McGeady (again)

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
marcusblackcat said:
Iirc Parkinson had the same chat with both players. Maguire stepped up and McGeady effectvely told him where to stick it
Click to expand...

McGeady thought, probably correctly, that he was too big for League One.

Maguire thought, probably correct, ‘this is the biggest club I’ll ever play for and I don’t wanna toss it’

McGeady was set for life after his move to Russia and it probably stopped him having a top, top career.

If his focus and fitness had matched his natural ability he could easily played for a United or a Liverpool. Easily.

He was linked with the top clubs while at Celtic but at the time Spartak offered him outrageous money and you can’t blame the lad for taking it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusblackcat
Nads said:
McGeady thought, probably correctly, that he was too big for League One.

Maguire thought, probably correct, ‘this is the biggest club I’ll ever play for and I don’t wanna toss it’

McGeady was set for life after his move to Russia and it probably stopped him having a top, top career.

If his focus and fitness had matched his natural ability he could easily played for a United or a Liverpool. Easily.

He was linked with the top clubs while at Celtic but at the time Spartak offered him outrageous money and you can’t blame the lad for taking it.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. As fans, so many say “we’ll that wasn’t a football decision”, but few say “he’s looking after himself and setting himself up for life. Well done”. Easy for people to criticise but I wonder how many would put their “job” ahead of their future!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nads
marcusblackcat said:
Absolutely. As fans, so many say “we’ll that wasn’t a football decision”, but few say “he’s looking after himself and setting himself up for life. Well done”. Easy for people to criticise but I wonder how many would put their “job” ahead of their future!
Click to expand...

I’d have done exactly what he did. He could have got injured, dropped off the map. Take a 4 year deal, bank tens of millions before you’re 25? ****ing rights mate.
 
Nads said:
He wasn’t winning us games in the end though mate, the impact had gone. He was stopping attacks in their tracks pirouetting about with the ball and trying to shoot allowing defenders back.

Natural ability wise he is another level to anyone else, but physically he went off a cliff and he lost the impact. This is before we factor in the abundantly clear attitude issues and it’s detrimental effect on the squad.

I was a massive McGeady fan, but players hit a limit.

I see lads in there 50’s playing 7-a-side who have still got a bit of class about them. There comes a point were the cons outweighs the pros and McGeady’s axis crossed.

Maguire has scored big goals in big games for us. Gooch scores regularly and assists regularly, only his injury record is the issue.
Click to expand...

see what your saying mate be he was playing injured for probably half a season, taking injections to get through games.
 
McGeady's wages are not an issue for the salary cap. Players must be included in the "squad" for their wages to be included - and he probably won't be!!

(This is from the Sunderland echo)

So this whole EFL thing which is (paraphrasing) to ensure lower league clubs live to their means, means that we can't enforce a player ourt of favour to leave and we still have to play him. But, as he's on relatively astronomical wages (for our division), we don't have to count his wages as long as we don't name him. But we still have to pay his wages?

Seriously, this is pointless and surely also proving just how stupid the salary cap is!
 
marcusblackcat said:
McGeady's wages are not an issue for the salary cap. Players must be included in the "squad" for their wages to be included - and he probably won't be!!

(This is from the Sunderland echo)

So this whole EFL thing which is (paraphrasing) to ensure lower league clubs live to their means, means that we can't enforce a player ourt of favour to leave and we still have to play him. But, as he's on relatively astronomical wages (for our division), we don't have to count his wages as long as we don't name him. But we still have to pay his wages?

Seriously, this is pointless and surely also proving just how stupid the salary cap is!
Click to expand...

Whilst it’s true he isn’t covered under cap, it would still free up a big chunk that we could spend if he went (and save us a fortune, he took a pay cut from 31k to around 20k I believe)
 
Huds0n said:
We have a side which lacks creativity and he is our most creative player.

Should never have been ditched IMO, weak as piss from the manager unable to manage him
Click to expand...
So you tolerate bullying of younger players ? It was when the bullying came to light that the manager had to take action and rightly so , personally I wouldn’t have him training with the U23 group .
 
marcusblackcat said:
McGeady's wages are not an issue for the salary cap. Players must be included in the "squad" for their wages to be included - and he probably won't be!!

(This is from the Sunderland echo)

So this whole EFL thing which is (paraphrasing) to ensure lower league clubs live to their means, means that we can't enforce a player ourt of favour to leave and we still have to play him. But, as he's on relatively astronomical wages (for our division), we don't have to count his wages as long as we don't name him. But we still have to pay his wages?

Seriously, this is pointless and surely also proving just how stupid the salary cap is!
Click to expand...

Hmm some posters have argued that if we do a legal challenge to this Cap we would win?
 
Sunderpitt said:
Hmm some posters have argued that if we do a legal challenge to this Cap we would win?
Click to expand...
I don't see how it's legal. You are effectively hamstringing anyone who makes a decent amount of money. They brought in the "wages can't be more than x percent of turnover" which, for SAFC, is significantly higher than most in our division (due to support etc.) Now they've changed it to a maximum of 2.5m or whatever regardless of annual turnover??

Imagine if they suddenly told all premier league clubs they were limited to spending £100k per player per week (around £100m a year based on 20 squad players over 22 years old) players would jump ship and go to one of the Spanish/French/German leagues in no time.

Whilst your Crystal Palaces and perennial strugglers would be delighted at the prospect, Man City, Liverpool, United (etc. etc. etc.) would likely try form their own "super league" in order to avoid this. Whereas, as it's "just" the third division, no one will give a **** seemingly!!

Shows just how little effort the EFL will put in to our league (and, let's be honest, 5 years before we ended up here - or even 3, we never thought anything of it).

Just hope we can get out of it. But I also hope that some of our "entitled" fans (We have quite a few looking at Twatter and facebook) will remember where we have been and show a lot more respect for those down here. I know I will!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: farnboromackem, Gil T Azell, cumbrianmackem and 1 other person
I think the wage cap will get passed (they have one in rugby), but I think it will have to be phased in gradually.

If it’s legal in rugby, then it surely CAN be in football, just not sure how they can just drop it in 4 weeks before season starts.

The rugby one is £7million foxes but 2 players excluded which they say can be used for ‘world class talent’.
 
Bigmackem said:
So you tolerate bullying of younger players ? It was when the bullying came to light that the manager had to take action and rightly so , personally I wouldn’t have him training with the U23 group .
Click to expand...

See this is what I don’t get. He was bullying younger players so his punishment for doing that is to train with the younger players?
 
Huds0n said:
See this is what I don’t get. He was bullying younger players so his punishment for doing that is to train with the younger players?
Click to expand...
Don’t think it was just the younger players , he picked on anyone and everyone without exception , I don’t know if we have to provide training facilities ? If not I would be inclined to say stop away !
 
Nads said:
He doesn’t count, but he’s classed as £1.5k per week or whatever under it, and the club is still spunking him 20k week regardless of rules which is harming the club for a player who won’t play.
Click to expand...
Where you getting £20k pw from?
 
Huds0n said:
We have a side which lacks creativity and he is our most creative player.

Should never have been ditched IMO, weak as piss from the manager unable to manage him
Click to expand...


Apparently he was a bully and a lot of players were sick of him thinking he was billy big bollocks.
I disagree and think it was strong of Parky. Especially as he was considered our best player.
The team improved because of it and goes to show one man doth not maketh a team ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ozzymac, clockstander and kirklees mackem
On paper the front three of McGeady, Grigg and Maguire looked unstoppable, on the pitch they were a shambles, one down and a distinct improvement in the other two says that Parky called it right, but its still a work in progress, and for me there is no place for McGeady, good as he is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nads
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back