Re: Gaskell to Wire? : Mon May 11, 2015 4:26 pm  

Bully_Boxer wrote:

Gaskell set to join Wire in 2016 according to Dave Parker in League Weekly! Perhaps not a great surprise given how well he is playing but if we did get promoted I'd like to think we might have kept hold of him.

Would imagine its if we dont get promoted. We have him under contract for next year so only way he'd be going is with our consent unless hes got a SL get out clause. Ateotd he too good to play in Championship and I wouldnt begrudge him a move next year if we're still down here.

Re: Gaskell to Wire? : Mon May 11, 2015 5:02 pm  

The problem is that we have no idea how these contracts have been written up. There may be a number of players with it written that they can leave for all we know. What would annoy me though is that everybody says he is too good for the championship - which is true now.
But when he was at Salford and not being picked he was classed as a fringe player who was struggling to make a name for himself. All of a sudden looking great against the part-timers he is world class. If I were to find out that some of our players (on 2 Yr contract ) have signed with others so soon I would not be impressed. The club needs to be very careful how it deals with speculation like this as if they say it is not true and it turns out someone has already signed the fans would be furious.

It was a tricky situation for the club to get good players to stay with us this year but we can't afford to be held over a barrel by their agents.
Fingers crossed it is all speculation - even the Sammut one.

Re: Gaskell to Wire? : Mon May 11, 2015 8:35 pm  

dddooommm wrote:

Like somebody mentioned earlier, if we don't go straight back up I could see Gaskell and some of our other top players looking at gaining a place in a SL squad. Thankfully he's signed up for another year so if Wire want him they'll have to pay for it.

Or, at the very least, ask really nicely.

Re: Gaskell to Wire? : Mon May 11, 2015 9:47 pm  

Is it more the case that the thinking should be, that when we fulfil our ambition of returning to the top flight this year. We want to keep our best players, in this case Mr Gaskell. Does it make sense that we decide to release quality players? It should be in the players minds through this competition that if they do not perform to there maximum, its quite possible that we will bring in the quality that is required. Removing the impact of being a yo yo club.

Players can make dreadful mistakes by leaving clubs and find that they are left in a vacuum of their own making i.e. Sammutt and Carvell.

Re: Gaskell to Wire? : Mon May 11, 2015 10:47 pm  

I've said this before, but I think it may be worth repeating.

The guys we've got on long term deals are, most likely, on low wages this year with the promise of a big wage hike next year assuming we get promoted back to SL. If we don't then I'd imagine that those same players will have a SL club/non-promotion release clause in their contracts

Re: Gaskell to Wire? : Mon May 11, 2015 11:06 pm  

roofaldo2 wrote:

I've said this before, but I think it may be worth repeating.

The guys we've got on long term deals are, most likely, on low wages this year with the promise of a big wage hike next year assuming we get promoted back to SL. If we don't then I'd imagine that those same players will have a SL club/non-promotion release clause in their contracts

This seems completely unfounded to me. Are you basing this on any factual information at all? Why would any player agree to this? We can offer absolutely no guarantees to any player about future earnings should we get back into SL.

I think what's more likely is that we've offered reasonable salaries to the majority of the squad, reduced wages to the younger/fringe players and a decent wage to a handful of key personnel. In my opinion the reason many (like Lee Gaskell and Dale Ferguson) chose to stay with us is because a) they were happy here b) their salaries were reasonable and c) the promise of regular game time and a platform to demonstrate your talents to other clubs (SL sides).
I think the theory of buy out clauses should a SL club come calling is also probably accurate.

Re: Gaskell to Wire? : Tue May 12, 2015 9:00 am  

Nothus wrote:

This seems completely unfounded to me. Are you basing this on any factual information at all? Why would any player agree to this? We can offer absolutely no guarantees to any player about future earnings should we get back into SL.

I think what's more likely is that we've offered reasonable salaries to the majority of the squad, reduced wages to the younger/fringe players and a decent wage to a handful of key personnel. In my opinion the reason many (like Lee Gaskell and Dale Ferguson) chose to stay with us is because a) they were happy here b) their salaries were reasonable and c) the promise of regular game time and a platform to demonstrate your talents to other clubs (SL sides).
I think the theory of buy out clauses should a SL club come calling is also probably accurate.

I'm basing it on the fact we've got a £1 million salary cap and 31 first teamers. So, just taking that as 1,000,000 split 31 ways gives us £32k each. Now, given that the average wage for a SL player is approximately £65k it seems reasonable to assume that our top players will get bumped up wages next year

Re: Gaskell to Wire? : Tue May 12, 2015 9:06 am  

roofaldo2 wrote:

I'm basing it on the fact we've got a £1 million salary cap and 31 first teamers. So, just taking that as 1,000,000 split 31 ways gives us £32k each. Now, given that the average wage for a SL player is approximately £65k it seems reasonable to assume that our top players will get bumped up wages next year

Well, each to their own I suppose. But I seriously doubt it is worked that way.

Re: Gaskell to Wire? : Tue May 12, 2015 10:24 am  

I agree with Roofaldo, I think it will be "stick with us this year,get us promoted and you get a big pay rise next season."

[Bulliac]

Re: Gaskell to Wire? : Tue May 12, 2015 11:16 am  

miketaurus wrote:

Players can make dreadful mistakes by leaving clubs and find that they are left in a vacuum of their own making i.e. Sammutt and Carvell.

I think it's difficult to make these decisions sometimes.

We have to remember that Sammut, Carvell, and I'll add in Scruton, were probably happy enough playing for Bradford, but had gone through periods of being paid late and, no doubt, had worries about not being paid at all. That they would have wanted to 'normalise' their employment situation was pretty clear, to be fair - and given a similar set of circumstances I'd guess they would again look first at how their families bread was going to be buttered. I guess the last thing on their minds was that we were going to hit some stability whilst their position at Wakey were going to start looking 'dodgy' again.