Albion keeper back at club

Agree - Extended loan seems to be conditional...

Paying his wages to end of season - no problem.

Extending his loan appears to be conditional upon our signing him permanently, which we do not appear to want to do. His wages are probably more than what we want to pay for an understudy keeper - I'm sure he's not looking for a pay cut with a year remaining on his current contract.

 

What a mess !!!!!

We lose our keeper,bring anouther one in for the Liverpool game which i must admit i thought it would be a disaster(how wrong was i) thought we had cracked it to get Steele hopefully on a permanant contract at the end of the season but now thats all gone pear shaped and im gutted.Why shouldnt we pay his wages if we were going to sign him? ok i dont know what they would be but how the board can let him go is beyond me after the way hes played for us. All the money their making out of this cup run AND the best chance we will ever get to win the FA cup and were pickling about to save bloody money again.
The way i feel right now i could tell em to stuff there Wembley ticket where the sun dont shine. (kissmyass)

 

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Do we run the risk of upsetting the rest of the squad by paying Luke &pound;8,000 a week (if that is true what he is on) or do we just find another Goalie and get it right this time.(dunno) </font></p>

 

You've hit the nail on the head...

Its not the wages to the end of the season. It's what he wants to sign permanent.

 

Well if it is that .....

then it is an issue with wages ....and we are lying

 

No idea

But you didn't need to write "absolute bloody laughing stock" - it was already in my original post. Good lad.

 

Sorry, nearly forgot..

 

It won't really matter Lenny lad.

Your bunch of overpaid over-rated prima donnas are not likely to get a shot in.
we'd do just as well with a subbuteo goalie.

How's the Missis? Has she cut down from 60 a day?

 

Why does he have to be an understudy?

I don't think Muller will be back in time for the start of next season - plus he'll need to get back into training etc etc. Therefore we're going to need a first choice keeper for next season - and if Luke plays well then why would we automatically drop him just because Muller was back?

Yes £8k is a hell of a lot, but then again you have to consider what we're paying for and how much it costs.

If Steele would cost £8k then I'd hope by a direct comparison we'd only been paying Mostto about £300 a week, and Christensen about 85p.

 

Then it would be an issue with Luke Steele and not WBA

Which clearly isn't the case.

 

He is not out of contract at the end of the season. I imagine that WBA and his agent , in return for a free transfer, want Barnsley to take on his current contract until it expires. So that could work out at over £400 000 if there is only a year left to run, for someone they were prepared to release to Peterborough for nothing just a few weeks ago.

 

RE: Then it would be an issue with Luke Steele and not WBA

This is quite clearly a 'who blinks first' situation. Haven't any of you lot played poker before!