Jump to content

Is there an option to recall Dyer?


saintjay77
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't think some people quite get this...

 

We don't want Dyer in the team, he is too expensive. We only offered him a contract in the summer on the assumpion that we'd then be able to sell him, rather than have him leave on a free.

 

I think the fact that we loaned him out barely a month after signing the contract, then again in January shows this. It's not as if we have a 'logjam' of quality right wingers.

 

Skacel is Holmes' obvious replacement to anyone with half a brain. Oscar Gobern it is then...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't want Dyer in the team, he is too expensive. We only offered him a contract in the summer on the assumpion that we'd then be able to sell him, rather than have him leave on a free.

 

In which case we only needed to offer him the same amount he was on before. Which as that was an academy contract, can't have been very much at all.

 

If he's on decent money now then Lowe ballsed up big-time, but I really can't see that being the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In which case we only needed to offer him the same amount he was on before. Which as that was an academy contract, can't have been very much at all.

 

If he's on decent money now then Lowe ballsed up big-time, but I really can't see that being the case.

 

No, if we'd offered him on a contract with an accademy sized wage packet, he'd have fooked off somewhere else for 5 times that amount. I don't know what Dyer's wage is, but based on those rumours that Liverpool and Pompey were looking at him (probably b*llocks, but there would no doubt have been other interest) we had to pay him more than we could afford to stay.

 

The whole idea is that he wouldn't be on the wage bill. We loan him out until we can find someone to sell him to, which is exactly what's happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, if we'd offered him on a contract with an accademy sized wage packet, he'd have fooked off somewhere else for 5 times that amount. I don't know what Dyer's wage is, but based on those rumours that Liverpool and Pompey were looking at him (probably b*llocks, but there would no doubt have been other interest) we had to pay him more than we could afford to stay.

 

The whole idea is that he wouldn't be on the wage bill. We loan him out until we can find someone to sell him to, which is exactly what's happening.

 

Almost, but not quite what I understood. The rules said that we had to offer him a contract on at least what he'd been paid to get anything for him..which was more than academy wages. He was already a 'senior' player, so I very much doubt we'd have offered to pay him *more* as such. We didn't want him to accept the offer. He was out of favour here, both because of his thieving and because of his erratic form, but if we'd offered him no contract he'd have gone for nothing. (Pompey were supposedly interested at the time.) If we offered him a contract and he refused it, to go elsewhere on a free transfer, we'd have got compensation under FIFA rules because he was under 23.

 

So we offered him a contract to protect our financial position, I suspect (but am not ITK) hoping he'd go and we'd get cash. Then no one did actually want him (thanks yet again Redknapp) and our bluff was called.

 

Hence on contract but not wanted -- hence loaned out to save his wages.

 

Those who are now starting to rave about him seem to have forgotten

 

a) he's a git

b) he was rubbish for us in recent seasons, though admittedly after a very promising start

c) he was also rubbish on loan at sheffield united

 

He was as I say a promising youngster... looked good alongside Walcott.. and maybe will indeed yet turn out to be a good player, but football is littered with promising youngsters who've not made it for various reasons.

 

K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think some people quite get this...

 

We don't want Dyer in the team, he is too expensive. We only offered him a contract in the summer on the assumpion that we'd then be able to sell him, rather than have him leave on a free.

 

I think the fact that we loaned him out barely a month after signing the contract, then again in January shows this. It's not as if we have a 'logjam' of quality right wingers.

 

Skacel is Holmes' obvious replacement to anyone with half a brain. Oscar Gobern it is then...

 

I'm sorry mate. YOU don't want Dyer. The discredited Pootvliet didn't want Dyer.

 

Don't speak for the rest of us with better judgement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry mate. YOU don't want Dyer. The discredited Pootvliet didn't want Dyer.

 

Don't speak for the rest of us with better judgement.

 

By we, I was refering to Saints as a club, not the fans in particular. I would quite like Dyer in the side, as I'm sure would many others. However it is quite clear that the board don't want him, hence he has been loaned out twice this season, barely a month after signing a new contract.

 

We offered him the new contract to stop him leaving for free in the hope that we could sell him on for maybe £500k-£1m at a late date.

 

If you can think of a more plausible explanation, I would be interested to hear it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By we, I was refering to Saints as a club, not the fans in particular. I would quite like Dyer in the side, as I'm sure would many others. However it is quite clear that the board don't want him, hence he has been loaned out twice this season, barely a month after signing a new contract.

 

We offered him the new contract to stop him leaving for free in the hope that we could sell him on for maybe £500k-£1m at a late date.

 

If you can think of a more plausible explanation, I would be interested to hear it.

 

Thanks for the clarification. I hope Wotte has the vision to request he is brought back now that his form (and value) has improved, and Holmes is likely to be out for some time.

It's all down to Lowe again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think some people quite get this...

 

We don't want Dyer in the team, he is too expensive. We only offered him a contract in the summer on the assumpion that we'd then be able to sell him, rather than have him leave on a free.

 

I think the fact that we loaned him out barely a month after signing the contract, then again in January shows this. It's not as if we have a 'logjam' of quality right wingers.

 

Skacel is Holmes' obvious replacement to anyone with half a brain. Oscar Gobern it is then...

 

Anyone else would get infracted for this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We offered him the new contract to stop him leaving for free in the hope that we could sell him on for maybe £500k-£1m at a late date.

In actual fact, he refused to sign a contract that had been offered to him (way back in December 07/January 08 if I remember rightly) in the belief that he would be highly coveted and therefore could get a better deal elsewhere. It was only when it became clear nobody actually wanted to take a chance on him (and a chance that the compensation payout to SFC would be higher than they were willing to risk) that he eventually signed the contract.

 

Apart from that addition, I agree with what Ken Tone has written above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote from Swansea camp I think answers all the questions:

"We would like to keep Nathan permanently," Martinez admitted.

 

"But it's not down to us. Any deal depends on the parent club and the player's wishes.

 

"We spoke to Southampton when Nathan joined us on loan about a permanent deal, but we'll have to wait and see. At the moment he is definitely with us until the end of the season so there is no pressure to do anything in this window."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...