|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Sept 9, 2015 6:42:10 GMT
Indeed. Massive congratulations to him for making the most of his very limited ability. Truth is, he's about as Irish as I am and it is highly unlikely he'd have any international caps or goals had he not decided to adopt his nationality. Walters is more Irish than sterling is English. So I'm led to believe yes. He's also got better stats than sterling as well and we all know how johnny boy loves his stats. |
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Sept 9, 2015 7:03:43 GMT
Has he? Actually I don't mean 'has he' I mean no he hasn't. He wouldn't have time to while scoring all those goals for club and country. You certainly don't get the humble, just happy to be here vibe from him that you got earlier on his Stoke career. Hubris |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2015 14:02:23 GMT
You certainly don't get the humble, just happy to be here vibe from him that you got earlier on his Stoke career. Hubris What a great word. |
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Sept 9, 2015 14:51:01 GMT
It comes before Nemesis the destroyer |
|
|
|
Post by Pretty Little Boother on Sept 9, 2015 16:14:56 GMT
Regarding the Ireland shirt - I like it's retro look. *its |
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Sept 9, 2015 19:36:28 GMT
Puts him in the top 2 for another stat then which will please Walters, give him something else to sound off about, yet won't help him a jot in getting the contract he craves. Roi are an extremely limited international outfit and Jon Walters is an extremely limited footballer. It is really quite extraordinary that a manager who has won the Premier League manager of the season and another who has taken Stoke City to their highest ever Premier League finish should between them give an extremely limited footballer 178 starts in the Premier League, and that the International managers of a reasonably good international side should give him 35 caps  How on earth has that happened ? Or, perhaps they know what they are doing and he isn't extremely limited. |
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Sept 9, 2015 19:41:46 GMT
Puts him in the top 2 for another stat then which will please Walters, give him something else to sound off about, yet won't help him a jot in getting the contract he craves. Roi are an extremely limited international outfit and Jon Walters is an extremely limited footballer. It is really quite extraordinary that a manager who has won the Premier League manager of the season and another who has taken Stoke City to their highest ever Premier League finish should between them give an extremely limited footballer 178 starts in the Premier League, and that the International managers of a reasonably good international side should give him 35 caps How on earth has that happened ? Or, perhaps they know what they are doing and he isn't extremely limited. Or maybe he's been part of pretty limited teams and nations who haven't had the resources or pool of players to replace him. I get that you love him and that is fair enough. When describing him as limited I'm actually being polite to him. He's a premier league footballer who is better without the ball than with it. Hopefully we will soon have seen the last of lassie and he will soon find himself a new home |
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Sept 9, 2015 19:49:55 GMT
It is really quite extraordinary that a manager who has won the Premier League manager of the season and another who has taken Stoke City to their highest ever Premier League finish should between them give an extremely limited footballer 178 starts in the Premier League, and that the International managers of a reasonably good international side should give him 35 caps How on earth has that happened ? Or, perhaps they know what they are doing and he isn't extremely limited. Or maybe he's been part of pretty limited teams and nations who haven't had the resources or pool of players to replace him. I get that you love him and that is fair enough. When describing him as limited I'm actually being polite to him. He's a premier league footballer who is better without the ball than with it. Hopefully we will soon have seen the last of lassie and he will soon find himself a new home I don't actually love him. Don't "love" any of them, and he lost his status as my favourite player with his post-election tweets, big style. But I recognise his abilities and attributes as a player, and I think to describe him as extremely limited is, with all due respect, ridiculous, as well as implying that the managers who have played him so much at the top level of the game don't know what they are doing. |
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Sept 9, 2015 21:09:11 GMT
Or maybe he's been part of pretty limited teams and nations who haven't had the resources or pool of players to replace him. I get that you love him and that is fair enough. When describing him as limited I'm actually being polite to him. He's a premier league footballer who is better without the ball than with it. Hopefully we will soon have seen the last of lassie and he will soon find himself a new home I don't actually love him. Don't "love" any of them, and he lost his status as my favourite player with his post-election tweets, big style. But I recognise his abilities and attributes as a player, and I think to describe him as extremely limited is, with all due respect, ridiculous, as well as implying that the managers who have played him so much at the top level of the game don't know what they are doing. Its ridiculous in your opinion but not in mine. Jon Walters has been a regular in a poor/very average stoke team guided by Tony pulis. We were in the bottom 3 when Hughes had to rely on him initially and our run to 50 points was jet propelled by odenwingie who took his place in the team. Despite arguably his best season in a stoke shirt last season, do you really think he'd have featured had odemwingie not got injured? Even so, great though it is for us, 9th is still pretty much mid table obscurity and therefore pretty average. He's played for a pretty poor republic of Ireland team where he's often been behind the likes of Shane long and noel hunt in the pecking order and with him in the squad, arguably the worst Irish side of my lifetime haven't come close to qualifying for any tournament. Why's that? Namely because they are a team of plodders who simply aren't good enough, the epitome of Jon Walters if ever there was one. Mark Bowen spoke of our aspiration to finish 8th, 7th or even 6th. Taking those teams ahead of us, would Walters get into the teams of Southampton, Swansea, Liverpool or spurs? Would he even get into the teams of those below us, the likes of West ham, crystal palace or Everton? The answer you're looking for is a resounding no. If we genuinely have aspirations to finish in those lofty positions, Jon Walters cannot be a regular starter. If he is, we will fall short and maybe even drop behind the likes of those below us last season and be entrenched very much in mid table mediocrity. Not quite so ridiculous when you view it from that perspective is it? Mediocre. Average. Limited. All very apt descriptions of Jon Walters in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by Sergeant Muttley on Sept 9, 2015 21:18:52 GMT
I don't actually love him. Don't "love" any of them, and he lost his status as my favourite player with his post-election tweets, big style. But I recognise his abilities and attributes as a player, and I think to describe him as extremely limited is, with all due respect, ridiculous, as well as implying that the managers who have played him so much at the top level of the game don't know what they are doing. Its ridiculous in your opinion but not in mine. Jon Walters has been a regular in a poor/very average stoke team guided by Tony pulis. We were in the bottom 3 when Hughes had to rely on him initially and our run to 50 points was jet propelled by odenwingie who took his place in the team. Despite arguably his best season in a stoke shirt last season, do you really think he'd have featured had odemwingie not got injured? Even so, great though it is for us, 9th is still pretty much mid table obscurity and therefore pretty average. He's played for a pretty poor republic of Ireland team where he's often been behind the likes of Shane long and noel hunt in the pecking order and with him in the squad, arguably the worst Irish side of my lifetime haven't come close to qualifying for any tournament. Why's that? Namely because they are a team of plodders who simply aren't good enough, the epitome of Jon Walters if ever there was one. Mark Bowen spoke of our aspiration to finish 8th, 7th or even 6th. Taking those teams ahead of us, would Walters get into the teams of Southampton, Swansea, Liverpool or spurs? Would he even get into the teams of those below us, the likes of West ham, crystal palace or Everton? The answer you're looking for is a resounding no. If we genuinely have aspirations to finish in those lofty positions, Jon Walters cannot be a regular starter. If he is, we will fall short and maybe even drop behind the likes of those below us last season and be entrenched very much in mid table mediocrity. Not quite so ridiculous when you view it from that perspective is it? Mediocre. Average. Limited. All very apt descriptions of Jon Walters in my opinion. I think the chairman may disagree with you mate on your comments |
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Sept 9, 2015 21:22:31 GMT
Its ridiculous in your opinion but not in mine. Jon Walters has been a regular in a poor/very average stoke team guided by Tony pulis. We were in the bottom 3 when Hughes had to rely on him initially and our run to 50 points was jet propelled by odenwingie who took his place in the team. Despite arguably his best season in a stoke shirt last season, do you really think he'd have featured had odemwingie not got injured? Even so, great though it is for us, 9th is still pretty much mid table obscurity and therefore pretty average. He's played for a pretty poor republic of Ireland team where he's often been behind the likes of Shane long and noel hunt in the pecking order and with him in the squad, arguably the worst Irish side of my lifetime haven't come close to qualifying for any tournament. Why's that? Namely because they are a team of plodders who simply aren't good enough, the epitome of Jon Walters if ever there was one. Mark Bowen spoke of our aspiration to finish 8th, 7th or even 6th. Taking those teams ahead of us, would Walters get into the teams of Southampton, Swansea, Liverpool or spurs? Would he even get into the teams of those below us, the likes of West ham, crystal palace or Everton? The answer you're looking for is a resounding no. If we genuinely have aspirations to finish in those lofty positions, Jon Walters cannot be a regular starter. If he is, we will fall short and maybe even drop behind the likes of those below us last season and be entrenched very much in mid table mediocrity. Not quite so ridiculous when you view it from that perspective is it? Mediocre. Average. Limited. All very apt descriptions of Jon Walters in my opinion. I think the chairman may disagree with you mate on your comments He disagrees so much, he's offered him a generous new contract that Walters can't wait to sign. Oh, hang on a minute... |
|
|
|
Post by Sergeant Muttley on Sept 9, 2015 21:28:41 GMT
I think the chairman may disagree with you mate on your comments He disagrees so much, he's offered him a generous new contract that Walters can't wait to sign. Oh, hang on a minute... You must have missed his comments in the media last week then mate?Add to that the comments of Carragher,Neville,Thompson and a lot more pundits on a regular basis who say he should be the 1st name on the teamsheet. |
|
|
|
Post by samba :) on Sept 9, 2015 21:34:52 GMT
only on the Oatcake could a thread congratulating a Stoke player on a positive achievement result in that kind of post. Is there anything wrong with just saying "Well done"? Indeed. Massive congratulations to him for making the most of his very limited ability. Truth is, he's about as Irish as I am and it is highly unlikely he'd have any international caps or goals had he not decided to adopt his nationality. his mother was irish |
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Sept 9, 2015 21:43:34 GMT
He disagrees so much, he's offered him a generous new contract that Walters can't wait to sign. Oh, hang on a minute... You must have missed his comments in the media last week then mate?Add to that the comments of Carragher,Neville,Thompson and a lot more pundits on a regular basis who say he should be the 1st name on the teamsheet. He should be in a team that is happy with mid table obscurity or one that is unlikely to see much of the ball. We aren't that team anymore. I saw the chairmans comments and I've seen Hughes make similar ones as well. I prefer to take the view of Jon Walters on that really and if the club valued him as much as they say they do, they'd offer him a contract that reflected their opinion of him. As it happens, they haven't. Facta non verba mate. Facta non verba. |
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Sept 9, 2015 21:44:30 GMT
Indeed. Massive congratulations to him for making the most of his very limited ability. Truth is, he's about as Irish as I am and it is highly unlikely he'd have any international caps or goals had he not decided to adopt his nationality. his mother was irish So I believe yes. |
|
|
|
Post by Sergeant Muttley on Sept 9, 2015 21:48:13 GMT
You must have missed his comments in the media last week then mate?Add to that the comments of Carragher,Neville,Thompson and a lot more pundits on a regular basis who say he should be the 1st name on the teamsheet. He should be in a team that is happy with mid table obscurity or one that is unlikely to see much of the ball. We aren't that team anymore. I saw the chairmans comments and I've seen Hughes make similar ones as well. I prefer to take the view of Jon Walters on that really and if the club valued him as much as they say they do, they'd offer him a contract that reflected their opinion of him. As it happens, they haven't. Facta non verba mate. Facta non verba. So Coates and Hughes are telling the press a load of bollocks then or facta non verba as you put it?Hughes as said the same from day one about Walters by the way but then again i suppose like a lot on here he's a Pulis player so lets slag him off |
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Sept 9, 2015 21:53:51 GMT
He should be in a team that is happy with mid table obscurity or one that is unlikely to see much of the ball. We aren't that team anymore. I saw the chairmans comments and I've seen Hughes make similar ones as well. I prefer to take the view of Jon Walters on that really and if the club valued him as much as they say they do, they'd offer him a contract that reflected their opinion of him. As it happens, they haven't. Facta non verba mate. Facta non verba. So Coates and Hughes are telling the press a load of bollocks then or facta non verba as you put it?Hughes as said the same from day one about Walters by the way but then again i suppose like a lot on here he's a Pulis player so lets slag him off It has absolutely nothing to do with him being a pulis player because he isn't. He's a stoke city player. Who signed him is irrelevant. I'm not saying they don't value him either but clearly they don't value him as much as Walters values himself. If they did, he wouldn't have felt inclined to put in a transfer request and he would be sitting on and enjoying the trappings of his nice new contract. Edit - as qpr manager, I think Hughes said similar things about Jamie Mackie. |
|
|
|
Post by Sergeant Muttley on Sept 9, 2015 22:00:44 GMT
So Coates and Hughes are telling the press a load of bollocks then or facta non verba as you put it?Hughes as said the same from day one about Walters by the way but then again i suppose like a lot on here he's a Pulis player so lets slag him off It has absolutely nothing to do with him being a pulis player because he isn't. He's a stoke city player. Who signed him is irrelevant. I'm not saying they don't value him either but clearly they don't value him as much as Walters values himself. If they did, he wouldn't have felt inclined to put in a transfer request and he would be sitting on and enjoying the trappings of his nice new contract. Edit - as qpr manager, I think Hughes said similar things about Jamie Mackie. We'll agree to differ on the 1st point mate and Jamie Mackie isn't fit to lace Walters boots |
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Sept 9, 2015 22:08:20 GMT
It has absolutely nothing to do with him being a pulis player because he isn't. He's a stoke city player. Who signed him is irrelevant. I'm not saying they don't value him either but clearly they don't value him as much as Walters values himself. If they did, he wouldn't have felt inclined to put in a transfer request and he would be sitting on and enjoying the trappings of his nice new contract. Edit - as qpr manager, I think Hughes said similar things about Jamie Mackie. We'll agree to differ on the 1st point mate and Jamie Mackie isn't fit to lace Walters boots I didn't say he was. I'm saying that Hughes said similar things about another very limited player whilst he was manager at another club. As for my first point, are you saying my view of Walters is down to who signed him and that I'd think differently had Hughes signed him? If so, can you tell me what I want for my tea tomorrow because you clearly know my mind better than I do. |
|
|
|
Post by knowles on Sept 9, 2015 23:20:31 GMT
Arguably the worst Irish side of my lifetime haven't come close to qualifying for any tournament. Why's that? Namely because they are a team of plodders who simply aren't good enough, the epitome of Jon Walters if ever there was one. Just to be picky...didn't Ireland qualify for Euro 2012? (admittedly they were pretty shite though!) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2015 1:15:33 GMT
I don't actually love him. Don't "love" any of them, and he lost his status as my favourite player with his post-election tweets, big style. But I recognise his abilities and attributes as a player, and I think to describe him as extremely limited is, with all due respect, ridiculous, as well as implying that the managers who have played him so much at the top level of the game don't know what they are doing. Its ridiculous in your opinion but not in mine. Jon Walters has been a regular in a poor/very average stoke team guided by Tony pulis. We were in the bottom 3 when Hughes had to rely on him initially and our run to 50 points was jet propelled by odenwingie who took his place in the team. Despite arguably his best season in a stoke shirt last season, do you really think he'd have featured had odemwingie not got injured? Even so, great though it is for us, 9th is still pretty much mid table obscurity and therefore pretty average. He's played for a pretty poor republic of Ireland team where he's often been behind the likes of Shane long and noel hunt in the pecking order and with him in the squad, arguably the worst Irish side of my lifetime haven't come close to qualifying for any tournament. Why's that? Namely because they are a team of plodders who simply aren't good enough, the epitome of Jon Walters if ever there was one. Mark Bowen spoke of our aspiration to finish 8th, 7th or even 6th. Taking those teams ahead of us, would Walters get into the teams of Southampton, Swansea, Liverpool or spurs? Would he even get into the teams of those below us, the likes of West ham, crystal palace or Everton? The answer you're looking for is a resounding no. If we genuinely have aspirations to finish in those lofty positions, Jon Walters cannot be a regular starter. If he is, we will fall short and maybe even drop behind the likes of those below us last season and be entrenched very much in mid table mediocrity. Not quite so ridiculous when you view it from that perspective is it? Mediocre. Average. Limited. All very apt descriptions of Jon Walters in my opinion. Whilst I don't disagree with anything you're saying, in the interest of being fair Ireland did qualify for Euro 2012 and Jonny boy was in the squad. I think he's my favourite source of Stoke related debate to be fair as well. edit - must remember to read all replies on thread before replying |
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Sept 10, 2015 6:34:19 GMT
I don't actually love him. Don't "love" any of them, and he lost his status as my favourite player with his post-election tweets, big style. But I recognise his abilities and attributes as a player, and I think to describe him as extremely limited is, with all due respect, ridiculous, as well as implying that the managers who have played him so much at the top level of the game don't know what they are doing. Its ridiculous in your opinion but not in mine. Jon Walters has been a regular in a poor/very average stoke team guided by Tony pulis. We were in the bottom 3 when Hughes had to rely on him initially and our run to 50 points was jet propelled by odenwingie who took his place in the team. Despite arguably his best season in a stoke shirt last season, do you really think he'd have featured had odemwingie not got injured? Even so, great though it is for us, 9th is still pretty much mid table obscurity and therefore pretty average. He's played for a pretty poor republic of Ireland team where he's often been behind the likes of Shane long and noel hunt in the pecking order and with him in the squad, arguably the worst Irish side of my lifetime haven't come close to qualifying for any tournament. Why's that? Namely because they are a team of plodders who simply aren't good enough, the epitome of Jon Walters if ever there was one. Mark Bowen spoke of our aspiration to finish 8th, 7th or even 6th. Taking those teams ahead of us, would Walters get into the teams of Southampton, Swansea, Liverpool or spurs? Would he even get into the teams of those below us, the likes of West ham, crystal palace or Everton? The answer you're looking for is a resounding no. If we genuinely have aspirations to finish in those lofty positions, Jon Walters cannot be a regular starter. If he is, we will fall short and maybe even drop behind the likes of those below us last season and be entrenched very much in mid table mediocrity. Not quite so ridiculous when you view it from that perspective is it? Mediocre. Average. Limited. All very apt descriptions of Jon Walters in my opinion. That's quite a portfolio of trenchant opinions and speculations, some of them presented as though they are facts. To take just a couple. Neither you nor I have any way of knowing how many games SJW would have had, or would have, if he was in the squads of any of the 7 clubs you mention, but, speaking hypothetically, even if it were the case that he wouldn't have had many at some of those clubs, that still wouldn't make him, on any normal use of those words, an "extremely limited" player, which was the (only) point I made. Similarly, with the speculation about how may less games he would have played if Odemwingie had not been injured. My point was a simple one - that on any normal use of language, it is simply not credible that two different but both very experienced and successful Premier League managers would give an "extremely limited" player 178 League games in just 5 seasons in a mid-table side Premier League side. |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Sept 10, 2015 7:07:08 GMT
So Coates and Hughes are telling the press a load of bollocks then or facta non verba as you put it?Hughes as said the same from day one about Walters by the way but then again i suppose like a lot on here he's a Pulis player so lets slag him off It has absolutely nothing to do with him being a pulis player because he isn't. He's a stoke city player. Who signed him is irrelevant. I'm not saying they don't value him either but clearly they don't value him as much as Walters values himself. If they did, he wouldn't have felt inclined to put in a transfer request and he would be sitting on and enjoying the trappings of his nice new contract. Edit - as qpr manager, I think Hughes said similar things about Jamie Mackie. The contract dispute doesn't seem to be anything to do with how the club value Walters now, or even next season - but whether they are prepared AT THIS TIME to offer him a contract which runs to include the 2017/18 season. Given his age they are saying that they won't commit to the 2017/18 season until much closer to the time and contingent upon the number of appearances he makes in the 2016/17 season. That seems fair enough to me - but it says nothing about how they value him at the moment. It is quite common for even the best players to move to shorter contracts once they approach their mid 30s. |
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Sept 10, 2015 10:23:23 GMT
It has absolutely nothing to do with him being a pulis player because he isn't. He's a stoke city player. Who signed him is irrelevant. I'm not saying they don't value him either but clearly they don't value him as much as Walters values himself. If they did, he wouldn't have felt inclined to put in a transfer request and he would be sitting on and enjoying the trappings of his nice new contract. Edit - as qpr manager, I think Hughes said similar things about Jamie Mackie. The contract dispute doesn't seem to be anything to do with how the club value Walters now, or even next season - but whether they are prepared AT THIS TIME to offer him a contract which runs to include the 2017/18 season. Given his age they are saying that they won't commit to the 2017/18 season until much closer to the time and contingent upon the number of appearances he makes in the 2016/17 season. That seems fair enough to me - but it says nothing about how they value him at the moment. It is quite common for even the best players to move to shorter contracts once they approach their mid 30s. I don't disagree at all. My point was that Jon Walters does and he has said specifically that the club talk about valuing him and what he brings yet haven't given him a contract offer than reflects the value that they say they place on him. The club value him but clearly, in Jon Walters opinion, not enough or not as much as they say they do. If he believes this, who is anyone else to argue? I would say the club are right to value Jon Walters less than he clearly values himself. Put simply, he isn't as good as he obviously thinks he is. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2015 12:22:28 GMT
The contract dispute doesn't seem to be anything to do with how the club value Walters now, or even next season - but whether they are prepared AT THIS TIME to offer him a contract which runs to include the 2017/18 season. Given his age they are saying that they won't commit to the 2017/18 season until much closer to the time and contingent upon the number of appearances he makes in the 2016/17 season. That seems fair enough to me - but it says nothing about how they value him at the moment. It is quite common for even the best players to move to shorter contracts once they approach their mid 30s. I don't disagree at all. My point was that Jon Walters does and he has said specifically that the club talk about valuing him and what he brings yet haven't given him a contract offer than reflects the value that they say they place on him. The club value him but clearly, in Jon Walters opinion, not enough or not as much as they say they do. If he believes this, who is anyone else to argue? I would say the club are right to value Jon Walters less than he clearly values himself. Put simply, he isn't as good as he obviously thinks he is. your conclusions don't add up though UNLESS you use the pre-supposition that your presumptions are 100% fact. the simple conclusion to come to (based on all the factual evidence rather than your speculation and presumptions which seem to be based on nothing other than your own personal opinion of him)) is simply that they DO value him as much as he values himself at the moment (hence the club offering him a contract and publicly stating on numerous occasions how much they want him to stay) but cannot guarantee that he will add the same value at the age of 35. contracts are offered based on how good they are now; the expiry date of that contract takes into account whether or not they will be as good in x amount of years time and therefore add the same thing to the squad. in short, the expiry date of the contract (which is the sticking point with Walters and Stoke) infers, implies or states NOTHING about how much they value him at this point in time. genuinely hope for your employers sake that you have little to do with hiring people or offering contracts given your obvious lack of knowledge as to what they are based on. |
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Sept 10, 2015 14:42:15 GMT
I don't disagree at all. My point was that Jon Walters does and he has said specifically that the club talk about valuing him and what he brings yet haven't given him a contract offer than reflects the value that they say they place on him. The club value him but clearly, in Jon Walters opinion, not enough or not as much as they say they do. If he believes this, who is anyone else to argue? I would say the club are right to value Jon Walters less than he clearly values himself. Put simply, he isn't as good as he obviously thinks he is. your conclusions don't add up though UNLESS you use the pre-supposition that your presumptions are 100% fact. the simple conclusion to come to (based on all the factual evidence rather than your speculation and presumptions which seem to be based on nothing other than your own personal opinion of him)) is simply that they DO value him as much as he values himself at the moment (hence the club offering him a contract and publicly stating on numerous occasions how much they want him to stay) but cannot guarantee that he will add the same value at the age of 35. contracts are offered based on how good they are now; the expiry date of that contract takes into account whether or not they will be as good in x amount of years time and therefore add the same thing to the squad. in short, the expiry date of the contract (which is the sticking point with Walters and Stoke) infers, implies or states NOTHING about how much they value him at this point in time. genuinely hope for your employers sake that you have little to do with hiring people or offering contracts given your obvious lack of knowledge as to what they are based on. As it happens I do have such responsibilities and if I wanted to keep someone or recruit them I'd make them an offer reflective of what I felt they were worth to either get them or keep them. Stoke have done exactly that with crouch, Whelan and Adam recently and all signed extensions. Walters hasn't and has said quite specifically that the club need to offer him something reflective of the value they say they place on him At one point only a few weeks ago, he insinuated that there wasn't even a contract offer on the table. Amazing how you come to the conclusion that I'm making assumptions yet you aren't. You really do come across as one of the most condescending posters on this forum. Until he agrees a new contract it is fair to assume that the value the club have for him is reflected in the offer made to him and that it differs somewhat to what Walters believes he's worth himself. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2015 16:27:59 GMT
your conclusions don't add up though UNLESS you use the pre-supposition that your presumptions are 100% fact. the simple conclusion to come to (based on all the factual evidence rather than your speculation and presumptions which seem to be based on nothing other than your own personal opinion of him)) is simply that they DO value him as much as he values himself at the moment (hence the club offering him a contract and publicly stating on numerous occasions how much they want him to stay) but cannot guarantee that he will add the same value at the age of 35. contracts are offered based on how good they are now; the expiry date of that contract takes into account whether or not they will be as good in x amount of years time and therefore add the same thing to the squad. in short, the expiry date of the contract (which is the sticking point with Walters and Stoke) infers, implies or states NOTHING about how much they value him at this point in time. genuinely hope for your employers sake that you have little to do with hiring people or offering contracts given your obvious lack of knowledge as to what they are based on. As it happens I do have such responsibilities and if I wanted to keep someone or recruit them I'd make them an offer reflective of what I felt they were worth to either get them or keep them. Stoke have done exactly that with crouch, Whelan and Adam recently and all signed extensions. Walters hasn't and has said quite specifically that the club need to offer him something reflective of the value they say they place on him At one point only a few weeks ago, he insinuated that there wasn't even a contract offer on the table. Amazing how you come to the conclusion that I'm making assumptions yet you aren't. You really do come across as one of the most condescending posters on this forum. Until he agrees a new contract it is fair to assume that the value the club have for him is reflected in the offer made to him and that it differs somewhat to what Walters believes he's worth himself. i'm not making assumptions am i? he has said the issue is the length of contract not the money or anything that actually has been offered by Stoke within the contract they've put in front of him. if i seem condescending to someone who has come onto a thread about a Stoke player who is nearing a great acheivement, and then gone on to do nothing but belittle him, slag him off and insult him then i don't particularly give a flying fuck! try supporting the players in the team you support you miserable cock! |
|
|
|
Post by Discovery Stoke on Sept 10, 2015 16:40:45 GMT
If he spent some more of his valuable time on crossing and finishing instead of making himself look a cock on twatter then he would be a far superior football player. Instead he tries to be like Robert Huth and be the social media golden boy!
|
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Sept 10, 2015 17:37:24 GMT
As it happens I do have such responsibilities and if I wanted to keep someone or recruit them I'd make them an offer reflective of what I felt they were worth to either get them or keep them. Stoke have done exactly that with crouch, Whelan and Adam recently and all signed extensions. Walters hasn't and has said quite specifically that the club need to offer him something reflective of the value they say they place on him At one point only a few weeks ago, he insinuated that there wasn't even a contract offer on the table. Amazing how you come to the conclusion that I'm making assumptions yet you aren't. You really do come across as one of the most condescending posters on this forum. Until he agrees a new contract it is fair to assume that the value the club have for him is reflected in the offer made to him and that it differs somewhat to what Walters believes he's worth himself. i'm not making assumptions am i? he has said the issue is the length of contract not the money or anything that actually has been offered by Stoke within the contract they've put in front of him. if i seem condescending to someone who has come onto a thread about a Stoke player who is nearing a great acheivement, and then gone on to do nothing but belittle him, slag him off and insult him then i don't particularly give a flying fuck! try supporting the players in the team you support you miserable cock! Get you big guy. Another big hard man behind an anonymous user name and keyboard. Your parents must be very proud of you. I support the team every week, home and away, thanks, including Jon Walters. I haven't slagged him off and have actually praised him for making the absolute most of his limited ability and on having his best season to date (last season) in a stoke shirt. |
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Sept 10, 2015 17:59:27 GMT
i'm not making assumptions am i? he has said the issue is the length of contract not the money or anything that actually has been offered by Stoke within the contract they've put in front of him. if i seem condescending to someone who has come onto a thread about a Stoke player who is nearing a great acheivement, and then gone on to do nothing but belittle him, slag him off and insult him then i don't particularly give a flying fuck! try supporting the players in the team you support you miserable cock! Get you big guy. Another big hard man behind an anonymous user name and keyboard. Your parents must be very proud of you. I support the team every week, home and away, thanks, including Jon Walters. I haven't slagged him off and have actually praised him for making the absolute most of his limited ability and on having his best season to date (last season) in a stoke shirt. I suppose it depends how you define slagging someone off, Dave. In fairness to mickmills, I think a lot of people would say that - he isn't as good as he thinks he is - in describing him as limited I'm being polite - mediocre, average, limited - a plodder who simply isn't good enough - hopefully we will soon have seen the last of him comes pretty close to slagging him off, particularly in what started as a congratulatory thread about international goals. If that isn't slagging him off, I wouldn't like to be on the receiving end of a proper slagging off from you  |
|
How on earth has that happened ? 
