Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Kyle Knoyle  (Read 4880 times)
horlock07


+31289/-27197
Offline Offline

Posts: 10397


Lives up north




Ignore
« on: Thursday, June 6, 2019, 09:38:55 »

Cambridge will have offered more money.

Will they, not seen the comparative wage offers posted anywhere, can you link please?

Wellens certainly gave a few hints that he wasn't 100% sold on Knoyle.  He used him at left back when we had nobody because he can defend pretty well,

The only time I saw him play in the flesh was at LB at Carlisle and he was beyond shite, whilst not helped by Bennett going AWOL in the first half he only improved very moderately after the formation switch.

Logged
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia


+158/-559
Offline Offline

Posts: 34189





Ignore
« Reply #1 on: Thursday, June 6, 2019, 09:49:18 »

Will they, not seen the comparative wage offers posted anywhere, can you link please?

It shouldn't be difficult to keep up...

Quote
Knoyle, 22, was allowed three weeks by Wellens to either agree or reject the Town boss’ 2019-20 contractual offer.

But the former West Ham youngster has so far done neither.

Should he opt to remain in Wiltshire next season, Wellens confirmed that Knoyle's salary at Town will be less than the offer that was originally put in front of him - as a direct result of his half-hearted commitment to the club.

  from this we can work out that Cambridge topped the reduced offer.  It's kind of what happens in football, player moves for more money....

Logged
Peter Venkman


+314/-178
Offline Offline

Posts: 31196


Enjoy yourself its later than you think.




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: Thursday, June 6, 2019, 09:54:57 »

It shouldn't be difficult to keep up...

  from this we can work out that Cambridge topped the reduced offer.  It's kind of what happens in football, player moves for more money....


We didn't offer Knoyle reduced terms though, thats why we will get a fee for Knoyle and not a free transfer.

This is just guesswork Reg and you know that.

I wouldn't be surprised if its due to location with Cambridge being almost an hour closer to East London than Swindon, as RobT says that could be the difference to a player not earning shitloads of money on a similar contract there as to what we offered him.
Logged

Because I chose to play the fool in a six-piece band
First-night nerves every one-night stand
I should be glad to be so inclined
What a waste! What a waste!
Rock n Roll don't mind.
pauld


+150/-133
Offline Offline

Posts: 20773





Ignore
« Reply #3 on: Thursday, June 6, 2019, 09:56:12 »

It shouldn't be difficult to keep up...

  from this we can work out that Cambridge topped the reduced offer.  It's kind of what happens in football, player moves for more money....


No we can't. We can assume that (and it would be a reasonable assumption), but there's nothing there that categorically states that Cambridge made an improved offer, just that the original offer we made to him was reduced. There's nothing to even indicate that that would have been less than last season
Logged
Peter Venkman


+314/-178
Offline Offline

Posts: 31196


Enjoy yourself its later than you think.




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: Thursday, June 6, 2019, 09:56:55 »

No we can't. We can assume that (and it would be a reasonable assumption), but there's nothing there that categorically states that Cambridge made an improved offer, just that the original offer we made to him was reduced. There's nothing to even indicate that that would have been less than last season
Exactly.
Logged

Because I chose to play the fool in a six-piece band
First-night nerves every one-night stand
I should be glad to be so inclined
What a waste! What a waste!
Rock n Roll don't mind.
horlock07


+31289/-27197
Offline Offline

Posts: 10397


Lives up north




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: Thursday, June 6, 2019, 09:58:56 »

No we can't. We can assume that (and it would be a reasonable assumption), but there's nothing there that categorically states that Cambridge made an improved offer, just that the original offer we made to him was reduced. There's nothing to even indicate that that would have been less than last season

Hang on, you are not saying that reg is making something up suit his tired 'I told you so narrative', will the world ever spin freely on its axis again! 
Logged
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia


+158/-559
Offline Offline

Posts: 34189





Ignore
« Reply #6 on: Thursday, June 6, 2019, 10:11:10 »

No we can't. We can assume that (and it would be a reasonable assumption), but there's nothing there that categorically states that Cambridge made an improved offer, just that the original offer we made to him was reduced. There's nothing to even indicate that that would have been less than last season

The alternative view by implication is that we offered Knoyle a reduced contract, and then he chose to reject it to move to Cambridge as they offered him the same, or less.  I'll carry on with my assumption then, thanks all the same.
Logged
horlock07


+31289/-27197
Offline Offline

Posts: 10397


Lives up north




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: Thursday, June 6, 2019, 10:33:23 »

The alternative view by implication is that we offered Knoyle a reduced contract, and then he chose to reject it to move to Cambridge as they offered him the same, or less.  I'll carry on with my assumption then, thanks all the same.

So just in order that we can be clear, this is not true then?

Cambridge will have offered more money.
Logged
DV Canio
Rock, paper, scissors, lizard, Spock


+8/-110
Offline Offline

Posts: 25704


Joseph McLaughlin




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: Thursday, June 6, 2019, 10:34:21 »

We offered Knoyle reduced terms comparative to the first contract offered.
Those reduced terms could still have been (...and probably were) an increase in terms compared with his expired contract.

If he was earning 1k a week and we offered him 4K a week then reduced the terms to 3k a week - we are still offering him more money on the ‘reduced’ terms than he was on originally
Logged
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia


+158/-559
Offline Offline

Posts: 34189





Ignore
« Reply #9 on: Thursday, June 6, 2019, 10:47:36 »

So just in order that we can be clear, this is not true then?


Just to be clear, it is an assumption based on the available evidence and the application of common sense.

It's rather like the debate between Bohr and Einstein in the 30's.... Bohr's contention being that quantum theory suggested the moon wasn't there if you are not looking... Einstein's argument, common sense tells you it is there when you're not looking.

Logged
horlock07


+31289/-27197
Offline Offline

Posts: 10397


Lives up north




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: Thursday, June 6, 2019, 10:48:59 »

Just to be clear, it is an assumption based on the available evidence and the application of common sense.

It's rather like the debate between Bohr and Einstein in the 30's.... Bohr's contention being that quantum theory suggested the moon wasn't there if you are not looking... Einstein's argument, common sense tells you it is there when you're not looking.



So no then.
Logged
pauld


+150/-133
Offline Offline

Posts: 20773





Ignore
« Reply #11 on: Thursday, June 6, 2019, 10:58:08 »

The alternative view by implication is that we offered Knoyle a reduced contract, and then he chose to reject it to move to Cambridge as they offered him the same, or less.  I'll carry on with my assumption then, thanks all the same.
That's fine. But it's an assumption, whereas you said it was a deduction, which it wasn't.
Logged
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia


+158/-559
Offline Offline

Posts: 34189





Ignore
« Reply #12 on: Thursday, June 6, 2019, 10:58:51 »

So no then.

Not at all.... I stand by the assumption based on the available evidence and application of common sense.  Ignoring as to whether the epistomology here is a priori or a posteriori... what makes you think Knoyle signed foir Cambridge for less money?
Logged
Peter Venkman


+314/-178
Offline Offline

Posts: 31196


Enjoy yourself its later than you think.




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: Thursday, June 6, 2019, 11:06:50 »

We offered Knoyle reduced terms comparative to the first contract offered.
Those reduced terms could still have been (...and probably were) an increase in terms compared with his expired contract.

If he was earning 1k a week and we offered him 4K a week then reduced the terms to 3k a week - we are still offering him more money on the ‘reduced’ terms than he was on originally

This.

If he was on £1,000 a week and we offered him a rise to £1,200 a week and then we withdrew it and offered him at least the same contract he was on £1,000 a week then we are still entitled to a transfer fee being he is under 24, the fee is based usually upon the division he was playing in, the amount of appearances he made and his wages.

« Last Edit: Thursday, June 6, 2019, 11:12:30 by Peter Venkman » Logged

Because I chose to play the fool in a six-piece band
First-night nerves every one-night stand
I should be glad to be so inclined
What a waste! What a waste!
Rock n Roll don't mind.
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia


+158/-559
Offline Offline

Posts: 34189





Ignore
« Reply #14 on: Thursday, June 6, 2019, 11:19:54 »

That's fine. But it's an assumption, whereas you said it was a deduction, which it wasn't.

I may have deduced, hence the    to get to the assumption, but I'll continue to hold it, until such time as someone like yourself Venkman or Horlock can provide me with evidence, that Knoyle chose to leave us on the back of being offered less money by Cambridge.... not expecting pay slips or owt like that, just what we know and common sense will do.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5   Go Up
Print
Jump to: