Samuels Signs

[NEM]

26 minutes ago, minijc said:

His mind was made up, perhaps turned by his agent.

Aye when Southampton and the likes were sniffing about.  I'm sure he could have been persuaded once it became apparent Kirkcaldy was his destination ?

[Don_Corleone]

3 hours ago, Ten Caat said:

I completely agree that we would have been far better giving some game time to one or more of our own youngsters.

But I repeat.....why would Wolves take him back? The deal was for the full season. They'd be perfectly entitled to ask for whatever loan fee payments were agreed for the full season. But it would still inconvenience them as they'd then have to provide Samuels with training facilities, medical and physio cover, injury insurance etc. Now Wolves are an EPL side and in the grand scheme of things, these would be a drop in the ocean for them but it's stuff they thought they had gotten rid of, certainly till the summer and in their minds hopefully for ever, He has no future at Wolves whatsoever.

It isn't just as simple as what you and others are making out just to say "send him back"

I get what you're saying - surely they must build a clause into these loan deals though that either party can break it off half way through? A year is a long time to commit to a total unknown quantity unless we're paying him next to nothing.

His only attribute seems to be his pace - I doubt he'll ever play a single game at a level higher than the English League 1. The EPL club academies churn out hundreds of players every year - 99% of them will never be good enough to play at our level. 

[aberdeen1970]

11 minutes ago, Don_Corleone said:

I get what you're saying - surely they must build a clause into these loan deals though that either party can break it off half way through? A year is a long time to commit to a total unknown quantity unless we're paying him next to nothing.

His only attribute seems to be his pace - I doubt he'll ever play a single game at a level higher than the English League 1. The EPL club academies churn out hundreds of players every year - 99% of them will never be good enough to play at our level. 

But 98% of them will be better than Samuels 

[Ten Caat]

38 minutes ago, Don_Corleone said:

I get what you're saying - surely they must build a clause into these loan deals though that either party can break it off half way through? A year is a long time to commit to a total unknown quantity unless we're paying him next to nothing.

His only attribute seems to be his pace - I doubt he'll ever play a single game at a level higher than the English League 1. The EPL club academies churn out hundreds of players every year - 99% of them will never be good enough to play at our level. 

Not always.

There is generally an injury clause whereby a player can be sent back to his parent club in the event that he would miss too much of the season to be of any further use to the club he was loaned to.

And there generally is also a break clause in player development loans where the loaning club feels that their player isn't getting enough game time to make continuing the loan worthwhile ( a la Longstaff)

But Samuels isn't with us for that reason. He signed for the full season, with Wolves at least hoping (expecting maybe) that we would exercise our option to buy at the end of it. Presumably we won't, although who can tell after the Devlin further extension fiasco, at which point he will return to Wolves. I'd expect them at that point to allow him to leave for free to anyone that will have him, or if no one wants him even on that basis, to probably pay up his contract and release him.

[minijc]

1 hour ago, NEM said:

Aye when Southampton and the likes were sniffing about.  I'm sure he could have been persuaded once it became apparent Kirkcaldy was his destination ?

His mind was made up before then.

[strachanmcgheegoal]

3 hours ago, Bournemouth Gee said:

He might come good, you never know!

We're one nil up at snake mountain . We clear from a hun corner. Substitute Samuels sprints away and makes it 0-2 before new, upcoming, highly thought of referee Willie McSashbasher calls play back for a potentially nasty look infringement.  Penalty to the huns with two reds sent off, both for nasty looks and another for asking if 24 minutes injury time was not a bit excessive? 

 

 

[Don_Corleone]

4 hours ago, Ten Caat said:

Not always.

There is generally an injury clause whereby a player can be sent back to his parent club in the event that he would miss too much of the season to be of any further use to the club he was loaned to.

And there generally is also a break clause in player development loans where the loaning club feels that their player isn't getting enough game time to make continuing the loan worthwhile ( a la Longstaff)

But Samuels isn't with us for that reason. He signed for the full season, with Wolves at least hoping (expecting maybe) that we would exercise our option to buy at the end of it. Presumably we won't, although who can tell after the Devlin further extension fiasco, at which point he will return to Wolves. I'd expect them at that point to allow him to leave for free to anyone that will have him, or if no one wants him even on that basis, to probably pay up his contract and release him.

If it's obvious we're not going to sign him at the end of the season, they might take him back and loan him out elsewhere with an option to buy clause in the hope they can get a wee bit of cash for him at the end of the season from some League 1 or 2 club. Waste of everyone's time having him here.

[sooth_stander]

5 hours ago, Ten Caat said:

Not always.

There is generally an injury clause whereby a player can be sent back to his parent club in the event that he would miss too much of the season to be of any further use to the club he was loaned to.

And there generally is also a break clause in player development loans where the loaning club feels that their player isn't getting enough game time to make continuing the loan worthwhile ( a la Longstaff)

But Samuels isn't with us for that reason. He signed for the full season, with Wolves at least hoping (expecting maybe) that we would exercise our option to buy at the end of it. Presumably we won't, although who can tell after the Devlin further extension fiasco, at which point he will return to Wolves. I'd expect them at that point to allow him to leave for free to anyone that will have him, or if no one wants him even on that basis, to probably pay up his contract and release him.

So what’s the deal with Longstaff, that allows us to bin him back to Newcastle midway thru the season? We not taking a massive hit on him?

With any season long loan deal, there’s always a break point in Jan that allows the situation to be reviewed. The fact that Samuels in OOC in the summer tells you Wolves don’t want him back but equally, doesn’t mean we are lumbered with him for the duration either

[Ten Caat]

22 minutes ago, sooth_stander said:

So what’s the deal with Longstaff, that allows us to bin him back to Newcastle midway thru the season? We not taking a massive hit on him?

With any season long loan deal, there’s always a break point in Jan that allows the situation to be reviewed. The fact that Samuels in OOC in the summer tells you Wolves don’t want him back but equally, doesn’t mean we are lumbered with him for the duration either

It isn't us that are binning Longstaff. It's Newcastle that are recalling him. Because he was sent to us to develop. He isn't doing much developing sitting on the bench week in week out.

Samuels wasn't sent to us to develop. It was essentially a year's trial with an agreed fee to buy him (presumably less than what would statutorily be due to Wolves as a development fee although they'd have to offer him another year's contract as a minimum for that to kick in) in the summer if he impressed.

And there isn't always a break point in January. 

 

[Tord31]

Longstaff and Samuels (and even Jenks) will only be leaving if their agent/club/Aberdeen line up another loan for them.

[Durrant Dived]

4 hours ago, Ten Caat said:

It isn't us that are binning Longstaff. It's Newcastle that are recalling him.

 

Hopefully they give us 50% of his loan fee back too...

[DD1903]

8 hours ago, Tord31 said:

Longstaff and Samuels (and even Jenks) will only be leaving if their agent/club/Aberdeen line up another loan for them.

Why would we line up a another loan for a player that isn't ours? 
 

Im sure Newcastle etc would love for us to call and let them know we'd sent their player to Peterhead in their behalf...

[GeorgeStreetReds]

Samuels and Longstaff both been awful, so predictable too.

[RED_JOHN]

16 hours ago, Tord31 said:

Longstaff and Samuels (and even Jenks) will only be leaving if their agent/club/Aberdeen line up another loan for them.

A good footballer likes a laugh and let’s be honest….these three players would be terrible company on a lad’s night out. 
My bit of advice to Mowbray whilst searching high and low for new signings is to pick a player who likes a laugh and a party. 

[Don_Corleone]

11 minutes ago, RED_JOHN said:

A good footballer likes a laugh and let’s be honest….these three players would be terrible company on a lad’s night out. 
My bit of advice to Mowbray whilst searching high and low for new signings is to pick a player who likes a laugh and a party. 

That's working out well for Dundee - Adam, Griffiths and Cummings love a laugh.

I think that is one thing that could be said for McInnes though, for the most of his time here it seems he had a good dressing room atmosphere and he always said he only brought guys in with the right personality who'd fit into it. 

Not sure that's the main problem with the three you mention though - I think the issue is they just can't play football very well!

[RED_JOHN]

1 hour ago, Don_Corleone said:

That's working out well for Dundee - Adam, Griffiths and Cummings love a laugh.

I think that is one thing that could be said for McInnes though, for the most of his time here it seems he had a good dressing room atmosphere and he always said he only brought guys in with the right personality who'd fit into it. 

Not sure that's the main problem with the three you mention though - I think the issue is they just can't play football very well!

You are going to get the Jenks fan club on your case now. Tell them I was asking for them (they have blocked me).

[Millertime]

On 12/20/2021 at 8:39 AM, jamiesd said:

Better off with H Samuel.  At least handy for xmas gifts

Haha I liked that a lot more than I thought I would

[fine-n-dandy]

21 hours ago, Tord31 said:

Longstaff and Samuels (and even Jenks) will only be leaving if their agent/club/Aberdeen line up another loan for them.

I’m sure (certainly in Longstaffs case) that if the loaning club/s  has the right to cut short the loan deal in January then surly we also have that right. 
 

I certainly have never heard of a loan deal where the loanee club has to find another loanee club for another clubs player

[RED_JOHN]

31 minutes ago, fine-n-dandy said:

I’m sure (certainly in Longstaffs case) that if the loaning club/s  has the right to cut short the loan deal in January then surly we also have that right. 
 

I certainly have never heard of a loan deal where the loanee club has to find another loanee club for another clubs player

Maybe we could loan them back to their parent clubs. 

[Stoneybloke]

And now he's gone...........bit of a waste of time all round.

What is the point ot getting loan players if we use them like this?

[Ten Caat]

7 minutes ago, Stoneybloke said:

And now he's gone...........bit of a waste of time all round.

What is the point ot getting loan players if we use them like this?

You can't use them if they turn out to be utter shite.

If Mowbray was behind this one it doesn't bode well for the future. Anyone who has had a passing acquaintance with a football could tell within 30 minutes of his first game for us that he was fucking useless.

That cross a few games later will live with me forever. So shite it was actually funny

[Stoneybloke]

6 minutes ago, Ten Caat said:

You can't use them if they turn out to be utter shite.

If Mowbray was behind this one it doesn't bode well for the future. Anyone who has had a passing acquaintance with a football could tell within 30 minutes of his first game for us that he was fucking useless.

That cross a few games later will live with me forever. So shite it was actually funny

Perhaps our standards and requirements are so high that no loan players will ever be good enough for us.

[Ten Caat]

2 minutes ago, Stoneybloke said:

Perhaps our standards and requirements are so high that no loan players will ever be good enough for us.

Christie was plenty good enough for us

As was Hector.

McCrorie was technically a loan initially

And of course Maddison, although I do question if his attitude was right and if he really ever wanted to be with us

 

But this season the loans have been poor. Jenks occasionally threatens to show he has some talent but mostly he hides. The other two.....waste of time, money and effort on everyone's part

[aberdeen1970]

Aye plenty of loan players have had games in the past.  

The opportunity was there for Samuels and Jenks if they were good enough. Longstaff had more competition. 

[RED_JOHN]

Can we change the title of this thread to….Samuels signs on.

[thurso]

1 hour ago, Ten Caat said:

You can't use them if they turn out to be utter shite.

If Mowbray was behind this one it doesn't bode well for the future. Anyone who has had a passing acquaintance with a football could tell within 30 minutes of his first game for us that he was fucking useless.

That cross a few games later will live with me forever. So shite it was actually funny

I think your being a bit harsh. 30 mins into his first game people on here were saying he looks like a decent player, going on about having pace and it being what we need up front. 
 

Maybe third or fourth game it was decided he was shit. 

[aberdeen1970]

4 minutes ago, thurso said:

I think your being a bit harsh. 30 mins into his first game people on here were saying he looks like a decent player, going on about having pace and it being what we need up front. 
 

Maybe third or fourth game it was decided he was shit. 

He was hopeless from the start min. 

Folk were just initially desperately wanting him to be a player as we were so short in attack. 

[Kincardine_Mearns_Red]

Away back to Wolves he goes.

[fine-n-dandy]

1 hour ago, aberdeen1970 said:

He was hopeless from the start min. 

Folk were just initially desperately wanting him to be a player as we were so short in attack. 

Similar could be said of our manager’s abilities 

[OddJob]

Yeah clearly something wasn't right as was pretty much dropped after his first few games, same as Longstaff. Maybe Glass is a better judge of a player than we actually think (well ok maybe not for some of the others)