BRISTOL CITY: Steve Cotterill reveals reasons behind failure to land Zach Clough. BRISTOL City boss Steve Cotterill today revealed how wages proved a stumbling block in his quest to lure Zach Clough from Bolton Wanderers. Bolton accepted a bid of £2m for the 20-year-old striker, who travelled to Bristol for talks with City officials on Sunday. But City were unable to make Clough what Cotterill describes as "a head-turning offer" and the striker decided to remain with the club he joined as an eight-year-old boy. Cotterill said: "I spent five hours on Sunday with Zach, his Dad and his agent. If I'm truthful, he didn't really want to come when he first heard of our interest. "Then, after the meeting, I think he saw us in a different light. But I also think that the business side of the deal would have to be head-turning for us to get him. I don't think we were going to do that. "The deal the agent wanted for his client was not conducive. I thought the offer we made was a good offer, one that would have fitted in with our dressing room and which was more than fair, given that I knew what he was on at Bolton. "In the end it was a no-go, but I still believe we were right not to pay what his agent wanted. I don't think he was being greedy, I understand it and I wish him all the best for the rest of the season." City's wage bill is among the lowest in the Championship this season and Cotterill is determined not to risk the future stability of the club in return for a short-term fix. Having confirmed that the Clough deal is dead, he and director of football Keith Burt have already moved on to other targets. But City are not expected to add to their squad ahead of Saturday's home game against Championship leaders Middlesbrough. http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/BRISTOL-CITY-Steve-Cotterill-reveals-reasons/story-28529535-detail/story.html
Rightly or wrongly it was Cotterill's decision not to pay Clough the rate being asked for and NOT Steve Lansdown as stated on another thread. How many of the other deals has Cotterill fired out of..?
The kid did not want to be here,i suspect lets see how much we can take from them in wages, which i might then be interested if it is a cracking deal. stay up north my friend. If the thread is true well done cotts,the kid is 20 years old,not even done anything yet and asking for the world. Tetburys response said SL was the problem,the wage cap he has enforced would make sense,however he would not earn what gayle or gray would have been offered. Any idea how the wages structure is set up
SC must be taking orders on what we are or aren't prepared to pay. Surely this power of veto isn't down to the Manager to decide ?
Steve Lansdown has stated other players have been offered what they demanded and we still got turned down, also no reasonable request would be or has been turned down by him. More like wage control than a wage cap..
we should be building for the future of the championship, and not trying not to upset the players who are already on contracts, at the end of the season should we have brought in 2 or 3 players on higher wages and still be in the champs then contract renegotiations are always a way forward... I THINK WE HAVE ONCE AGAIN TOTALLY SCREWED THIS ONE UP, I am already suspecting that BENNETT had been TALKING ABOUT A PERMANENT DEAL AND SAID TO HIMSELF IF THATS ALL I am likely to get then FIRST CHANCE IM OFF ... ... ...
