The Ultimate Super Ayr Thread

[Walter]

Not sure if this will format properly but this is the jist of it ..
 

He used the word "Math". Get him hounded out of Somerset Park Ayr fans!

[Skyline Drifter]

32 minutes ago, eez-eh said:

And he’d be wholly entitled to do so, I just think anyone implying we pushed the boat out in January is being disingenuous.

The club also bullishly turned down a six figure offer for Shankland which I said at the time was an extremely brave decision. Would you ultimately have finished in a worse position than 4th if you'd taken it? And if so, by over £150k? Whilst there's no indication Shankland actually wanted to go and you can't make him go if he would rather just see out his contract, I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest the club pushed the boat out a bit but not seeking to cash in on him when his stock was at his highest. There were several posters on here at the time saying the decision would easily pay for itself IF you could finish top two as a result but, as ever in football it's not that easy. He got injured, was far less effective in the second half of the season and you ended up 4th anyway.

[ayrmad]

1 minute ago, Skyline Drifter said:

The club also bullishly turned down a six figure offer for Shankland which I said at the time was an extremely brave decision. Would you ultimately have finished in a worse position than 4th if you'd taken it? And if so, by over £150k? Whilst there's no indication Shankland actually wanted to go and you can't make him go if he would rather just see out his contract, I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest the club pushed the boat out a bit but not seeking to cash in on him when his stock was at his highest. There were several posters on here at the time saying the decision would easily pay for itself IF you could finish top two as a result but, as ever in football it's not that easy. He got injured, was far less effective in the second half of the season and you ended up 4th anyway.

Wouldn't change it, the The Rangers tie eased that burden and we also sent a message out to other youngsters looking for somewhere to strut their stuff.

[D'Jaffo]

The club also bullishly turned down a six figure offer for Shankland which I said at the time was an extremely brave decision. Would you ultimately have finished in a worse position than 4th if you'd taken it? And if so, by over £150k? Whilst there's no indication Shankland actually wanted to go and you can't make him go if he would rather just see out his contract, I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest the club pushed the boat out a bit but not seeking to cash in on him when his stock was at his highest. There were several posters on here at the time saying the decision would easily pay for itself IF you could finish top two as a result but, as ever in football it's not that easy. He got injured, was far less effective in the second half of the season and you ended up 4th anyway.

The flip side is if we had sold him in January and finished 4th or lower then most people would be questioning whether we could’ve done better had we had ambition and kept him.

Basically hindsight is a wonderful thing and at the time the club and management obviously felt we had a real chance at top 2. And no matter what decision a board or chairman makes they’re going to get criticised for it by someone.

[vikingTON]

How on earth would 'selling a player for actual money' send a less appealing message to younger players than 'letting their contract run out'? That is just utter bullshit to try and account for your club's failed transfer policy.

Edited June 7, 2019 by vikingTON

[rb123!]

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/4337909/st-johnstone-celtic-wallace-duffy-free-transfer/

Hopefully he wasn't someone McCall was after, seems like the kind of player he'd have gone for.

[ayrmad]

1 minute ago, virginton said:

How on earth would 'selling a player for actual money' send a less appealing message to younger players than ;letting their contract run out? That is just utter bullshit to try and account for your club's failed transfer policy.

Because the boy now gets to negotiate a better deal for himself.

[D'Jaffo]

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/4337909/st-johnstone-celtic-wallace-duffy-free-transfer/
Hopefully he wasn't someone McCall was after, seems like the kind of player he'd have gone for.

Never trust a man with a surname for a forename.

[D'Jaffo]

How on earth would 'selling a player for actual money' send a less appealing message to younger players than 'letting their contract run out'? That is just utter bullshit to try and account for your club's failed transfer policy.

Because the boy now gets to negotiate a better deal for himself.

Well...

That was easy.

[vikingTON]

4 minutes ago, ayrmad said:

Because the boy now gets to negotiate a better deal for himself.

Erm yes, because back in January he would had no leverage over personal terms whatsoever. The reality here is that the player has exercised freedom of contract and Ayr have contributed nothing towards that outcome: 'play for us, do well and then go somewhere else at the end of your deal for nothing' is the same message that every football club can offer.

Edited June 7, 2019 by vikingTON

[ayrmad]

4 minutes ago, virginton said:

Erm yes, because back in January he would had no leverage over personal terms whatsoever. The reality here is that the player has exercised freedom of contract and Ayr have contributed nothing towards that outcome: 'play for us, do well and then go somewhere else at the end of your deal for nothing' is the same message that every football club can offer.

Except most don't, they cash in for themselves, Shankland is in a far better position today due to what happened this time last year, more clubs will be willing to take a chance on him with no transfer fee.

Hats off to Lachlan as he was urged to take the £150k from Fylde, played a stormer. 

Edited June 7, 2019 by ayrmad

[ayrmad]

McDaid- a supposed Donkey now at Dundee, good move for the boy.

Rose- still a lot to learn, now at Coventry, good move for the boy.

Smith- chose regular games over a bigger team, now at Dundee United, think he could have got a better move but still a good move.

Shankland- a supposed fat waster, cogitating over a move to far bigger clubs than Ayr, worth my season ticket on his own last season.

Doohan- only a boy but looked the part for the vast majority of the season, should go onto bigger and better things in the near future.

McKenna- struggled at Ayr but obviously learned enough to make him very saleable at high level.

Tidser-supposed star midfielder, currently wriggling out of a PCA with a Scottish League 1 club.

 

It'll be a hard choice for all those kids this summer.

[vikingTON]

14 minutes ago, ayrmad said:

Except most don't

Most actually do. Far more than 95% of players at this level leave their clubs at the end of their contract. Shankland was no exception to that.

Quote

they cash in for themselves

A club getting a fee as well as the player getting a desirable move is a win-win for both parties. That has been the entire fucking point of a transfer strategy for any club that isn't PSG or Man City for decades. 

The idea that Ayr have cleverly reinvented the wheel by squandering the chance to make any money and then watch their player leave for nothing is laughable nonsense.

Quote

Shankland is in a far better position today due to what happened this time last year, more clubs will be willing to take a chance on him with no transfer fee.

A position that he enjoys by virtue of his contract expiring and being a free agent, not the goodwill of Ayr United. So no, it won't actually lead to a scrum of hotshots battering down your club's door as a result. 

Quote

Hats off to Lachlan as he was urged to take the £150k from Fylde, played a stormer. 

That'll be why he's currently having to take to social media to explain why you're still skint then. 'Played a stormer' indeed.

Edited June 7, 2019 by vikingTON

[ayrmad]

1 minute ago, virginton said:

Most actually do. Far more than 95% of players at this level leave their clubs at the end of their contract. Shankland was no exception to that.

A club getting a fee as well as the player getting a desirable move is a win-win for both parties. That has been the entire fucking point of a transfer strategy for any club that isn't PSG or Man City for decades. 

The idea that Ayr have cleverly reinvented the wheel by squandering the chance to make any money and then watch their player leave for nothing is laughable nonsense.

A position that he enjoys by virtue of his contract expiring and being a free agent, not the goodwill of Ayr United. So no, it won't actually lead to a scrum of hotshots battering down the door as a result. 

That'll be why he's currently having to take to social media to explain why you're still skint then. 'Played a stormer' indeed.

I'm sure Lachlan would take great pleasure in slapping you about the pus with all the bills he's paid over the years without the aid of buckets at the turnstiles.

[ftk]

That'll be why he's currently having to take to social media to explain why you're still skint then. 'Played a stormer' indeed.

Bring back Tartan Tammy all is forgiven!

[Skyline Drifter]

32 minutes ago, ayrmad said:

Wouldn't change it, the The Rangers tie eased that burden and we also sent a message out to other youngsters looking for somewhere to strut their stuff.

You did? Which was what? That you'll stand in their way and hold them to a contract if a big money move comes calling. I'm not sure that's actually the message you want to send to attract ambitious youngsters, notwithstanding you are perfectly entitled to do it.

30 minutes ago, D'Jaffo said:

The flip side is if we had sold him in January and finished 4th or lower then most people would be questioning whether we could’ve done better had we had ambition and kept him.

Basically hindsight is a wonderful thing and at the time the club and management obviously felt we had a real chance at top 2. And no matter what decision a board or chairman makes they’re going to get criticised for it by someone.

Of course, said at the time it was a hiding to nothing either way but one route guaranteed a six figure cash sum, the other held a hope that it might yield something better. As I said at the time and highlight now, it was a brave decision to take the gamble and hold on to him. They are entitled to call it "pushing the boat out" if they want.

I'm not criticising Ayr for holding on to him. I'd have taken the cash but fair play to Ayr for not doing. I'm defending the suggestion now that having done so was certainly taking a gamble and pushing the boat out.

26 minutes ago, ayrmad said:

Because the boy now gets to negotiate a better deal for himself.

 

17 minutes ago, ayrmad said:

Hats off to Lachlan as he was urged to take the £150k from Fylde, played a stormer. 

Er, you should maybe lay of the drink at this time of day Ayrmad. You're entitled to think it was a gamble well worth taking if you like. Depends how risk averse you are I guess but it's an awful lot easier to advocate a gamble with £150,000 of someone else's money than if it's your own. However, hindsight demonstrably shows that it was the wrong decision and Lachlan very much didn't "play a stormer".  Though I appreciate he'd probably have coem in for a fair bit of criticism if he'd sold him. Boards and owners sometimes have to take that for the greater good though.

[ftk]

Er, you should maybe lay of the drink at this time of day Ayrmad. You're entitled to think it was a gamble well worth taking if you like. Depends how risk averse you are I guess but it's an awful lot easier to advocate a gamble with £150,000 of someone else's money than if it's your own. However, hindsight demonstrably shows that it was the wrong decision and Lachlan very much didn't "play a stormer".  Though I appreciate he'd probably have coem in for a fair bit of criticism if he'd sold him. Boards and owners sometimes have to take that for the greater good though.

 

If we had took the 150k from Flyde we may have got relegated, maybe not got the rangers game money, not sold as many season tickets etc.

 

All ifs and buts nobody has a crystal ball. I for one would have been raging if we sold Shankland at the start of the season and I'm sure many more would have been too.

 

 

 

[rb123!]

McDaid- a supposed Donkey now at Dundee, good move for the boy.

Rose- still a lot to learn, now at Coventry, good move for the boy.

Smith- chose regular games over a bigger team, now at Dundee United, think he could have got a better move but still a good move.

Shankland- a supposed fat waster, cogitating over a move to far bigger clubs than Ayr, worth my season ticket on his own last season.

Doohan- only a boy but looked the part for the vast majority of the season, should go onto bigger and better things in the near future.

McKenna- struggled at Ayr but obviously learned enough to make him very saleable at high level.

Tidser-supposed star midfielder, currently wriggling out of a PCA with a Scottish League 1 club.

 

It'll be a hard choice for all those kids this summer.

Would take Tidser as a replacement for Crawford if we lose him

 

[malkyshotton]

Maybe no other decent concrete offer came in and Shankland didn't fancy Fylde so Cameron decided to use a bit of spin to keep the positive mood around the club at the time by saying he wasn't for sale. 

[ayrmad]

2 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

You did? Which was what? That you'll stand in their way and hold them to a contract if a big money move comes calling. I'm not sure that's actually the message you want to send to attract ambitious youngsters, notwithstanding you are perfectly entitled to do it.

Shankland would have been allowed to leave if he wanted to.

Of course, said at the time it was a hiding to nothing either way but one route guaranteed a six figure cash sum, the other held a hope that it might yield something better. As I said at the time and highlight now, it was a brave decision to take the gamble and hold on to him. They are entitled to call it "pushing the boat out" if they want.

I'm not criticising Ayr for holding on to him. I'd have taken the cash but fair play to Ayr for not doing. I'm defending the suggestion now that having done so was certainly taking a gamble and pushing the boat out.

I think it would have been a bigger gamble if he'd left at our urging, we're gradually getting our crowd numbers up and that would/could have had a very negative effect long term.

 

Er, you should maybe lay of the drink at this time of day Ayrmad.

Perhaps you'd be better posting about football rather than 2nd guessing what I get upto, being a fanny doesn't suit you.

You're entitled to think it was a gamble well worth taking if you like. Depends how risk averse you are I guess but it's an awful lot easier to advocate a gamble with £150,000 of someone else's money than if it's your own.

Obviously, it's also easy to say you'd have done the opposite when it's nowt to do with you or your club.

However, hindsight demonstrably shows that it was the wrong decision and Lachlan very much didn't "play a stormer".  Though I appreciate he'd probably have coem in for a fair bit of criticism if he'd sold him. Boards and owners sometimes have to take that for the greater good though.

You worry about your opinions of your boards performance which I've no interest in, I think he played a stormer with Lawrence as do a sizeable number of Ayr fans.