full commitment to the jersey as any football fan expects for their team. Sandaza looked for a free ride and never had the club at heart. Why anyone thinks he got a raw deal makes me shake my head in disbelief. He was a disaster While I would agree that he didn't give us anything, I wouldn't agree that he didn't try. What he did or didn't do on the park has got nothing to do with the morality of prank phone calls that have a distressing impact on peoples' lives. You are not the only one who gets angry. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GovanAllan 0 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Are we still arguing over this muppet, good riddance ya plank don't let the door smack you on the arse. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter 0 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 C'mon, you're being deliberately obtuse and you know it. DB's point was that just because a player has no resale value it doesn't make him a bad signing. The Sandaza signing can't be described as anything close to a success, but he was pretty decent for the Arabs and was the best player in a very good St Johnstone team which played a passing game through midfield, so it was perfectly reasonable to think he was a player who could have helped us progress through the leagues. A salary ratchet based on league progression is a perfectly sensible mechanism in our circumstances. I deliberately didn't listen to the recording, but even assuming he said his salary increased BY 120% after 4 years (as opposed being 120% of the original figure, which barely covers inflation over the period), then if the base salary is "a lot less" than £7k as mentioned earlier, then there is nothing wrong with the structure of the deal, just that the player hasn't delivered. More sensible posts from you please lad. The negative nancies have us cornered! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,744 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Realism isn't negativity. That is probably as new a definition of the word as "sectarianism" has seen in modern day Scotland. Obviously, Sandaza was/is 28 when we signed him up, so who says he hasn't got a sell-on value? Who says that he won't score 20odd next season? Your crystal ball? The same that told you McCulloch would score 20+? Anyway, as he's a sitting duck now, all those who didn't like his signing in the first place can sling mud at him to their heart's content. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountain Bear 0 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 More sensible posts from you please lad. The negative nancies have us cornered! Wilco. I'm all for a healthy dose of skepticism, but you can have too much of a good thing... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gers4Life 0 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 If you step out of line in your place of work and you break the rules and its serious enough to warrant suspension pending an investigation and your employers deem it a serious enough to dismiss you then you only have yourself to blame! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 C'mon, you're being deliberately obtuse and you know it. DB's point was that just because a player has no resale value it doesn't make him a bad signing. First negative now obtuse you must be living in a parallel universe. Signing overrated and overpaid journeymen who can't be arsed puling a leg brought us to brink of oblivion yet plenty seem happy to travel down that road again. The Sandaza signing can't be described as anything close to a success, but he was pretty decent for the Arabs and was the best player in a very good St Johnstone team which played a passing game through midfield, so it was perfectly reasonable to think he was a player who could have helped us progress through the leagues. So not the type of player to play alone up front for the hoof it up the park as hard as you can mob? A salary ratchet based on league progression is a perfectly sensible mechanism in our circumstances. I deliberately didn't listen to the recording, but even assuming he said his salary increased BY 120% after 4 years (as opposed being 120% of the original figure, which barely covers inflation over the period), then if the base salary is "a lot less" than £7k as mentioned earlier, then there is nothing wrong with the structure of the deal, just that the player hasn't delivered. Nobody mentioned league progression just time progression, you think it will be worth throwing £10k a week at him even if we're not in the top tier? £4.5k year 1 £10k year 4 you do the math. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UCF2008 0 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Nobody mentioned league progression just time progression, you think it will be worth throwing £10k a week at him even if we're not in the top tier? £4.5k year 1 £10k year 4 you do the math. You're not seriously suggesting we won't be back in the top flight by year 4 are you? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 You're not seriously suggesting we won't be back in the top flight by year 4 are you? Can you guarantee it? There's only a finite amount of money available and if today's crowd is indicative of where we're heading attendance wise (and let's face it it's hardly a one off) then how long before the share issue proceeds are burned up then what for a club without full business banking facilities? Ever decreasing circles and all that. Interesting times ahead. 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.