Swindon v Colchester pre match chat and matchday thread

[bathford]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p07ncylm

Talk of the Town from Shaun.

[Anteater]

4-1 Town

[RobertT]

We should win 2-0, but the sporting gods are nasty, we'll probably lose 1-0 with Norris recreating that goal where he'd fallen over in the 6 yard box and the ball hit him before trickling over the line

[Gnasher]

Sadly can't make this one. 1-1 or 4-0 win, can't decide which.

[Legends-Lounge]

Sadly can't make this one. 1-1 or 4-0 win, can't decide which.

Win, tempered expectations 3-1

[Tails]

Colchester are no mugs, this will be a tough game tonight. Not to mention the "case of the ex" is doubled with both Norris AND Robinson. In Robinsons case I'm sure he'd actually rather be in red tonight but he'll be desperate to prove a point I imagine.

Nonetheless it'll be nice for the drive down the M4 to be filled with excitement!

[Audrey]

Just a little more info on Doyle’s loan.

It is season long and cannot be recalled in January. We have paid a loan fee to Bradford and are paying in excess of 50% of his wages. He cannot play for any other club this season apart from us/Bradford - so Bradford can't sell him in January to anybody but ourselves.

This is according to Radio Leeds. Seems iron clad to me.

Also

A player on loan can play against its parent club under the UEFA rule, as long as the host club has applied for, and received an express permission from the parent club allowing or permitting their player on loan to play against them.

[Panda Paws]

The club have confirmed he can't play against Bradford.

[Peter Venkman]

The club have confirmed he can't play against Bradford.

Yeah I think its a standard thing now with loans that a player cannot play against his parent club, in South America IIRC there was a case of match fixing when a loan player scored an OG so his parent team won the match, several years back. So it does makes sense.

Christian Roberts signed for Swindon from Bristol City and they inserted a clause in the transfer that Roberts was not allowed to play against them that season even though his wasn't a loan, probably wouldn't get away with that now.

[Audrey]

Strange how things change quickly. When Doyle first joined us Bradford fans were adamant, almost demanding, he be allowed to play against them as it would, in their view, be like playing 10 men.

Not so vocal now.

[Flashheart]

There were one or two on their forum claiming that he is actually a hindrance to teams he plays for, and teams he does play for will always struggle.

They must be feeling a bit silly.

[pauld]

There were one or two on their forum claiming that he is actually a hindrance to teams he plays for, and teams he does play for will always struggle.

Yeah, he's been constantly holding us back, scoring and creating all those goals, the bastard!

[Peter Venkman]

The last 2 days on the Bradford forum has been quite amusing to read, it does indeed suggest that as stated above there is no recall option in January and that we are paying only a percentage of his wages, here are a few posts on it since the weekend. With a couple of "silly" remarks at the end too.

I am still completely perplexed by the decision to let him go to a promotion rival, really really hope this doesn't bite us back on the ar$e come the end of the season. Some reports suggest that Swindon aren't even paying all of his wages which makes this even more baffling. Surely promotion is worth more than losing circa £5k a week in wages.
 
Before the Northampton game Radio Leeds were quoting we have paid Swindon to take him but I was not sure of what % of his wage we were paying, surely it can't be 100% that would make no sense at all.

I haven't seen a figure but am sure I ready somewhere it was over half of his wages they were paying.

Wouldn't have expected Swindon to be one of our promotion rivals this year tbh so understood why they wanted to get him off the wage bill, but if they could potentially occupy one of the top seven spots then we need to be holding them to ransom

up their contribution to 100 %, sign him, or we'll recall him and he can sit on our bench or (if he sulks over it and gets disruptive) make him train with the kids. Is it right that he can only play for us and Swindon this year now? I.e. no one other than Swindon can buy him in Jan?

Can we recall in Jan? If he's on 15 goals we should look at getting him in / selling him before his contract is up.
 
Someone posted Swindon have a season long loan and we cant recall him but I'd think we have a return clause if we want him to return, and if as you say he's still scoring Swindon can pay a fee if they want to keep Doyle.

They discussed this on Radio Leeds on Saturday. Apparently it was a loan where there was a small fee involved (??) but we are still contributing something towards his salary. They didn’t indicate how much. They did say there wasn’t a recall clause in Jan and went on to say that it seemed like one of those situations where a parting of ways was the best for both parties. Doyle never found the form that most us believed and hoped he would with us, whilst we needed the money created by him leaving to sign players in much needed alternative positions than his.

You don't care how many goals he scores for one of our opponents who are also going for promotion, I hope its not the goals Doyle scores for Swindon that determines who gets a play off spot.

I understand for Bowyer to bring in his own players we had to get rid of the high earners but to hear on Radio Leeds we're paying a % of his wages (large or small) whilst there is looking a bad piece of business at the present monent.

It's actually making our promotion push even more difficult when we've essentially gifted a top 7 rival with a clinical goalscorer. It's so ridiculously stupid!

The fact its looking a bad business decision is because he is scoring for Swindon. If he hadn't been scoring people would be saying its a great bit of business getting shut of Doyle look what we are saving on wages. The club knew what could happen and it didn't bother them. If there is no recall clause the club was happy with that. It's all ifs and buts Doyle is a Swindon player who's registration we hold but that's it.
 
Let's be honest, a large chunk of people supported letting him go for footballing reasons, Financial fair play meant we couldn't keep him as well. He didn't perform well. If players who left clubs always performed worse, then there wouldn't be a functioning transfer market.

we won't get any money from Swindon they are always on can't pay we take it away
 
So you're suggesting he didn't want to be at Bradford City but wants to be at Swindon Town. I find that difficult to believe.

[reeves4england]

Yeah I think its a standard thing now with loans that a player cannot play against his parent club, in South America IIRC there was a case of match fixing when a loan player scored an OG so his parent team won the match, several years back. So it does makes sense.

Christian Roberts signed for Swindon from Bristol City and they inserted a clause in the transfer that Roberts was not allowed to play against them that season even though his wasn't a loan, probably wouldn't get away with that now.

The current rules are that a loan player can only play against his parent club if permission is given in the loan agreement. The default is that they can't. BUT with a transfer you're not allowed to put the clause in any more, a la Christian Roberts. Once the player's gone you have no say when they can and can't play.

[Audrey]

I realise there is a difference between loaning a player to a club in your league and actually selling one, but would we be the same if Doris had knocked in 20+ last season with Colchester. Would we be pointing the finger at management for not playing to his strengths?

I don’t think so. They are obsessed with Doyle cos they paid £350,000 and £5k pw for him and he didn’t deliver. Whether we’ll end up paying anything for him or just signing him when OOC, I don’t know.

They were drooling when they signed the oldsters Vaughan and Donaldson - I know who I’d rather have.