Michael O' Connor on Trial

[sandyford_valiant]

If hes on 3k+ a week then i dont think a 60% cut is that bad!

 

It probably is when lines dicko and pope are on a lot more than the 60% wage.

 

He probably wants what they are getting and prob rightly so.

 

He's a good player who would do very well for the vale.

 

Jennings will be far cheaper but won't be as good as Micky.

 

Let's hope we've got a few quid for a few more players or if not we are massively weaker than last season in numbers and quality.

[valiant_593]

We offered what we could afford. We haven't wasted his time, if anything he has wasted our time.

 

He would of let us know what he wanted when we were first interested. Rotherham fans are saying he was on 4k a week, seems a bit unrealistic so lets say 3, no player would want to sign anywhere on 60% less wages, no normal person would do that in any job. I think weve messed him about and personally its an embarrassing offer.

[BIRCHES HEAD WHITES]

He's just tweeted to a vale fan saying he was willing to relocate but he wasn't willing to take a 60% pay cut at the vale...

 

if this is true it is shameful and embarrassing .

[valiant_593]

Hardly. Its probably the going wage in this division, if someone is overpaid in the first place its not shocking to offer them a realistic wage.

 

But they still wouldnt want to take that cut. A wage cut is fair enough, 20% or so, not 60%, I would never accept a job on 60% less wages than I was originally on.

[Gazleese]

Close the thread.

 

We'll be ringing Rob Taylor and Griff up at this rate.

[valiant_593]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]3346[/ATTACH]

if this is true it is shameful and embarrassing .

[Guppy 4 England]

But they still wouldnt want to take that cut. A wage cut is fair enough, 20% or so, not 60%, I would never accept a job on 60% less wages than I was originally on.

 

Even if it meant being unemployed?

[valiant_593]

Even if it meant being unemployed?

 

Thats different, but in Oconnor's case Im sure he will have offers elsewhere that are better.

[PortVale4Life]

Said all along it was money and that he wouldnt sign. Its a joke of an offer and an insult that we would offer a player 60% lower than what he was on! Lets see if we can get griff back ***.

[bar1]

But they still wouldnt want to take that cut. A wage cut is fair enough, 20% or so, not 60%, I would never accept a job on 60% less wages than I was originally on.

 

fair point but he his currently out of contract and without a club, so earning nothing

[George]

But they still wouldnt want to take that cut. A wage cut is fair enough, 20% or so, not 60%, I would never accept a job on 60% less wages than I was originally on.

 

At the moment though he is on ZERO. He was released. We can only offer him what we can afford to offer him.

[valiant_593]

At the moment though he is on ZERO. He was released. We can only offer him what we can afford to offer him.

 

I know but what is the point in offering a wage with such a big reduction. He will get better offers from other clubs, as I said a reduction is more than fair but I dont see any point in wasting time offering such a big wage reduction, would have been much better off looking at targets that we could realistically sign.

[Woakesy]

Can I just add that I find the Vale fans contacting O'Connor on Twitter are embarrassing.

 

Just leave him to get on with it. Stop creeping.

[George]

I know but what is the point in offering a wage with such a big reduction. He will get better offers from other clubs, as I said a reduction is more than fair but I dont see any point in wasting time offering such a big wage reduction, would have been much better off looking at targets that we could realistically sign.

 

Agreed. I'm guessing Adams though he could offer more when he came on trial (which doesn't bode well for the communication between Adams and Smurf).

 

Personally I though we would have offered him approx 2.5k. Whether he would have accepted that is a different matter.

[BIRCHES HEAD WHITES]

maybe we should make offers to 30 or so ex prem players , well those who are unemployed anyway and offer them a grand a week . we should get 3 or four then surely ? with them being unemployed they will work for that won't they ?