The Gentleman
Well-Known Member
Has he, where did you see that?
He's been offered a contract. He rejected it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Has he, where did you see that?
I'm sure we've had this exact conversation before. It was in the telegraph.
The one where the telegraph report (18.04.2014) said that Waggot has had a chat with Moussa's agent?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
The one where the telegraph report (18.04.2014) said that Waggot has had a chat with Moussa's agent?
What do you think they were chatting about? A contract or the price of fish?
What's 3 small squares got to do with anything?
Or was that the contract offer - Yes, No or maybe?
Yes. It's been in the telegraph. They have also confirmed it on CWR on one of the phone ins.
If It suits you to believe a contract was never offered and no discussions took place then good for you.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Firstly, I have never said that discussions haven't taken place. If you are talking about the telegraph report on the 18th then we have all read it I presume and nowhere does it say that a contract has been offered, or am I reading it wrong?
You have to read between the lines.
I imagine the discussions went something like this....
Waggot "we'd like to offer Franck a new contract, 2 years same terms. Shall we sit down and thrash this out"
Franck's Agent "sorry Franck wants to keep his options open, there are others interested in Franck's services so we won't be sitting down to discuss a new contract you"
This is rejected a contract or more accurately the opportunity to sign a new contract. That's true whether it's written on a piece of paper or not.
We want to keep him and resign him but Franck's agent has declined discussing a new contract, that is a contract rebuffle.
This is all getting a bit boring now.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
You have to read between the lines.
I imagine the discussions went something like this....
Waggot "we'd like to offer Franck a new contract, 2 years same terms. Shall we sit down and thrash this out"
Franck's Agent "sorry Franck wants to keep his options open, there are others interested in Franck's services so we won't be sitting down to discuss a new contract you"
This is rejected a contract or more accurately the opportunity to sign a new contract. That's true whether it's written on a piece of paper or not.
We want to keep him and resign him but Franck's agent has declined discussing a new contract, that is a contract rebuffle.
This is all getting a bit boring now.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Or......
Waggott 'We'd love to offer Moussa a new contract, but because of FFP rules we can't.'
Is the fact that it's getting boring is the fact that with all of your statistics gathering know how, you cannot actually find anywhere that he has been offered a contract. All I asked was show me where he was offered a contract after you stated that he has been offered one and he rejected it. You have no way of knowing whether that was the conversation between Waggot and Franck's agent or are you giving up stats and just going on guess work now because if you are can you tell us about Murphy, Callum and any signings that Waggot may be lining up because that's how you'd imagine it goes? The report I'm referring to only say's that he is keeping his options open, why can't the club just try and show willing and actually offer an improved contract? he has proved his worth to us and is deserving of it. Where you say that Franck's agent has declined discussing a new contract, was it not the case that it was actually the club and Pressley that said that no contract talks will take place until we are safe? Which sort of contradicts the club saying we've spoke to Moussa about a new contract.
What makes me chuckle is that you say it's getting boring after enlisting the help of the CET to help you get to the bottom of it!
As I was only asking the question of whether he'd been offered one, would it still be boring if you found out that he did?
As no-one actually knows but we haven't heard too much from the club may suggest that the club have told him that he has no future here and will not be offered a new contract.
You could take the trouble to google it
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/fans-ask-franck-moussa-signing-6521556
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sp...news/coventry-city-contract-talks-joe-6890843
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sp...ews/franck-moussa-waiting-till-summer-6923519
The conclusion I draw is the club haven't made an offer he wants to accept & he will see what other offers turn up.
I very much doubt if he will sign on for CCFC again.
No you didn't, you suggested that the club had told him to leave. I'd refer you to you're post number 22.
Jack on the other thread has posted a number of links which suggest that the club have tried to secure him.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
We can keep going all you want but in reply to the points you raised after being so bored I feel I have to respond, so here goes:
The bit you highlighted in your first extract was because after what I said in post 22 you clearly stated "He's been offered a contract. He's rejected it" in post 34 and I said to you after that "Has he, where did you see that?" in post 36 hence me saying in the bit you highlighted above in the top post"As I was only asking the question of whether he'd been offered one". My post 22 starts by saying "As no-one knows" which means you, me and any other person not involved in that one discussion.
I suggest what may of happened and you state something like it's fact (when so far you've proved nothing of the sort). You then try and ask CET for help and when you don't get that you use another members post to try and prove your argument but still have no proof and all those links say is the club would like to secure him. Guess what, I would like to secure him for next season and if I said that to him would that be a contract offer?.
What makes me laugh in all this is all I asked you (post 36) as I hadn't seen anything and you desperately try and show something as fact when it is nothing of the sort. You seem to like to deal in facts and stats to back up your argument (which is fair enough if you're that way inclined) yet use terms like "I imagine" which basically means you have no clue. The funny bit (for me anyway) is that when people state something as fact on here but then get found out to be suspect, certain posters come on taking the piss out of them, yet those same posters come and like your posts doing the same thing.
Anyway, I'm going to watch the football now so just wanted to recap, I suggest one possible scenario, you state something as fact, I asked where that was, as yet you have come up with nothing despite trying lots of different avenues. About as nutshell as it gets for now.I think.
what was the score with Dublin? was a bit young to know the "politics" of football at the time.
From what I remember Dion had asked for more money and allegedly Villa were already a factor at that point. Didn't we eventually complain about tapping up of our players from local clubs?
He then agreed to go to villa for apparently less money than Blackburn.
Er no. Dublin had signed a contract a few months before. Richardson tried to sell him to Blackburn the following October.
Dublin refused to move his family from Stratford. He then agreed to go to villa for apparently less money than Blackburn. Given you've claimed to spend most games in the VP area I'm surprised you didn't know that. The story was going round for weeks before he left.
Fair enough if that is the case but why not have a little pride and play for the club who are currently paying your wages?
Did he get promised something and then not get offered it?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?