I'm thinking it may be easier for all concerned if they just let us be promoted. Less hassle. Money needn't change hands. No one needs to move clubs and relocate to the back of beyond. Job done.
Seems an iffy source but would be a good move for Greaves. And we'll be getting a big sell on in 12 months time
I’m not sure why some are getting really agitated by the Giles situation when we don’t really know anything yet. If has been suggested, we had to complete the signing, even if we didn’t feel he was good value, based on what we saw of him last season but we feel we can recoup the cost by selling him to Boro, then I would have thought that was a good solution. Yes, you can argue that we maybe shouldn’t have agreed the original deal with hindsight but surely this makes sense if we get our money back? I really can’t imagine we’re going to sell him at a loss. If we do, then it should obviously be questioned but I really can’t imagine we’re going to do that.
Think the issue is if it was an obligation why have both the buying and selling club listed as an option. Seems bizarrely confusing
Surely we may aswell keep him than sell him at a loss. It’s not like are blessed with quality lb’s **assuming we are selling him and at loss
I reckon he wants out after he was cold shouldered by the greatest coach ever and has told them he wants to go
I’ve heard from a very good source that Greaves doesn’t really want to leave, at least to the clubs mentioned but the club are forcing him out. Bit strange if we don’t need to sell…
Maybe Giles rates Rosieball over Walterball? He may have committed to the contract, with an obligation to sign permanently, because he thought Rosieball would improve the XG, & his double pivots, and doesn’t see Walterball delivering those options. It doesn’t matter what he wants nor which team he plays for next season, for now, he’s our player & we have an obligation to support him.
