So Murphy didn't say he was willing to take a pay cut before the end of the season as the other poster claimed. He doesn't actually say he wanted/would have signed a new deal at the time either.
It looks to me he just wanted to know if he was going to get a contract offer from the club, presumably so he could weigh up all his options and see what deal would be best for him.
The fact is we tried to keep him but he signed a better deal elsewhere, people want to believe we let him go and didn't try to keep him then that is up to them.
I'd say you're not really trying to keep him if you're ignoring his suggestion that it's decided before the end of the season (per earlier article). If you're trying to keep him, you make an offer at that point. It's absolutely crystal clear that he didn't want it dragging out into the summer. Whether he'd have taken a wage cut at that point in time isn't clear one way or the other, accepted, but since it wasn't offered, we'll never know. (Personally though, I think I'd be more minded to take a reduced deal for the sake of security, than take the risk that nothing might come up that I fancied later on when I was out of contract. It seems Murphy was looking for some security, reading that earlier article, if he was just after more money I'd imagine he'd simply sit quiet and let his contract run down).
This article, I think, explains quite clearly how Murphy feels about that:
You seem to hold the opinion that the club did it's best to keep him, I'm suggesting (also an opinion) that isn't backed up by what's said here and in the previous article. If you want to believe that the club did it's best to keep him, then that's up to you.
I'd say you're not really trying to keep him if you're ignoring his suggestion that it's decided before the end of the season (per earlier article). If you're trying to keep him, you make an offer at that point. It's absolutely crystal clear that he didn't want it dragging out into the summer. Whether he'd have taken a wage cut at that point in time isn't clear one way or the other, accepted, but since it wasn't offered, we'll never know. (Personally though, I think I'd be more minded to take a reduced deal for the sake of security, than take the risk that nothing might come up that I fancied later on when I was out of contract. It seems Murphy was looking for some security, reading that earlier article, if he was just after more money I'd imagine he'd simply sit quiet and let his contract run down).
This article, I think, explains quite clearly how Murphy feels about that:
You seem to hold the opinion that the club did it's best to keep him, I'm suggesting (also an opinion) that isn't backed up by what's said here and in the previous article. If you want to believe that the club did it's best to keep him, then that's up to you.
Well in that article Murphy says why he wasn't offered a contract earlier, the club were concentrating on staying in the division. They wanted to make sure they knew what division so they could set the budget before making him an offer.
Yes I think the club did the best to keep him within the financial limits and restrictions at the club (which admittedly are self imposed by the club for moving to Northampton). He received a better offer than us and moved on, it happens.
Well in that article Murphy says why he wasn't offered a contract earlier, the club were concentrating on staying in the division. They wanted to make sure they knew what division so they could set the budget before making him an offer.
Yes I think the club did the best to keep him within the financial limits and restrictions at the club (which admittedly are self imposed by the club for moving to Northampton). He received a better offer than us and moved on, it happens.
Given they are happy enough to make baker go why would they pretend they offered him a contract? I would guess Huddersfield had filtered their interest in him down to him anyway.
Given they are happy enough to make baker go why would they pretend they offered him a contract? I would guess Huddersfield had filtered their interest in him down to him anyway.
Given they are happy enough to make baker go why would they pretend they offered him a contract? I would guess Huddersfield had filtered their interest in him down to him anyway.
The strange thing in all this bizarre schenanigans outside the football club, the team and unit around that still seems to follow the cliches.
You know the things, star players won't be sold, looking hard for replacements, hoping to add to the squad... the kind of thing every club on earth bar an elite few does before doing the opposite!
SISU have traditionally claimed to have spoken about contracts with players, while the players beg to differ. I'd say it's as much a business as usual from the football side of things, that seems to carry blithely on whilst ignoring the fact it doesn't really matter in terms of getting fans onside just atm!
FWIW I'm sure they would have offered him a deal of sorts, or at least intended to. The traditional SISU way of contract negotiation has been to leave things to the last minute, after all. Am also sure he could earn more at Huddersfield, and am also sure he's confident enough in himself he thinks he can break into the first team there