The talk of why Holt handed in his transfer request

[AndyCanary 0]

Remember when GH handed in his transfer request? I remember there being loads of people stating it was to do with things like:Him falling out with PL (a few even said PL had given him a black eye)Him not getting picked and not liking being a subHim not playing and blaming that on him not getting picked for the England squadDo you think these reasons are now invalid because PL has gone? The above reasons don''t seem to be mentioned anymore..I just wonder whether we''re all getting emotionally involved with the PL stuff and maybe 1 of the above might have had some truth in it which could be a positive for GH under Hughton.Who knows! Just thought it would be interesting to hear whether opinions have changed.

[xymox 7]

I have no idea about GH thinks. But if I were him I would think I have scored a lot of goals in the premiership the only English guy better than me earns 200k a week. I love it here please pay me more.

Don''t think that''s an unfair ask really.

[AndyCanary 0]

[quote user="xymox"]I have no idea about GH thinks. But if I were him I would think I have scored a lot of goals in the premiership the only English guy better than me earns 200k a week. I love it here please pay me more.

Don''t think that''s an unfair ask really.[/quote]Agreed.Although the thing that seems to be forgotten by many on here is that if Holt gets his way with his contract and wanting more money with 2 years left then it could cause a ripple effect with other players who''ve played well.

[xymox 7]

Yep, if Holt gets his way others will want the same.

Premiership mate, do you want it or not?

I quite enjoyed the championship but I would prefer to be here. We are premier league and if we can''t pay our players accordingly we won''t be for long.

We are well ahead of the 7 year plan so let''s wait and see, I would risk paying the demands within reason but McNally hasnt called me for advice lately.

[AndyCanary 0]

Very refreshing view point mate. I like it.

[Jacko 0]

• You can argue this situation so many different ways. The board can point to the fact that they gave Holt a 3 year deal in Championship on good money without any idea of whether he would be any good in the Premier League. There is absolutely no disputing the fact that he had earnt that deal. But even if he had been absolute bobbins this year he would have had he security of another two years on his contract. They have already looked after Holty and showed him loyalty.
• They also have a pretty valid point about him age wise. Most centre forwards peak between about 28-31. Sadly nature usually dictates that is downhill after that. To expect to be the top earner at the club for 3 years when nobody knows whether you will actually warrant that money beyond next season is a pretty big ask from a club like ours.
• However you also see it from Holt''s point of view. He has had an outstanding season and the goals record is there for all to see. I can understand why he is looking at some very ordinary Premier League centre forwards on about £30/40k a week and thinking hang on a second why aren''t I something in that ballpark. Its a short career and I need to cash in.

Ultimately for that reason I don''t think there is actually one definitive right or wrong answer to this. Both sides have pretty legimate reasons for their stance. Technically Norwich have the upper hand because he is under contract for 2 years but we cant afford to have an unhappy players on our hands. I think a fair compromise would be a pay rise for the next 2 seasons and then see how he gets on next season with  regards to offering him an extra year.

[ABC (A Basingstoke Canary) 26]

[quote user="xymox"]Yep, if Holt gets his way others will want the same. Premiership mate, do you want it or not? I quite enjoyed the championship but I would prefer to be here. We are premier league and if we can''t pay our players accordingly we won''t be for long. We are well ahead of the 7 year plan so let''s wait and see, I would risk paying the demands within reason but McNally hasnt called me for advice lately.[/quote]

 

Sorry mate - 7 year plan / premier league pay / do you want the premiership etc. - is all really academic.

 

An agreement was made with the banks - we owe money to the banks. I don''t know the finer details, but it is something along the lines of if we stayed in the premier league we would pay them off by the end of season 2. Now, if we don''t do that, then the banks could quite legitimately pull the plug. And where would that leave us? Administration? Receivership? (one only has to look at the international furore surrounding the possibility of Greece defaulting on their agreements to see how seriously banks expect institutions to stick to their agreements).

 

I''m delighted that come the end of 2012/2013 season, we will be debt free. Once we reach that position and IF Grant Holt continues to score goals at the rate he did last season, then there would be mileage in renegotiating - after all, GH must have faith in his own ability.......

 

Another option could be to pay any player a premium on the number of goals scored - giving each player their own private baselines and goalscoring bonus models. For example, assume GH has a baseline of 10 goals, thereafter he gets £200k per league goal. So if he scores 20 goals, he earns an additional £2m over and above his wages. I''m sure that some sponsorship deal could be easily tied up for that. The advantage for us of course, is that if a player scores 20 goals in a season, the chances are that the team will stay up!

[Block E Buh 0]

I think it has to be remembered that the current board havent put us in this financial mess, it stems back to the Robert Chase era, Delia did actually use her own money to rescue us not forgetting the excellent effort by Geofrey Watling. Should we keep our club safe and continue to be debt free or give in to greedy agents who badly advise when a player should ask for more money? Just my opinion but id rather have a safe football club now, then offer new deals in the next Premiership season when we are safe again.

[Devils Advocate. 0]

IF there were problems between GH and PL, why are there so many people tipping GH to move to Aston Villa? Surely the problems would re-surface if he did?.

[AndyCanary 0]

[quote user="ABC A Basingstoke Canary"]

[quote user="xymox"]Yep, if Holt gets his way others will want the same. Premiership mate, do you want it or not? I quite enjoyed the championship but I would prefer to be here. We are premier league and if we can''t pay our players accordingly we won''t be for long. We are well ahead of the 7 year plan so let''s wait and see, I would risk paying the demands within reason but McNally hasnt called me for advice lately.[/quote]

 

Sorry mate - 7 year plan / premier league pay / do you want the premiership etc. - is all really academic.

 

An agreement was made with the banks - we owe money to the banks. I don''t know the finer details, but it is something along the lines of if we stayed in the premier league we would pay them off by the end of season 2. Now, if we don''t do that, then the banks could quite legitimately pull the plug. And where would that leave us? Administration? Receivership? (one only has to look at the international furore surrounding the possibility of Greece defaulting on their agreements to see how seriously banks expect institutions to stick to their agreements).

 

I''m delighted that come the end of 2012/2013 season, we will be debt free. Once we reach that position and IF Grant Holt continues to score goals at the rate he did last season, then there would be mileage in renegotiating - after all, GH must have faith in his own ability.......

 

Another option could be to pay any player a premium on the number of goals scored - giving each player their own private baselines and goalscoring bonus models. For example, assume GH has a baseline of 10 goals, thereafter he gets £200k per league goal. So if he scores 20 goals, he earns an additional £2m over and above his wages. I''m sure that some sponsorship deal could be easily tied up for that. The advantage for us of course, is that if a player scores 20 goals in a season, the chances are that the team will stay up!

[/quote]Probably one of the best posts I''ve read on this forum! [Y]

[Mr Jenkins 0]

"Probably one of the best posts I''ve read on this forum! "

He should be known from now on as Carlsburg![:)]

[Mr Jenkins 0]

I`m not sure we should pay him per goal but why not a big bonus if we stay up linked to our final place in the League, this may already happen for all I know!  Each player could negotiate his own bonus and some will be bigger than others, a bit like bankers or porn stars![:)]

[whoareyou? 0]

I love how some are so quick and happy to spend someone elses money without even knowing if they have that money to spend.Holt will not be worth £16-20k per week in 3 years time.And imagine if we got relegated in that time? Then what? Back to square one and another debt mountain!

[step 0]

ABC

Very good post far too sensible post for this messageboard !

[ricky knight 0]

Heard he was pxssed because Morison is on more than him. Morison top earner by all accounts, only what i have heard make of it what you will.

[ricky knight 0]

Whoareyou, if his goals keep us up for another couple of years that will be small change, it works both ways.

[Alan_Grey 0]

[quote user="ricky knight"]Heard he was pxssed because Morison is on more than him. Morison top earner by all accounts, only what i have heard make of it what you will.[/quote]I believe the source for that snippet is Charlie Wyett. It''s on his twitter.

[ricky knight 0]

[quote user="Alan_Grey"][quote user="ricky knight"]Heard he was pxssed because Morison is on more than him. Morison top earner by all accounts, only what i have heard make of it what you will.[/quote]I believe the source for that snippet is Charlie Wyett. It''s on his twitter.[/quote]

never heard of him mate. Definately not my source, interesting he has the same idea though.

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="step"]ABC Very good post far too sensible post for this messageboard ![/quote]

 

Seconded !

 

Holt signed his current contract (presumably on the advice of his agent) not so long ago, so, if he was happy with it then, why does it need to be renogociated now ?  As for bonuses on goals scored, well, I''m pretty sure that all the players are on a win bonus commensurate with their current contract/salary, and is not that the same thing ?

 

Whilst I''m totally in agreement that GH has done a fine job for this club, something troubles me deeply about paying up huge increases of permanent money to individuals based on fleeting, short term success. It gives out all the wrong messages, and is as illogical as the concept of the Bank/ Building Soc demanding an increase in your monthly mortgage payment, just because you happen to have had a payrise, pools win or been left some money in a will.

[Clint 221]

ABC''s post made good sense but the goal bonus is not something I would be keen on as surely that would mean personal glory far outweighs the team ethos for Holt.Once Holt hits his 10 goals, each time he gets near the goal he will see £200k staring him in the face, which I would suggest may have an influence on his decision making......should I pass to a colleague more likely to score or do I want to gamble and go for the £200k jackpot myself?  Hmmmm, I wonder.

[ricky knight 0]

Wake up guys we have one of the lowest wage bills in the league to be successful or go to the next level we have to spend it a bit. I am not saying go crazy but Holt has proved his worth and deserves a good rise. It will cost alot of money to replace him and would be a gamble as a proven striker would cost an arm and a leg and we would definately shy away from signing one of them.

[nutty nigel 7,528]

Yes Holt signed a contract last summer. But he signed it as an unknown quantity in the Premier League. It could have gone two ways. Had he been unable to make the step up the club would undoubtedly have looked to sell him and spend the money on a player who could do it. But in the year since he signed that contract Holty has proved he was more than capable of making the step up. This has saved the club from needing to find a replacement and Holty''s value to the club is greater than it was last summer.

 

 

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Yes Holt signed a contract last summer. But he signed it as an unknown quantity in the Premier League. It could have gone two ways. Had he been unable to make the step up the club would undoubtedly have looked to sell him and spend the money on a player who could do it. But in the year since he signed that contract Holty has proved he was more than capable of making the step up. This has saved the club from needing to find a replacement and Holty''s value to the club is greater than it was last summer.

 

 

[/quote]

 

So what , in effect , you are saying, Nutty, is that fixed-term contracts are not worth the paper they''re written on ? That any agreement between two or more parties can be torn up , if the circumstances of one  of the parties change ?   Where your landlord, if he has a problem with rent from one of the tenents in another of his properties, is OK to put your rent up in the middle of your tenancy agreement, to cover his costs ?

 

No, sorry, Nutty. It just does not wash. Particularly in this sort of economic climate . What we have to hope is that Holt and the club can come to some compromise, but as long as he thinks he''s holding all the cards, and is putting out silly tweets, frankly, it does not look too promising.

[nutty nigel 7,528]

[quote user="Eric Pickles Pie Supplier"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Yes Holt signed a contract last summer. But he signed it as an unknown quantity in the Premier League. It could have gone two ways. Had he been unable to make the step up the club would undoubtedly have looked to sell him and spend the money on a player who could do it. But in the year since he signed that contract Holty has proved he was more than capable of making the step up. This has saved the club from needing to find a replacement and Holty''s value to the club is greater than it was last summer.

 

 

[/quote]

 

So what , in effect , you are saying, Nutty, is that fixed-term contracts are not worth the paper they''re written on ? That any agreement between two or more parties can be torn up , if the circumstances of one  of the parties change ?   Where your landlord, if he has a problem with rent from one of the tenents in another of his properties, is OK to put your rent up in the middle of your tenancy agreement, to cover his costs ?

 

No, sorry, Nutty. It just does not wash. Particularly in this sort of economic climate . What we have to hope is that Holt and the club can come to some compromise, but as long as he thinks he''s holding all the cards, and is putting out silly tweets, frankly, it does not look too promising.

[/quote]

 

No that''s not what I''m saying Eric. What I''m saying is Holt''s value has changed. His contract still stands. But he is in a position where another club may value him more than we did last summer. He could also have found himself in a position where his value was less than that contract. So I am just pointing out the two scenarios.

 

If he''d been a flop he could of course have seen out his contract Cureton style thus affecting our ability to get a replacement in. Or the club could have cashed in on selling him and freeing the wages for another player.

 

But as he is now a proven Premier player the situation is in reverse and he wants a transfer to cash in on those circumstances.

 

In both scenarios the contract is sooooo last season. The club has the option to make him see out his contract now. Just as Cureton had the option to see out his contract then. The club could offer an improved contract but that''s entirely up to them and doesn''t appear to be what Holt is demanding.

 

 

[ricky knight 0]

Contracts in Football are not worth a rub cant be compared to any other business imo. It comes down to the fact is Holt worth more than he is on, Yes he is, will City pay No they wont, should they pay him more imo yes he has earned it what he is on is pathetic for a top Premier league striker which he has proved he is.

[whoareyou? 0]

[quote user="ricky knight"]Whoareyou, if his goals keep us up for another couple of years that will be small change, it works both ways.[/quote]Quite. So would you take the risk of giving him a 3rd year which will take him up to 34 yrs old? How many Premier league strikers could still be called top strikers at 34? Shearer is about the only one i can think of in recent times.

[ricky knight 0]

Even if he was a passenger for the last year and his goals had kept us up for the first two the good would out weigh the bad financially.

[YellowFellow 0]

There is one problem with this debate, as far as i have heard from Holt and his agent is that its not to do with money, or contract length, and it seems to be something more personal that has really offended holt and he wants to movebecause of that, ofcourse it may all be resolved by a pay increase or contract extension, but i have fears it is beyond that. Even Iwan Roberts put on his twitter that he had spoken to holts agent and was shocked at some of the things that had been said/done, and he could understand why he put transfer request in. I hope Hughton can resolve what ever it is, but if not, i hope we dont just sell him to the highest bidder, id rather he went to everton for £3mil then villa or west ham for £5mil. i know some of you will think thats stupid and we should get as much as we can, but at the moment i would expect villa and westham to be bottom half, possible relegation candidates, and i really dont want holt to score goals that ultimately could relegate us depending on the sort of season we have

[YellowFellow 0]

I think holt is worthy of 3 years. at 34 he may have lost some pace but he hasnt really got any to lose. He will still have his strenght and he will still have football inteligence, i think a good comparison is teddy sheringham, ok holt is not as good as sheringham in his prime, but both rely alot on inteliigence then pace, and sheringham was quality beyond 34. also how many of the people that hink its madness giving holt a contract up to the age of 34, are the same fans that moaned that we didnt give iwan roberts a contract when we were promoted before? ok iwan was obviously not the player he used to be, but i still think that having him coming of the bench for 20mins or so, to nick a goal, or help hold onto the ball when we were under the cosh, would have kept us up that year. likewise, holt will still be an asset at 34 im sure.besides its one of my footballing ambitions to see a norwich player get to 100 goals for us, so 3 years means 10 goals a year, which will do it:)

[ricky knight 0]

i think its common knowledge he wanted a three year deal, that might not be the reason now but it help kick start his wanting away.