| Carroll on 11:30 - Jun 8 with 1589 views | dmm |
| Carroll on 11:20 - Jun 8 by Maggsinho |
Sounds like Dozzell from Ipswich will be incoming at some point so that would fill that gap. |
Having read what Ipswich fans make of Dozzell, he seems quite similar to Carroll in both positive and negative respects. |  | |  |
| Carroll on 23:07 - Jun 8 with 1233 views | GloryHunter |
Clearly the club has a duty of care - and there is probably a clause in the players' contracts - but it always grates with me when an injured player recuperates on full wages, plus world-class private medical treatment, and then decides to leave on a sour note. Shame. |  | | |
| Carroll on 08:13 - Jun 9 with 1100 views | distortR |
| Carroll on 23:07 - Jun 8 by GloryHunter |
Clearly the club has a duty of care - and there is probably a clause in the players' contracts - but it always grates with me when an injured player recuperates on full wages, plus world-class private medical treatment, and then decides to leave on a sour note. Shame. |
I thought the opposite - he has repaid us for the duty of care  |  | | |
| Carroll on 08:48 - Jun 9 with 1044 views | francisbowles |
| Carroll on 23:07 - Jun 8 by GloryHunter |
Clearly the club has a duty of care - and there is probably a clause in the players' contracts - but it always grates with me when an injured player recuperates on full wages, plus world-class private medical treatment, and then decides to leave on a sour note. Shame. |
One thing puzzling me about this. Didn't we have an option for a second year? | | | |
| Carroll on 09:17 - Jun 9 with 984 views | dmm |
| Carroll on 08:48 - Jun 9 by francisbowles |
One thing puzzling me about this. Didn't we have an option for a second year? |
You're right, we did. Perhaps the new contract we offered him was significantly different from the previous one to negate that option clause, e.g. if we wanted to reduce his wage by 50% he'd have every right to refuse it. | | | |
| Carroll on 09:24 - Jun 9 with 972 views | Myke |
| Carroll on 23:07 - Jun 8 by GloryHunter |
Clearly the club has a duty of care - and there is probably a clause in the players' contracts - but it always grates with me when an injured player recuperates on full wages, plus world-class private medical treatment, and then decides to leave on a sour note. Shame. |
Not sure how it was 'sour'. He was offered a contract, which he opted not to accept. No mention of any recriminations or bitterness from either party. It;s just business. Personally sorry to see him go, but with our very tight budgetary restrictions and given his age it's understandable. If he was to accept a one year deal now, then this time next year, he would find it even harder to get a longer deal anywhere having just turned thirty. He has another 4-5 years ahead of him and I'm sure he's looking for a bit more security than one year at a time. | | | |
| Carroll on 09:49 - Jun 10 with 691 views | francisbowles |
| Carroll on 09:17 - Jun 9 by dmm |
You're right, we did. Perhaps the new contract we offered him was significantly different from the previous one to negate that option clause, e.g. if we wanted to reduce his wage by 50% he'd have every right to refuse it. |
Could be that with his injury record, we made the offer heavily weighted towards appearances. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
