The Greenock Morton Thread - It's Better Than Yours

[The Ghost of B A R P]

50 minutes ago, virginton said:

Enlighten us please as to how how freeing up part of two fringe player wages would fund two extra signings of the quality required.

No they couldn't because they can't actually be afforded within any credible squad structure. Your tantrum is hysterical because:

1) Right now, we do not have sufficient, fit centre backs to simply release Broadfoot. 

2) But we have in fact already signed a full range of centre backs in the squad for this season; it's simply a combination of injuries/suspensions that leaves us requiring to stretch to 4th choice. (Whether Broadfoot is higher in that pecking order is a separate point).

3) Shrieking for the paid termination of a 4th choice defender's contract to sign a different back-up centre back is a completely moronic allocation of money, when other areas of the squad still need credible first choice options. Doing so would take funds away from signing players elsewhere. 

As for the rest of your increasingly unhinged, 'lolz'-based word salad - just because I think that the current squad assembled is abysmal doesn't mean that I must demand that we squander what's left of our inherently limited budget with more shite decisions.

I wanted more players to be ruthlessly culled in May -  including Broadfoot, Bearne and indeed Garrity who is not making an impact either. Instead the squad has been largely filled with fringe players from last season and new additions who unfortunately look hopeless in the attacking half of the pitch. The club cannot magically 'terminate contract' its way out of that position: this is real life rather than your daft wee FM save. 

Ok, pay very close attention...

Wages freed-up from Bearne (already done) and Broadfoot (entirely necessary) will fund at least one more signing: and a whole something is worth a lot more than two halves of nothing.  The club has already begun the process of 'terminate contract' its way out of the position we're in and that should clearly continue with Broadfoot. It was a shite decison to offer him a contract; it would be an even more shite decision to persist with him (just as it was a shite decision to give Bearne a two-year deal, etc, etc... you following?). 

And if we sign a centre-half (ideally one that could cover right-back) over the next ten days, they will not initially be 'back-up': they are very likely to go straight in and play in the league opener and possibly beyond. At this point in time, Dylan Corr basically doesn't exist.

What you thought should happen in the past is entirely irrelevant; and, as usual, you've offered no suggestions as to what should actually happen now. The only 'hysteria' and 'tantrums' is coming from you (exhibit A: your ridiculous response to watching us lose in Perth; exhibit B: your bizarre white-knighting for Kirk fkn Broadfoot).

This sure is real life... and in real life teams get relegated... unless the manager/club does everything they can to address the very obvious problems we have. We need to get Broadfoot out the door and we need to make at least three more signings (four if at all possible).

Suggest a credible alternative or don't bother replying.

Edited July 24 by The Ghost of B A R P

[The Ghost of B A R P]

6 minutes ago, Rudolph Hucker said:

Here’s an alternative scenario for you.  
 

Bearne, unhappy at not getting game time and probably having been told that that’s unlikely to change having spoken to Imrie, has two choices - either to twiddle his thumbs on the bench till the end of his contract, or do something about it. He doesn’t fancy option one.
Either he, or his agent if he has one, put a few feelers out and get some interest from down south, if he can be made available without a fee.                           

Bearne approaches the club asking to be released from his contract.  Morton could hold him to his contract, but as the player clearly wants to leave the club have the upper hand in negotiating a deal.

The player is released as a free agent without a payoff. Morton receive no transfer fee ( a remote possibility anyway) but have no further wage or National Insurance commitment to the player.

Win - win.

 

Not impossible... but highly unlikely, I think.

More realistic to think Bearne has taken a proportion of his projected wage for the next 12 months (same offer - see above - should be put in front of one more player in the squad). Still a (limited) win-win for both parties.

[Colkitto]

8 minutes ago, The Ghost of B A R P said:

Ok, pay very close attention...

Wages freed-up from Bearne (already done) and Broadfoot (entirely necessary) will fund at least one more signing: and a whole something is worth a lot more than two halves of nothing.  The club has already begun the process of 'terminate contract' its way out of the position we're in and that should clearly continue with Broadfoot. It was a shite decison to offer him a contract; it would be an even more shite decision to persist with him (just as it was a shite decision to give Bearne a two-year deal, etc, etc... you following?). 

And if we sign a centre-half (ideally one that could cover right-back) over the next ten days, they will not initially be 'back-up': they are very likely to go straight in and play in the league opener and possibly beyond. At this point in time, Dylan Corr basically doesn't exist.

What you thought should happen in the past is entirely irrelevant; and, as usual, you've offered no suggestions as to what should actually happen now. The only 'hysteria' and 'tantrums' is coming from you (exhibit A: your ridiculous response to watching us lose in Perth; exhibit B: your bizarre white-knighting for Kirk fkn Broadfoot).

This sure is real life... and in real life teams get relegated... unless the manager/club does everything they can to address the very obvious problems we have. We need to get Broadfoot out the door and we need to make at least three more signings (four if at all possible).

Suggest a credible alternative or don't bother replying.

 

A player has employment rights like everyone else, so not sure how you can "terminate a contract"? 

Unless there are disciplinary breeches then surely Broadfoot can sit in the stand all season and get his full salary if he doesn't want to leave? 

You can come to an agreement with a player to move on and terminate his contract but there has to be agreement on both sides, not just one side(the Club)   

[vikingTON]

9 minutes ago, The Ghost of B A R P said:

Ok, pay very close attention...

Wages freed-up from Bearne (already done) and Broadfoot (entirely necessary) will fund at least one more signing: and a whole something is worth a lot more than two halves of nothing. 

They won't even fund one credible signing unless the terms of release are extremely generous to the club. Good to see you've climbed down from your two new signings claim already. 

Quote

And if we sign a centre-half (ideally one that could cover right-back) over the next ten days, they will not initially be 'back-up': they are very likely to go straight in and play in the league opener and possibly beyond. At this point in time, Dylan Corr basically doesn't exist.

No they wouldn't, as Baird won't be suspended and so Boyes plus Baird *should* be the starting defenders. 

Quote

What you thought should happen in the past is entirely irrelevant; and, as usual, you've offered no suggestions as to what should actually happen now. .

Except that you made it relevant by your non-sequitur 'but if you think the team's shite, what should be done?!!!?' retort. 

The bulk of the damage is already done and won't be reversed. This club has a limited budget that needs to go on finding two quality players to add to the first team - not padding out squad positions. 

Quote

This sure is real life... and in real life teams get relegated... unless the manager/club does everything they can to address the very obvious problems we have. We need to get Broadfoot out the door and we need to make at least three more signings (four if at all possible).

The chances of our relegation wil impacted far less by whether 4th choice Broadfoot is in the team for a few weeks than the current first choice dross playing for 10-30 games. That you're either too stupid or too emotionally unhinged to understand how opportunity costs work is really not my problem.

 

[Jamie_M]

55 minutes ago, Branch Ton said:

Oh aye. Did he do a Lewis and walk past him in the corridor in May 2021.

Very much doubt there's many players hanging about the corridors during the off season.

[TheGoon]

Looking at JET seems insane to me. Not only does he no longer score goals (at dreadful levels of football) - he’s a proven lazy b*****d. I get Imrie will know him from Livi but it reeks of O’Connor 2.0.

[Ferguson]

6 minutes ago, TheGoon said:

I get Imrie will know him from Livi but it reeks of O’Connor 2.0.

My exact initial thoughts.

[Jamie_M]

7 minutes ago, TheGoon said:

Looking at JET seems insane to me. Not only does he no longer score goals (at dreadful levels of football) - he’s a proven lazy b*****d. I get Imrie will know him from Livi but it reeks of O’Connor 2.0.

He wasn't at Livi with Dougie.

[Rudolph Hucker]

14 minutes ago, Colkitto said:

You can come to an agreement with a player to move on and terminate his contract but there has to be agreement on both sides, not just one side(the Club)   

Well, exactly. “By mutual agreement” is the usual term used.

 

[The Ghost of B A R P]

2 minutes ago, virginton said:

The bulk of the damage is already done and won't be reversed. This club has a limited budget that needs to go on finding two quality players to add to the first team - not padding out squad positions. 

The chances of our relegation wil impacted far less by whether 4th choice Broadfoot is in the team for a few weeks than the current first choice dross playing for 10-30 games. That you're either too stupid or too emotionally unhinged to understand how opportunity costs work is really not my problem.

 

Projection is a terrible thing (see also 'tantrums', hysteria', etc). Not sure if inventing 'padding out squad options' (not mentioned or suggested) is due to the fact that you're stupid or emotionally unhinged... but I suspect it might be both.

2 minutes ago, virginton said:

They won't even fund one credible signing unless the terms of release are extremely generous to the club. Good to see you've climbed down from your two new signings claim already. 

 

Read my lips... 'at least' one...

2 minutes ago, virginton said:

No they wouldn't, as Baird won't be suspended and so Boyes plus Baird *should* be the starting defenders. 

 

Baird is an injury doubt.

2 minutes ago, virginton said:

Except that you made it relevant by your non-sequitur 'but if you think the team's shite, what should be done?!!!?' retort. 

 

That's not what a non-sequitur is. Don't use words you don't understand.

As previously, if you've got nothing useful to say, maybe just shut up for five minutes (or five weeks...).

[The Ghost of B A R P]

17 minutes ago, Colkitto said:

 

A player has employment rights like everyone else, so not sure how you can "terminate a contract"? 

Unless there are disciplinary breeches then surely Broadfoot can sit in the stand all season and get his full salary if he doesn't want to leave? 

You can come to an agreement with a player to move on and terminate his contract but there has to be agreement on both sides, not just one side(the Club)   

That's what I meant: agree a termination, rather than just boot him out the door (which would be great, but, as you say, employment law, etc...).

[TheGoon]

3 minutes ago, Jamie_M said:

He wasn't at Livi with Dougie.

Even stranger then. Suppose Martindale did get a tune out of him, but that was a while ago.

[vikingTON]

8 minutes ago, The Ghost of B A R P said:

Projection is a terrible thing (see also 'tantrums', hysteria', etc). Not sure if inventing 'padding out squad options' (not mentioned or suggested) is due to the fact that you're stupid or emotionally unhinged... but I suspect it might be both.

Read my lips... 'at least' one...

Baird is an injury doubt.

That's not what a non-sequitur is. Don't use words you don't understand.

As previously, if you've got nothing useful to say, maybe just shut up for five minutes (or five weeks...).

1) Please explain how terminating ('mutually consenting') the contracts of two bit part players will magically convert into 'at least one' additional and credible signing. Be extremely specific as to the costings for this - with extra budget to spare as you also envisage. 

2) Baird was a fitness doubt for the St Johnstone game on Saturday past. The first league game will be a fortnight after this, so you're talking shite. 

[vikingTON]

10 minutes ago, The Ghost of B A R P said:

That's what I meant: agree a termination, rather than just boot him out the door (which would be great, but, as you say, employment law, etc...).

Why would Broadfoot agree to a termination of his contract? 

[The Ghost of B A R P]

1 hour ago, virginton said:

1) Please explain how terminating ('mutually consenting') the contracts of two bit part players will magically convert into 'at least one' additional and credible signing. Be extremely specific as to the costings for this - with extra budget to spare as you also envisage. 

 

Assume Bearne was on, say, £600 a week (despite his age, it's hard to see anyone relocating up here for less) and Broadfoot is on the same (he's a senior player, but presumably doesn't need the money). Assume we offered Bearne 30% of his wages for the next 9 months: he takes a lump sum of c. 7k and can go off and sign for whoever will take him in the 6th or 7th tier down south; we claw back over 16k in wages (the equivalent of £420 per week that can go on another player over the same 9-month period).

Agree the same with Broadfoot and you free up a total of £840 a week (or the proportionate equivalent)... which could go on a single player, or maybe the same £600 a week on one player and the remainder contributing elsewhere (e.g. a loan where we're paying only a very small proportion of the player's wage).

[And if you don't fancy my guess of £600 a week, the point holds proportionally: i.e. 2 x 70% savings gives you 140% of whatever the base sum is.]

'At least one'... 'one or two'... you got me?

1 hour ago, virginton said:

2) Baird was a fitness doubt for the St Johnstone game on Saturday past. The first league game will be a fortnight after this, so you're talking shite. 

If Baird has a muscle tear (as reported), he'll still be a serious doubt in, eh, 10 days time... No need to talk unnecessary shite.

1 hour ago, virginton said:

Why would Broadfoot agree to a termination of his contract? 

Why did Bearne? (a move you fully supported btw, to the point where you were crowing about having 'predicted' it...).

Perfectly reasonable to assume that if a manager tells a player they won't be playing, said player might decide to take a bit of money and - in Broadfoot's case, if he wants to keep playing - f**k off to a more appropriate level of football.

The question here isn't whether it's possible or beneficial (it's clearly both): it's whether Imrie has got to the point where he's accepted Broadfoot isn't good enough. That's by no means clear, even after the wee stooshie up in Methil; but managers (or good mangers) get there in the end. We just have to hope it's sooner rather than later (and absolutely before the end of August).

You batter on with your hysterical [sic] nonsense that we're somehow in worse nick than we were at this stage in the past two seasons; we're clearly not. The truth is that there's the basis for a credible squad already there: two further additions, plus one or two more funded by getting deadwood out the door, and we'll be fine... or maybe even more than that.

If we haven't signed another three or four players by the end of September, come back to me and I'll happily admit I was wrong (I understand this is a difficult concept for you, but give it a go...).*

Spoiler

* Wee note to add that I'm not promising to delete my account on here, because that would just be foolish...

 

Edited July 24 by The Ghost of B A R P

[vikingTON]

5 hours ago, The Ghost of B A R P said:

Assume Bearne was on, say, £600 a week (despite his age, it's hard to see anyone relocating up here for less) and Broadfoot is on the same (he's a senior player, but presumably doesn't need the money). Assume we offered Bearne 30% of his wages for the next 9 months: he takes a lump sum of c. 7k and can go off and sign for whoever will take him in the 6th or 7th tier down south; we claw back over 16k in wages (the equivalent of £420 per week that can go on another player over the same 9-month period).

Agree the same with Broadfoot and you free up a total of £840 a week (or the proportionate equivalent)... which could go on a single player, or maybe the same £600 a week on one player and the remainder contributing elsewhere (e.g. a loan where we're paying only a very small proportion of the player's wage).

[And if you don't fancy my guess of £600 a week, the point holds proportionally: i.e. 2 x 70% savings gives you 140% of whatever the base sum is.]

'At least one'... 'one or two'... you got me?

If Baird has a muscle tear (as reported), he'll still be a serious doubt in, eh, 10 days time... No need to talk unnecessary shite.

Why did Bearne? (a move you fully supported btw, to the point where you were crowing about having 'predicted' it...).

Perfectly reasonable to assume that if a manager tells a player they won't be playing, said player might decide to take a bit of money and - in Broadfoot's case, if he wants to keep playing - f**k off to a more appropriate level of football.

  Reveal hidden contents

* Wee note to add that I'm not promising to delete my account on here, because that would just be foolish...

 

Why would Broadfoot accept 30% of his wages to leave, having been offered and accepted a new deal two months ago? 

Bearne was signed over a year ago and his career was going nowhere by remaining up here - that's why a deal could be done (although your 30% claim is predictably fanciful). Broadfoot has no further career prospects as a footballer and so has no need to accept an equally laughable settlement. 

Which is where your entire claim predictably collapses on its arse. 

Baird was a fitness doubt for a game on Saturday and will therefore quite clearly be fit by next Saturday if no other issues arise. You are simply clutching at straws now to support your shrieking but ultimately irrational argument. 

Edited July 24 by vikingTON

[DreamOakTree1]

 

[Jamie_M]

 

[TheGoon]

I hope to God he proves me wrong, but that is the very definition of a panic signing. 

[Reid]

He’ll either be one of the best players in the league or a Novo/O’Connor type signing for Morton.