Jump to content

Wednesday 30th October 2024 - kick-off 8pm

Scottish Premiership: Aberdeen v Rangers

Transfer Window 2015


manc_don

Recommended Posts

I think there could have been a player there at one point, bad lifestyle choices have hindered him massively.  I admit to not watching that much of him prior to joining us but for the baggage he brings he's not worth it.  Just my opinion of course.

 

Agree he's been a massive disappointment.

 

I'll never forget the dagger he stuck into us after the 90th minute at Pittodrie on a new year fixture.

 

He was always class potential. He fucked up. We never put him back on track. A good inspirational manager might have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 646
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Agree he's been a massive disappointment.

 

I'll never forget the dagger he stuck into us after the 90th minute at Pittodrie on a new year fixture.

 

He was always class potential. He fucked up. We never put him back on track. A good inspirational manager might have.

Seems to happen to quite a few Scottish strikers look at Riordan and O'Connor.  I think they get too much too soon and their heads explode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to happen to quite a few Scottish strikers look at Riordan and O'Connor.  I think they get too much too soon and their heads explode.

 

Nothing to do with strikers. It's a Scottish disease.

 

We see it in a load more fields than Scottish strikers.

 

Girls are the biggest distraction. Booze and drugs are next.

 

Some loved all three. Which means they never loved their talent enough.

 

Fitba is not the only sport. Oranges are not the only grapefruits

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a thoroughly underwhelming transfer window. Failed target after failed target obviously.

 

It's obviously disappointing not to get Tansey in but I'm not sure you can definitely say its failed target after failed target... fair enough we missed out on Tansey but from the sounds of things that was mainly due to Caley being awkward and using ambiguity in their contract wording to their benefit.

 

Were we seriously linked with moves for major targets in this window? Brannigan was on a pre-contract wasnt he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apart from Simon Church of course.

 

The first part of my sentence is still relevant. Comments i've read (not just here but elsewhere) haven't really filled me with confidence but he's a red and here's hoping he scores the winner on Wednesday!

 

Edit: ED, as I've said before, we usually do our business early doors, to me this reeks of plan A, or B have failed, then moved onto C.  Our circumstances haven't changed, so to me this is our only answer. I don't blame Caley, they probably see us as direct competitors, would you want to sell to us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first part of my sentence is still relevant. Comments i've read (not just here but elsewhere) haven't really filled me with confidence but he's a red and here's hoping he scores the winner on Wednesday!

 

Edit: ED, as I've said before, we usually do our business early doors, to me this reeks of plan A, or B have failed, then moved onto C.  Our circumstances haven't changed, so to me this is our only answer. I don't blame Caley, they probably see us as direct competitors, would you want to sell to us?

 

You could be right but saying that I genuinely don't think the club or McInnes would spend what's a significant sum of money for us on someone who's not going to be a main target.

 

I can understand Caley not wanting to sell to us but IF the talk of a minimum release fee being met and Caley ignoring it claiming ambiguity in the wording then it's not really on is it? Not only that but if it is the case I'd imagine the player would be pretty raging. I guess the truth will come out though.

 

I also don't think the Windows a sign the board have given up on the season, they'd not have tried to spend money if they had given up, I guess somethings things don't work out how you want them to. That's just my opinion though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to me like we've been a victim of the system a little. I suspect our first targets were missed previously, and we were left with further scouting to do. From that we identified another few targets and failed on them. I reckon Tansey was a punt, and pretty low down the list. The 200K bid suggests that cash was there for the right person, but by the time we got to Tansey ICT weren't ready to replace him so Hughes kicked up a fuss (threatened to leave apparently!) and we were left with nothing. Agents and players normally hold all the cards in these situations - that's why all deals are usually late in the window(s) -  so it's unusual for a transfer like this not to go through.

 

I think a centre midfielder was the key to us pushing the Tims all the way, and I think we'll regret not getting someone in. I don't think Storie is good enough to play there against the vermin. Hopefully Considine turns out to have been a midfielder all along and we can play him there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re ict, I think it's largely down to the fact Kenny Cameron fucking hates afc.Interesting to see where this one goes, my first thought on hearing ICT were refusing was that they might be cutting their nose to spite their face a little. By that I mean one of the big selling points of ICT when trying to attract players has been providing a shop window to move onto bigger things.  Rooney, Andy Shinnie and McKay to name a few from recent times have all got moves to England from ICT.  Now AFC are obviously not paying what  even league 1 clubs in England can but Tansey would likely have at least doubled, hell probably trebled, his wage by moving east .  Can't imagine he's too chuffed about having that scuppered for him by Kenny Cameron especially when the release fee was actually met regardless of the circumstances of how it was known.  I reckon agents will definitely remember this in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to me like we've been a victim of the system a little. I suspect our first targets were missed previously, and we were left with further scouting to do. From that we identified another few targets and failed on them. I reckon Tansey was a punt, and pretty low down the list. The 200K bid suggests that cash was there for the right person, but by the time we got to Tansey ICT weren't ready to replace him so Hughes kicked up a fuss (threatened to leave apparently!) and we were left with nothing. Agents and players normally hold all the cards in these situations - that's why all deals are usually late in the window(s) -  so it's unusual for a transfer like this not to go through.

 

I think a centre midfielder was the key to us pushing the Tims all the way, and I think we'll regret not getting someone in. I don't think Storie is good enough to play there against the vermin. Hopefully Considine turns out to have been a midfielder all along and we can play him there.

I really don't think we'd have spent £200k on someone who wasn't a main target.  In fact I'd say there's no hope in hell we were looking to spend what would be only our second transfer fee in years on a punt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I was AFC I would certainly be taking this to the SFA or even above.

 

If a release clause is met then surely if the player agrees the move then they have to release his contract. Inverness have behaved like a spoiled child and have grasped at a wording issue to hang on to a player who clearly wanted to leave. If rumours are to be believed both Tansey and his agent are pretty pissed about what Inverness have done.

 

There must have been a point where they were going to release him as they signed a replacement for him.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lack of ambition on AFC's part imo.  Tansey, imo, isn't good enough to hold down a regular starting place with us. Also, this window would have been a real opportunity for AFC to make a statement of intent. Spend decent money on a couple of players, players who'd be starting every week and can make a real difference. Celtic are there for the taking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you've got situations like this and the more "high profile" cases of Berahino and possibly Stones how long will it be before we see a footballer challenge the contracts system?

 

I didn't particularly want us to sign Tansey and certainly didn't feel he was worth £200k, nor do I feel any sympathy for millionaire footballers not getting to play for other teams offering to increase their weekly wage by more then the national average yearly wage, but in this day it is an odd system that allows people to be treated as commodities.

 

I'm not saying that it is wrong that clubs protect their investments in players just that if a player was to take this to European Court of Human Rights or whatever we may see a ruling that makes the one Bosman received seem a minor inconvenience.

 

The answer, presumably, is "Release Clauses" with a formula set out by FIFA or whatever may come to replace it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't think we'd have spent £200k on someone who wasn't a main target.  In fact I'd say there's no hope in hell we were looking to spend what would be only our second transfer fee in years on a punt.

 

Really? If he was our top target, with a release clause, then he'd have been signed immediately after Flood and Jack got injured or even before the cup game. I'd say McInnes was given a budget to spend (possibly more than 200K), he identified 4 or 5 players and Tansey was 4th or 5th on that list. I suppose you could still call him a "main" target, just not the main target. Punt was probably a bit harsh - in fact completely the wrong word - as he's very much a known quantity, it's just that I think that he'd have had to play to the very best of his ability in order to improve on Jack or Flood when they return. I think the 200K would have been worth it just to replace Storie in tomorrow night's team to be honest (I don't think Storie is quite there yet). I think we took a risk on trying to get our other targets (who couldn't be tackled until the ended of the window) assuming we had the fall back of Tansey's release clause, and in the end we failed because his clause wasn't water-tight.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? If he was our top target, with a release clause, then he'd have been signed immediately after Flood and Jack got injured or even before the cup game. I'd say McInnes was given a budget to spend (possibly more than 200K), he identified 4 or 5 players and Tansey was 4th or 5th on that list. I suppose you could still call him a "main" target, just not the main target. Punt was probably a bit harsh - in fact completely the wrong word - as he's very much a known quantity, it's just that I think that he'd have had to play to the very best of his ability in order to improve on Jack or Flood when they return. I think the 200K would have been worth it just to replace Storie in tomorrow night's team to be honest (I don't think Storie is quite there yet). I think we took a risk on trying to get our other targets (who couldn't be tackled until the ended of the window) assuming we had the fall back of Tansey's release clause, and in the end we failed because his clause wasn't water-tight.

 

Very much this.  As I said earlier, we always do our business early. This clearly didn't work out.  The big influences on this would logically be injuries which happened early in the window.  Since then, nothing has changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? If he was our top target, with a release clause, then he'd have been signed immediately after Flood and Jack got injured or even before the cup game. I'd say McInnes was given a budget to spend (possibly more than 200K), he identified 4 or 5 players and Tansey was 4th or 5th on that list. I suppose you could still call him a "main" target, just not the main target. Punt was probably a bit harsh - in fact completely the wrong word - as he's very much a known quantity, it's just that I think that he'd have had to play to the very best of his ability in order to improve on Jack or Flood when they return. I think the 200K would have been worth it just to replace Storie in tomorrow night's team to be honest (I don't think Storie is quite there yet). I think we took a risk on trying to get our other targets (who couldn't be tackled until the ended of the window) assuming we had the fall back of Tansey's release clause, and in the end we failed because his clause wasn't water-tight.

 

You may well be right, guess we may never know but I'm not overly convinced the budget was always there. McInnes made it perfectly clear in the early part of the window that people had to leave to free up wages to get his targets in. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Tansey was one he wanted but needed to shift Quinn etc before finally making the move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...