Championship season 2025/26

[Saint Garrett]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

I think it's more to do with compensation for rvn being stuck in this seasons accounts. 

Exactly this. Shows the mess theyre in tbh that they're having to wait to sack him.

[Midfield_General]

2 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

I think Rohl was our first choice but the chairman made it difficult and we wanted things sorted early to capitalise on our early relegation. If Leicester do get him it will be really interesting to see how they get on. I haven't heard anything about points deductions as yet. 

Exactly this. Rohl is under contract and Chansiri is demanding £5m to release him from it from any interested club. We didn’t want him enough to pay that so looked elsewhere. Leicester are financially screwed so there’s no way they’re paying £5m to pay to get a manager out of his contract - they’ll go for a free agent.

The exception being if the situation at Wednesday, where they haven’t paid their staff on time for a few months now, triggers a legal situation whereby the players and management team’s contracts become void if it happens too many times, which enables them all to walk for free, which is possible. 

Edited Friday at 16:04 by Midfield_General

[BarberSaint]

4 hours ago, goodymatt said:

The media had Rohl as our first choice for some time and reaffirmed that post Juric sacking. He clearly ‘was’ our first choice. I agree that it is possible that when Still became available, we felt we had to go for it and it could have completely changed our direction. News reports suggested that we stepped away from Rohl due to high compensation fee, I doubt we envisaged he’d become available for nothing? So it does beg the question, who actually was our preferred target this summer. For what it’s worth I like the Still appointment, it’s just an observation really that Leicester seem to land on their feet and have beaten us to a few targets in the past, Maresca and Maddison being the big ones.

 

 

Or you just  believe stuff.

 

[hypochondriac]

42 minutes ago, BarberSaint said:

 

 

Or you just  believe stuff.

 

Seems like an odd thing to make up. We definitely talked to him extensively so were clearly interested in him. The reported amount from Chasiri appears to be correct and so we obviously made the right decision. Has that compensation not been there, does anyone doubt that we wouldn't have done our best to make him manager? 

[BarberSaint]

12 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Seems like an odd thing to make up. We definitely talked to him extensively so were clearly interested in him. The reported amount from Chasiri appears to be correct and so we obviously made the right decision. Has that compensation not been there, does anyone doubt that we wouldn't have done our best to make him manager? 

Well as you know there's a lot of hot air out there.  A lot of speculation which is pointless.  If there has been so much interest in him surely one team must be able to afford his 'release' clause and would be willing to pay it. Everton paid us for Koeman, so they must have wanted him. 

 

For the early part of last season it would be quite obvious to state that a manager whose team was doing well would be the matter of interest.  Then you just bandy names around until e.g. Rosenior signs a new contract then you go on.

 

Gossip makes its own news.

[hypochondriac]

14 minutes ago, BarberSaint said:

Well as you know there's a lot of hot air out there.  A lot of speculation which is pointless.  If there has been so much interest in him surely one team must be able to afford his 'release' clause and would be willing to pay it. Everton paid us for Koeman, so they must have wanted him. 

 

For the early part of last season it would be quite obvious to state that a manager whose team was doing well would be the matter of interest.  Then you just bandy names around until e.g. Rosenior signs a new contract then you go on.

 

Gossip makes its own news.

There isn't prem interest it's championship and European teams and very few if any of them would consider that a sensible use of limited funds. 

[Doctoroncall]

14 hours ago, Midfield_General said:

Exactly this. Rohl is under contract and Chansiri is demanding £5m to release him from it from any interested club. We didn’t want him enough to pay that so looked elsewhere. Leicester are financially screwed so there’s no way they’re paying £5m to pay to get a manager out of his contract - they’ll go for a free agent.

The exception being if the situation at Wednesday, where they haven’t paid their staff on time for a few months now, triggers a legal situation whereby the players and management team’s contracts become void if it happens too many times, which enables them all to walk for free, which is possible. 

It’s happened twice which is enough for players and staff to start legal proceedings, however, I can see the players and staff don’t want to force the issue as it’s not the best way to leave a club to go elsewhere. 
 

Also Rohl was certainly of interest, whether it was the compensation and/or Still’s availability to become first choice is difficult to say. 

Edited Saturday at 06:08 by Doctoroncall
Add

[skintsaint]

[Football Special]

On 28/06/2025 at 07:01, Doctoroncall said:

It’s happened twice which is enough for players and staff to start legal proceedings, however, I can see the players and staff don’t want to force the issue as it’s not the best way to leave a club to go elsewhere. 
 

Also Rohl was certainly of interest, whether it was the compensation and/or Still’s availability to become first choice is difficult to say. 

I think the non-payment of staff is perfect for Leicester who will now pick up Rohl without having to pay compensation 

[sockeye]

19 minutes ago, skintsaint said:

Am I correct in saying that players will be able to walk away from the club now? Combined with their transfer embargo, dire times lie ahead for them.

[CSA96]

I wonder how Shea Charles/Saints have been implicated by that, and whether they've met their obligations to pay whatever % of his wages was agreed in the loan deal, or whether Saints have been making up the shortfalls for Charles if he has been left high and dry in part by SWFC

Edited 15 hours ago by CSA96

[Chez]

4 minutes ago, CSA96 said:

I wonder how Shea Charles/Saints have been implicated by that, and whether they've met their obligations to pay whatever % of his wages was agreed in the loan deal, or whether Saints have been making up the shortfalls for Charles if he has been left high and dry in part by SWFC

Saints pay Charles his wages directly - so he wont have been impacted at all. SWFC pay us a fee equivalent to his wages. Not sure how/when that is paid, but potentially there will be a debt. As we know from our own history, the other football clubs get paid first, the other non football debts get settled afterwards. 

[Chez]

28 minutes ago, sockeye said:

Am I correct in saying that players will be able to walk away from the club now? Combined with their transfer embargo, dire times lie ahead for them.

Not paying them is a breach of contract, but I suspect the players others would want, and with value, Djeidi Gassama, for example, will be paid first and so probably won't be available on a free. 

[Matthew Le God]

4 hours ago, CSA96 said:

I wonder how Shea Charles/Saints have been implicated by that, and whether they've met their obligations to pay whatever % of his wages was agreed in the loan deal, or whether Saints have been making up the shortfalls for Charles if he has been left high and dry in part by SWFC

It wouldn't impact Charles financially. His wages are paid by his employer (Saints) not the loan club. The loan club pays the parent club a % of the value of the wages, they don't pay the player himself.

[Football Special]

I know it's nonsense but looks like Birmingham fans are full of confidence 

[skintsaint]

2 hours ago, Football Special said:

I know it's nonsense but looks like Birmingham fans are full of confidence 

Their striker who played for England U21s that they spent big dosh on looked a bit out of place, I know he scored a lot in League one but will be interesting to see how he does this season.

Edited 4 hours ago by skintsaint

[CSA96]

1 hour ago, skintsaint said:

Their striker who played U21s that they spent big dosh on looked a bit out of place for the U21s, I know he scored a lot in League one but will be interesting to see how he does this season.

He only scored 15 in League One, to be fair. He stacked up a bunch of penalties on top, fair enough because Rickie Lambert benefitted from that too, but Rickie also scored far more often from open play. All the cash for 15 open play goals in League One doesn't feel like an amazing return... even though they got the job done last season

[Saint_clark]

I keep forgetting that Kuryu Matsuki is a part of the squad. Complete unknown quantity to me but clearly deemed good enough.