Thommo
Re: Thommo
Sounds like we did the sensible thing, I had a feeling he had already told AA no matter what we offered he wouldn't be returning, so we simply offered him a contract on the same terms again to ensure that should he sign for someone else the rules regarding transfer of players under the age of 24 kicks in and we would be entitled to some compensation.
As for the compensation should he sign for someone else, may only be a couple of £k. But for a fan owned club its a couple of £k we might have not otherwise had.
Good player, but when you start adding together the wage savings on Thommo, Trotman, Ainge (whatever the % was) and Elliott. there should be funds for 3 high quality players in there to get us the GK, CB and CF we need to challenge.
As for the compensation should he sign for someone else, may only be a couple of £k. But for a fan owned club its a couple of £k we might have not otherwise had.
Good player, but when you start adding together the wage savings on Thommo, Trotman, Ainge (whatever the % was) and Elliott. there should be funds for 3 high quality players in there to get us the GK, CB and CF we need to challenge.
-
- Posts: 5690
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 1:44 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Thommo
I also should add that, in order to for the club to be due compensation, we would have had to re-engage with Trotman on the same (or increased) terms than his previous contract.
If we didn't do that, then no compensation will be due. I'm interested to know if we did this - however I don't think we will find out.
If we didn't do that, then no compensation will be due. I'm interested to know if we did this - however I don't think we will find out.
Re: Thommo
The money Thommo has been allegedly offered is staggering.
Despite being one of our top earners, a 50% pay rise, and a 5 figure signing on fee. We couldn’t possibly match this and he couldn’t possibly turn it down.
Despite being one of our top earners, a 50% pay rise, and a 5 figure signing on fee. We couldn’t possibly match this and he couldn’t possibly turn it down.
Re: Thommo
Great Annual Savings FC
-
- Posts: 1413
- Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 4:10 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Thommo
Nothing personal Beano, but I'm always intrigued as to how third parties know the details of what should be private contract discussions between the employer and employee.
- theoriginalfatcat
- Posts: 6718
- Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Thommo
I was thinking the same thing, allegedly he gets two camels too (I've heard)darlo2001uk wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 4:08 pmNothing personal Beano, but I'm always intrigued as to how third parties know the details of what should be private contract discussions between the employer and employee.
Profile pic
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!
- HarrytheQuaker
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:57 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Thommo
He is training at Gav Cogdons gym in Washington so let's put 2 and 2 together and get 100
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
Re: Thommo
Officially signed for Spennymoor.
Good luck to him but gutted at the same time.
https://spennymoortownfc.co.uk/2020/05/ ... n-capture/
Good luck to him but gutted at the same time.
https://spennymoortownfc.co.uk/2020/05/ ... n-capture/
-
- Posts: 5690
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 1:44 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Thommo
Non-penalty goals per 90 mins:
16/17: 0.24 per 90 mins
17/18: 0.21 per 90 mins
18/19: 0.13 per 90 mins
19/20: 0.08 per 90 mins
Assists per 90 mins:
16/17: 0.27 per 90 mins
17/18: 0.18 per 90 mins
18/19: 0.21 per 90 mins
19/20: 0.19 per 90 mins
I wish him well at Spennymoor - an absolute club legend. However I think that the above shows that perhaps it is mutually beneficial for both parties to move on.
16/17: 0.24 per 90 mins
17/18: 0.21 per 90 mins
18/19: 0.13 per 90 mins
19/20: 0.08 per 90 mins
Assists per 90 mins:
16/17: 0.27 per 90 mins
17/18: 0.18 per 90 mins
18/19: 0.21 per 90 mins
19/20: 0.19 per 90 mins
I wish him well at Spennymoor - an absolute club legend. However I think that the above shows that perhaps it is mutually beneficial for both parties to move on.
Last edited by Darlofan97 on Tue May 19, 2020 5:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Thommo
I think we do know as the club statement says we would seek compensation from a new club - we wouldn't seek it if we weren't entitled especially as all we'd have to do was offer the same terms.Darlofan97 wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 1:52 pmI also should add that, in order to for the club to be due compensation, we would have had to re-engage with Trotman on the same (or increased) terms than his previous contract.
If we didn't do that, then no compensation will be due. I'm interested to know if we did this - however I don't think we will find out.
It might have been a token gesture as we knew it would be rejected but worth it if it gets something over nothing.
-
- Posts: 5690
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 1:44 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Thommo
A previous article from the club also said that he remained under contract - so I am a bit sceptical to be honest.lo36789 wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 5:17 pmI think we do know as the club statement says we would seek compensation from a new club - we wouldn't seek it if we weren't entitled especially as all we'd have to do was offer the same terms.Darlofan97 wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 1:52 pmI also should add that, in order to for the club to be due compensation, we would have had to re-engage with Trotman on the same (or increased) terms than his previous contract.
If we didn't do that, then no compensation will be due. I'm interested to know if we did this - however I don't think we will find out.
It might have been a token gesture as we knew it would be rejected but worth it if it gets something over nothing.
Re: Thommo
Thompson, Trotman and Ainge all off the books. Considering only Thompson contributed last season, and even then he wasn't a key performer, that gives Armstrong plenty of scope to really strengthen our team. Maybe it's freed up enough cash to go get that other striker we needed.
Re: Thommo
He seems to suggest that the financial offer from Spendy and us was pretty much the same but the vibes and football reasons over there clinched it.
Last edited by LoidLucan on Tue May 19, 2020 6:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Thommo
I thought we had an option to be honest so would strictly be under contract if we didn't then take that option and offer a renewal at a comparable salary that would leave us where we are now.Darlofan97 wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 5:21 pmA previous article from the club also said that he remained under contract - so I am a bit sceptical to be honest.lo36789 wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 5:17 pmI think we do know as the club statement says we would seek compensation from a new club - we wouldn't seek it if we weren't entitled especially as all we'd have to do was offer the same terms.Darlofan97 wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 1:52 pmI also should add that, in order to for the club to be due compensation, we would have had to re-engage with Trotman on the same (or increased) terms than his previous contract.
If we didn't do that, then no compensation will be due. I'm interested to know if we did this - however I don't think we will find out.
It might have been a token gesture as we knew it would be rejected but worth it if it gets something over nothing.
Best situation for all parties.
-
- Posts: 2826
- Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:43 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Thommo
Just read that statement, similar offer from us and that he felt wanted after speaking to Groves and Ainsley. The fact that AA offered a new deal suggests he was wanted here as well.Obviously the so called signing on fee swayed it.LoidLucan wrote:He seems to suggest that the financial offer from Spendy and us was pretty much the same but the vibes over there clinched it.
Sent from my moto g(6) play using Tapatalk
Re: Thommo
Brad has deep pockets, if he was offered similar contracts, only signing on fee must have bettered what a possible testimonial would have brought him, that's football good luck to thomo.
-
- Posts: 5690
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 1:44 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Thommo
I am a little confused by your point.lo36789 wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 5:43 pmI thought we had an option to be honest so would strictly be under contract if we didn't then take that option and offer a renewal at a comparable salary that would leave us where we are now.Darlofan97 wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 5:21 pmA previous article from the club also said that he remained under contract - so I am a bit sceptical to be honest.lo36789 wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 5:17 pmI think we do know as the club statement says we would seek compensation from a new club - we wouldn't seek it if we weren't entitled especially as all we'd have to do was offer the same terms.Darlofan97 wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 1:52 pmI also should add that, in order to for the club to be due compensation, we would have had to re-engage with Trotman on the same (or increased) terms than his previous contract.
If we didn't do that, then no compensation will be due. I'm interested to know if we did this - however I don't think we will find out.
It might have been a token gesture as we knew it would be rejected but worth it if it gets something over nothing.
Best situation for all parties.
We may have had an option - but this hasn't been taken as Trotman is now out of contract (which contradicts what the official website said originally).
We will only receive compensation from another club if we offered Trotman the same (or increased) terms.
Although the club have explained that they are seeking compensation - I am slightly sceptical of the this. The article was written by Ray - who previously said Trotman was under-contract and this was incorrect. I'd prefer to hear it from DJ or CS that the same terms were offered, subsequently rejected and therefore we are entitled to compensation under FA regulations.
However, like I said previously, I don't expect to receive this information as I am certainly not entitled to it as your average fan. I am just quite sceptical of us offering the same terms - and the line at the end of the article could just be a token gesture/mis-information.
*Puts tin-hat on*.
Re: Thommo
Football is a funny old game as a famous pundit used to say.
Over the years Thommo has been a bit of a thorn in Spennymoor’s side but cannot help thinking they have dropped a bit of a clanger here. Surely his best days are behind him but I suppose the move could spark him up a bit.
Think we can use the money freed up by losing Ainge Elliott Trotman and Thommo to build up our squad. If you look what those 4 contributed to last season it wasn’t a great deal.
Over the years Thommo has been a bit of a thorn in Spennymoor’s side but cannot help thinking they have dropped a bit of a clanger here. Surely his best days are behind him but I suppose the move could spark him up a bit.
Think we can use the money freed up by losing Ainge Elliott Trotman and Thommo to build up our squad. If you look what those 4 contributed to last season it wasn’t a great deal.
-
- Posts: 14080
- Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Thommo
Agreed he couldn't get near to the starting 11 & when he came on, he rarely made much of an impact. I don't think him going to Spennymoor will improve their squad. Anyway good luck Thommo, apart from when you are playing us of course.Old Git wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 6:09 pmFootball is a funny old game as a famous pundit used to say.
Over the years Thommo has been a bit of a thorn in Spennymoor’s side but cannot help thinking they have dropped a bit of a clanger here. Surely his best days are behind him but I suppose the move could spark him up a bit.
Think we can use the money freed up by losing Ainge Elliott Trotman and Thommo to build up our squad. If you look what those 4 contributed to last season it wasn’t a great deal.
-
- Posts: 1413
- Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 4:10 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Thommo
So not a 50 per cent pay rise then?
Re: Thommo
I wouldn't expect any player to declare the salary as an alluring factor in their unveiling.
-
- Posts: 5690
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 1:44 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Thommo
Me neither.
I think it is more than likely he’s on a better wage that we offered him and got a decent signing on fee.
I think it is more than likely he’s on a better wage that we offered him and got a decent signing on fee.
-
- Posts: 271
- Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2019 5:51 am
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Thommo
We know by now any chance to launch a sly dig at Darlo and the Spenny PR machine takes full advantage.
- theoriginalfatcat
- Posts: 6718
- Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Thommo
Re Thompson it would seem Alun's upset him by plonking him on the bench too many times - personally I'm not over bothered by this, we can't live in the past.
Profile pic
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!
- HarrytheQuaker
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:57 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Thommo
I thought you would be the 1st person to say I ain't botheredtheoriginalfatcat wrote:Re Thompson it would seem Alun's upset him by plonking him on the bench too many times - personally I'm not over bothered by this, we can't live in the past.
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
Re: Thommo
I don't know so basically you think there are now 2 articles which are not true?Darlofan97 wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 6:06 pmI am a little confused by your point.
We may have had an option - but this hasn't been taken as Trotman is now out of contract (which contradicts what the official website said originally).
We will only receive compensation from another club if we offered Trotman the same (or increased) terms.
Although the club have explained that they are seeking compensation - I am slightly sceptical of the this. The article was written by Ray - who previously said Trotman was under-contract and this was incorrect. I'd prefer to hear it from DJ or CS that the same terms were offered, subsequently rejected and therefore we are entitled to compensation under FA regulations.
However, like I said previously, I don't expect to receive this information as I am certainly not entitled to it as your average fan. I am just quite sceptical of us offering the same terms - and the line at the end of the article could just be a token gesture/mis-information.
It just seems plausible to me that Ray is aware of the players where we have options, he was also advised that all players with the exception of those we know about have been offered new deals. From that it is inferred that Trotman is under contract (article 1)
In the case of Trotman rather than calling in the option we simply offered a new deal (but this was a token gesture - basically a gentleman's agreement ie. we won't take the option on you and we will let you leave, but you have to reject this new contract which we will offer you). Trotman then rejected this and we are now eligible for compensation (article 2)
It makes sense for this to happen as he gets what he wants (ie not to travel), we get what we want which is that we aren't committed on his wages but equally have a chance of getting compensation for him.
All of this is assumptions of course, but it would somewhat match the timeline and circumstances if true.
- theoriginalfatcat
- Posts: 6718
- Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Thommo
I bet you didn't really, anyway - I aint bovered.HarrytheQuaker wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 8:46 pmI thought you would be the 1st person to say I ain't botheredtheoriginalfatcat wrote:Re Thompson it would seem Alun's upset him by plonking him on the bench too many times - personally I'm not over bothered by this, we can't live in the past.
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
Profile pic
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!
-
- Posts: 5690
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 1:44 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Thommo
The first article explicitly stated that Trotman was under-contract - which was factually incorrect.lo36789 wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 8:59 pmI don't know so basically you think there are now 2 articles which are not true?Darlofan97 wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 6:06 pmI am a little confused by your point.
We may have had an option - but this hasn't been taken as Trotman is now out of contract (which contradicts what the official website said originally).
We will only receive compensation from another club if we offered Trotman the same (or increased) terms.
Although the club have explained that they are seeking compensation - I am slightly sceptical of the this. The article was written by Ray - who previously said Trotman was under-contract and this was incorrect. I'd prefer to hear it from DJ or CS that the same terms were offered, subsequently rejected and therefore we are entitled to compensation under FA regulations.
However, like I said previously, I don't expect to receive this information as I am certainly not entitled to it as your average fan. I am just quite sceptical of us offering the same terms - and the line at the end of the article could just be a token gesture/mis-information.
It just seems plausible to me that Ray is aware of the players where we have options, he was also advised that all players with the exception of those we know about have been offered new deals. From that it is inferred that Trotman is under contract (article 1)
In the case of Trotman rather than calling in the option we simply offered a new deal (but this was a token gesture - basically a gentleman's agreement ie. we won't take the option on you and we will let you leave, but you have to reject this new contract which we will offer you). Trotman then rejected this and we are now eligible for compensation (article 2)
It makes sense for this to happen as he gets what he wants (ie not to travel), we get what we want which is that we aren't committed on his wages but equally have a chance of getting compensation for him.
All of this is assumptions of course, but it would somewhat match the timeline and circumstances if true.
The second article explains that we are seeking compensation for him, but stopped short of saying he was re-engaged with on the same terms (this is what I am doubting).
You are over-complicating it. The talk of gentleman's agreements, options etc. All immaterial to the actual issue. The only point that needs clarifying is, was Trotman offered the same contractual terms in order for us to be due compensation under FA regulations? It's a reasonable question - especially when we were told he was looking to leave but was under-contract, but then he wasn't under-contract within the space of about an hour.
Re: Thommo
No problem with Thommo leaving although I thought DFC might have deserved a bit better than a screenshot from his iPhone and then a couple of narky digs in his statement.
But from a football point of view no problem. It’s very unusual for a player to stay on reduced terms and I can’t blame him for accepting more money at Spennymoor. He struggled to get in to the 11 last season unfortunately so maybe a change of scenery will do him good.
Great player in his day though. I’m sure he’ll be motivated to prove he can get back to those standards again.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But from a football point of view no problem. It’s very unusual for a player to stay on reduced terms and I can’t blame him for accepting more money at Spennymoor. He struggled to get in to the 11 last season unfortunately so maybe a change of scenery will do him good.
Great player in his day though. I’m sure he’ll be motivated to prove he can get back to those standards again.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk