d0nald0n1 Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 Don't know if we can release him but I'd love to see us send him back. We don't need him and he doesn't by all accounts want to be here. Quote
Ajja Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 I'd send him back just to remove a drain on our management resource and a negative influence. Good enough reason on its own. We are NOT paying him a wage though, utter horseshit to suggest otherwise. Quote
TENEMENTFUNSTER Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 I'd send him back just to remove a drain on our management resource and a negative influence. Good enough reason on its own. We are NOT paying him a wage though, utter horseshit to suggest otherwise. Quote
boboisared Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 I disagree with you here bobo. Maybe the huns felt that they could send us Velicka on loan he would get his fitness and sharpness back and they could offer him a new contract, probably on reduced terms due to his injury woes. This would have been a striker that along with Kendo "super goal machine" Miller would help to replace boyd and give them some experienced attacking backup on the bench. I reckon he huns would have reasoned he had a far greater chance of first team action at us rather than them what with their 4 million signing. They may also have been worried about losing Kenny Miller this season as well as his contract is up. A win win situation for them. They would have had to pay his wages if they paid him off anyway. This way they get defensive back up and give Velicka a chance to prove his fitness. I'd 100% agree with you if they didn't already try that one with Bristol though Coopy. Quote
14Fosters Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 We ARE paying him a wage though, utter horseshit to suggest otherwise. I always assumed (and completely unfounded at that) that we would just continue paying Foster's wage and they'd continue paying Velicka's. Both clubs have someone that their respective manager's thought they needed more without any additional cost... Seems sensible (ignoring the fact it was our only fullback) to me... Quote
coopy100 Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 I'd 100% agree with you if they didn't already try that one with Bristol though Coopy. Aye but that is where his injury problem really started. He hardly ever played for them so that would make it pointless as a get him fit exercise. The huns may have hoped that the serious injury he suffered down there was behind him and sent him to us for the reasons I have already stated. Quote
boboisared Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 Aye but that is where his injury problem really started. He hardly ever played for them so that would make it pointless as a get him fit exercise. The huns may have hoped that the serious injury he suffered down there was behind him and sent him to us for the reasons I have already stated. He was a crock at Rangers too though. Quote
coopy100 Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 He was a crock at Rangers too though. Was he? I thought he just wasn't getting a game for them and had no serious injury woes at the huns. Still like my version of events. As I say they would have had to pay his wages to terminate his contract anyway so may as well put him out on loan and get a defender in for cover as a return and see how he fares. Really a win win situation for the huns. Quote
Madbadteacher Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 I would guess (and it's pure pie in the sky speculation-FACT) that we're possibly paying Velicka's share of Fosters wage, and der hun are paying the rest, AND Foster? Edit: In other words we're still paying the same total wage bill, but have a different (and probably higher earning) player there. Quote
boboisared Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 Was he? I thought he just wasn't getting a game for them and had no serious injury woes at the huns. Still like my version of events. As I say they would have had to pay his wages to terminate his contract anyway so may as well put him out on loan and get a defender in for cover as a return and see how he fares. Really a win win situation for the huns. If you don't agree with me I'm just going to cover my ears and shout "LA LA LA LA LA". Quote
TENEMENTFUNSTER Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 If you don't agree with me I'm just going to cover my ears and shout "LA LA LA LA LA". Cool, someone with an incredible level of perceptive powers would be likely to adopt the same strategy. Quote
coopy100 Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 If you don't agree with me I'm just going to cover my ears and shout "LA LA LA LA LA". You do that Bobo. How it will stop your ability to read escapes me though. Quote
tsr Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 Would be hard pushed to operate a forum with no hands. Quote
Roberto Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 Velicka isn't costing anything, no? Well what about him renting a room out at the Double Tree by Hilton that Aberdeen pay for? What about physio bills and his usage of facilities (such as gym) that Aberdeen pay for. I'd say he's costing us more than many people think.... Quote
Edinburghdon Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 Velicka isn't costing anything, no? Well what about him renting a room out at the Double Tree by Hilton that Aberdeen pay for? What about physio bills and his usage of facilities (such as gym) that Aberdeen pay for. I'd say he's costing us more than many people think.... Including the wages we're paying him... Quote
mini59dons Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 Including the wages we're paying him... Or at the very least the wages we are Paying Ricky Foster for playing for the huns! Quote
Kowalski Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 Velicka isn't costing anything, no? Well what about him renting a room out at the Double Tree by Hilton that Aberdeen pay for? What about physio bills and his usage of facilities (such as gym) that Aberdeen pay for. I'd say he's costing us more than many people think.... Absolutely. And as somebody else said, there's hidden costs of the training and physio he'll be getting. I refuse to believe we're not paying him a wage unless somebody proves it (either way). Quote
TENEMENTFUNSTER Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 I think the balance of probabilities is we aren't paying Velicka anything in terms of wages. That really doesn't matter, he should go back to his club if we can do that. Quote
tsr Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 Common sense, Velicka is on more money than Foster, the huns wanted Foster therefore it makes no sense at all to think we'd be paying Velicka's wages, what sort of deal would that be for us, its fairly bloody obvious the huns are paying all the dosh imo. Quote
sheepheid Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 This thread's pish - Brown and Knox just need to get Foster back ASAP and send Velicka on his merry way. End of. Quote
Millertime Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 I'd send him back just to remove a drain on our management resource and a negative influence. Good enough reason on its own. We are NOT paying him a wage though, utter horseshit to suggest otherwise. gonna be some serious egg on folks faces then when it becomes ACTUAL fact eh? Quote
Millertime Posted January 6, 2011 Report Posted January 6, 2011 Cool, someone with an incredible level of perceptive powers would be likely to adopt the same strategy. nah, im more a "na na na na na" kinda guy! Quote
TENEMENTFUNSTER Posted January 7, 2011 Report Posted January 7, 2011 gonna be some serious egg on folks faces then when it becomes ACTUAL fact eh? So it isn't at the moment then. Glad we've cleared that up. Quote
dave_min Posted January 7, 2011 Report Posted January 7, 2011 Velicka isn't costing anything, no? Well what about him renting a room out at the Double Tree by Hilton that Aberdeen pay for? What about physio bills and his usage of facilities (such as gym) that Aberdeen pay for. I'd say he's costing us more than many people think.... You sure he's staying there? Quote
Millertime Posted January 7, 2011 Report Posted January 7, 2011 So it isn't at the moment then. Glad we've cleared that up. well how can it be? i dont have any evidence just remember who first said it when you do finally see for yourself you'll then realise that im actually a beacon Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.