The Everton Board Thread 2015/16 [ Not takeover related ]

[marty mcfly]

The board have been waiting for him to hand in the request so it is seen as out of their hands. It still isn't because they can just refuse. If they sell him then it's probably something they wanted all along. You don't need to believe in conspiracy theories to think that. It's simply the most logical explanation.

 

[tadpole]

Have Everton not even commented on this yet 24hrs of fans frenzy and not a word, It smacks of a little kid sticking his fingers in his ears and going lalalalalalalalala hope his mum or dad would just go away and stop shouting at him.

I think Everton's actions over the next few days are going to speak louder than words mate, one way or the other.

 

[marty mcfly]

Martinez tonight was a GREAT start. As of tonight keeping Yarmolenko and Stones is still on. What a rollercoaster

 

[Whistlin' Dixie]

Seeing as once again you've deliberately confounded the issue, I'll just use this example.

The question being, why weren’t Coleman, Barkley, Baines, Kev, McCarthy told to put in transfer requests so we could cash in on them as well as they are all valuable assets as well??

That wasn't the question I asked - You've given another (wrong) answer to a totally different question I asked & made your own question out of it and then given your own answers trying to make them my answers......and you've ballsed yerself up at that as well, because they (Coleman, Baines & McCarthy) never handed in transfer requests in the last week of the window (like I originally asked for) - you said they did, not me.

Here's the evidence.

So your saying that the club are telling these players to wait until the last minute and put a request in?? Quite strange as to why Baines and Coleman never left then, or even Barkley, or McCarthy or Kev.

I never said that, did I? I said it was strange it happens here more frequently than anywhere else. You've based your entire theory on something I've not once said.

And here's further evidence you didn't even understand the original question and point I was making; which was:

Berbatov is one example at one club. Got any more similar examples from spurs - like about another four (of their best players in the respective seasons) in the same timeframe?

Didn't think so.

Stones follows on from Rooney, Lescott, Arteta & Fellaini - all at the same club, all under the same stewardship. Too many to be coincidence, imo.

And your answer to that was:

Do you want to include Modric and Bale, (going back even further Carrick) forced the move to Utd into that list as well.

How about Utd; Ronaldo and now DeGea lookign to move on.
Arsenal, Overmars, Petit, Viera, Van Persie, Anelka.
The RS; Torres, Mascherano, Alonso, Suarez, Sterling.
Southampton; Schneiderlin, Clyne, Lallana, Shaw, Lovren, Chambers in the last 2 years, Bale, Walcott and Chamberlain in the past

The bold denotes anyone sold before the last week of the window. By definition, if they were sold before the last week, then they didn't hand in a request in the last week, either, did they?

Looking at the answer, can you see how many times you've answered wrong? The question & point I was making was easy enough to understand. None of your answers I've highlighted meet the criteria I originally asked for.

How simple does the question I originally asked have to be in order for you to comprehend?.

Of the top 6 fees we've received.......Four of those players handed in transfer requests in the last week of the transfer window AND have been sold. I want you to name me another club where this has happened as frequently, under the SAME stewardship (ie with the same chairman) and in the same timescale; from the Rooney sale until the Fellaini sale.

I'd like you to answer THIS question, and THIS question alone. Don't go off at a tangent or make things up, please. And, your completely pointless: "You're just anti-board" stance is not part of this, because I've made it perfectly clear where I stand on that. That isn't the question or the issue.

When you realise you can't fulfil the criteria, take notice that players both handing in transfer requests AND then being sold in the last week of the window hasn't happened as frequently at any other club.

That is the point and pattern I was pointing out.

 

[stretford blue]

@watchedToffee saying a new loan has been taken out secured on 2016/17 TV revenue

 

[The Esk]

The flip side of Martinez' magnificent defense of John Stones, talking about values other than money etc is that the very same argument can be used as a justification of the Board's parsimonious attitude to funding the club's development.

In fact it is a brilliant defense against people like me, and many others who argue that the club can only move forward by seeking additional investment from the Board, other investors or new owners.

From a business perspective however, it is a very high risk strategy to believe you can stand toe-to-toe with competitors all of whom are spending/have spent considerably more money than yourself.

The next question of course, is what level of competition are you aiming for? Are the objectives to compete at the very top - winning the Premiership, regular CL appearances and domestic Cup wins, or are they more "plucky old Everton" competing bravely for the 5th/6th/7th place trophy? If it is the former rather than the latter then it seems highly improbable that it will succeed.

These really are watershed days - this time next week we will have a very clear picture of how the next few years are going to pan out for Everton, it's a fascinating chess game at present.

 

[Ihaters]

haha all the fume over:

Showing no ambition by selling one of our future core players
The board selling Stones for cheap
The board waiting till the last day then selling to cover their backs and pocket the money
The board forcing him into a transfer request to save money
The board only having to come out and say he's not for sale

Well they said he's not for sale, and have now denied him a transfer request..

Will they get any credit for it I wonder?

 

[nsno-chris]

Seeing as once again you've deliberately confounded the issue, I'll just use this example.


That wasn't the question I asked - You've given another (wrong) answer to a totally different question I asked & made your own question out of it and then given your own answers trying to make them my answers......and you've ballsed yerself up at that as well, because they (Coleman, Baines & McCarthy) never handed in transfer requests in the last week of the window (like I originally asked for) - you said they did, not me.

Here's the evidence.


I never said that, did I? I said it was strange it happens here more frequently than anywhere else. You've based your entire theory on something I've not once said.

And here's further evidence you didn't even understand the original question and point I was making; which was:


And your answer to that was:



The bold denotes anyone sold before the last week of the window. By definition, if they were sold before the last week, then they didn't hand in a request in the last week, either, did they?

Looking at the answer, can you see how many times you've answered wrong? The question & point I was making was easy enough to understand. None of your answers I've highlighted meet the criteria I originally asked for.

How simple does the question I originally asked have to be in order for you to comprehend?.

Of the top 6 fees we've received.......Four of those players handed in transfer requests in the last week of the transfer window AND have been sold. I want you to name me another club where this has happened as frequently, under the SAME stewardship (ie with the same chairman) and in the same timescale; from the Rooney sale until the Fellaini sale.

I'd like you to answer THIS question, and THIS question alone. Don't go off at a tangent or make things up, please. And, your completely pointless: "You're just anti-board" stance is not part of this, because I've made it perfectly clear where I stand on that. That isn't the question or the issue.

When you realise you can't fulfil the criteria, take notice that players both handing in transfer requests AND then being sold in the last week of the window hasn't happened as frequently at any other club.

That is the point and pattern I was pointing out.

It's quite clear you can't read or don't want to accept what I wrote. I did not say those players handed in a transfer request at all, it was a separate statement as to why other valuable assets where not sold regardless or told to put in a transfer request.

You've obviously got quite a boring agenda made up of complete conspiracy theories with no evidence to support the issue. The facts are quite simple, 4 players have been sold, in 12 years, that have a handed in a request. In all instances Everton refused to sell and the player forced the move. Just because it happens at the end of the windows is irrelevant.

But as I said in my earlier post, which you clearly did not read because of this agenda, if the club are forcing players to move why haven't other valuable assets been told the same??? You can't give answer because one doesn't exist.

You're actually becoming quite boring now so shuffle on and bring me some evidence

 

[Elong]

The flip side of Martinez' magnificent defense of John Stones, talking about values other than money etc is that the very same argument can be used as a justification of the Board's parsimonious attitude to funding the club's development.

In fact it is a brilliant defense against people like me, and many others who argue that the club can only move forward by seeking additional investment from the Board, other investors or new owners.

From a business perspective however, it is a very high risk strategy to believe you can stand toe-to-toe with competitors all of whom are spending/have spent considerably more money than yourself.

The next question of course, is what level of competition are you aiming for? Are the objectives to compete at the very top - winning the Premiership, regular CL appearances and domestic Cup wins, or are they more "plucky old Everton" competing bravely for the 5th/6th/7th place trophy. If it is the former rather than the latter then it seems highly improbable that it will succeed.

These really are watershed days - this time next week we will have a very clear picture of how the next few years are going to pan out for Everton, it's a fascinating chess game at present.

Do you think Bobby spoke out against the company line last night with that fantastic quote? Or is the board on the same page? You're 100% correct, this next week is going to be very interesting!

 

[Whistlin' Dixie]

haha all the fume over:

Showing no ambition by selling one of our future core players
The board selling Stones for cheap
The board waiting till the last day then selling to cover their backs and pocket the money
The board forcing him into a transfer request to save money
The board only having to come out and say he's not for sale

Well they said he's not for sale, and have now denied him a transfer request..

Will they get any credit for it I wonder?

For keeping hold of a player under contract? Hardly. I'd fume if he's sold though.

The groundhog day element's what's cheesed me off the most.

 

[Whistlin' Dixie]

It's quite clear you can't read or don't want to accept what I wrote. I did not say those players handed in a transfer request at all, it was a separate statement as to why other valuable assets where not sold regardless or told to put in a transfer request.

You've obviously got quite a boring agenda made up of complete conspiracy theories with no evidence to support the issue. The facts are quite simple, 4 players have been sold, in 12 years, that have a handed in a request. In all instances Everton refused to sell and the player forced the move. Just because it happens at the end of the windows is irrelevant.

But as I said in my earlier post, which you clearly did not read because of this agenda, if the club are forcing players to move why haven't other valuable assets been told the same??? You can't give answer because one doesn't exist.

You're actually becoming quite boring now so shuffle on and bring me some evidence

Haha! The exact answer I'd expect from someone like you. lol

As soon as it's made clear how when & where you've gone wrong, its': "bored"

 

[The Esk]

Do you think Bobby spoke out against the company line last night with that fantastic quote? Or is the board on the same page? You're 100% correct, this next week is going to be very interesting!

Bear in mind this is only my view, I have no evidence to support this.

I actually believe Bobby has the support of the Board on this issue, I do not think they want to sell. By not selling they maintain a higher moral ground (which has some value) and they can continue their current business model, limited funding, develop young players etc.

Two years ago facing similar circumstances they would have sold, now with broadcasting revenues increasing by 70% from 2016 they do not have to in order to maintain the status quo.

Whilst applauding the stance on Stones, my argument is that the status quo is not good enough, and by not progressing we are falling further and further behind our competitors.

 

[D410]

@watchedToffee saying a new loan has been taken out secured on 2016/17 TV revenue

Indeed sir, we are now borrowing two seasons ahead. JG Funding and some have already traced this back to a well know figure.

 

[Ihaters]

For keeping hold of a player under contract? Hardly. I'd fume if he's sold though.

The groundhog day element's what's cheesed me off the most.

No.. for the things I mentioned.

 

[Elong]

Bear in mind this is only my view, I have no evidence to support this.

I actually believe Bobby has the support of the Board on this issue, I do not think they want to sell. By not selling they maintain a higher moral ground (which has some value) and they can continue their current business model, limited funding, develop young players etc.

Two years ago facing similar circumstances they would have sold, now with broadcasting revenues increasing by 70% from 2016 they do not have to in order to maintain the status quo.

Whilst applauding the stance on Stones, my argument is that the status quo is not good enough, and by not progressing we are falling further and further behind our competitors.

For our sanity and for the hope of our club progressing I hope this close to the truth. It would be great if it was true anyway. As you say, all opinions and wait and see, but watershed indeed, perhaps this could be the moment where our board take us in a forward direction. Pigs might start flying! lol