Help

Can anybody explain how these two statements can both be correct when they are completely the opposite?</p>



Thursday 29th June</p>

Speaking exclusively to www.barnsleyfc.co.uk from Spain, Andy said: &quot;We have had more positive discussions with Chris and it looks as though he will be staying.</p>

&quot;It looks as though it will definitely be sorted next week and I am happy that Chris will stay with us.</p>



Wednesday 5th July</p>

<span lang="EN-US">&quot;Chris had until the 16th June to respond.&quot;</span></p>

<span lang="EN-US">&quot;<span lang="EN-US">By that date the Club had heard nothing from Chris or his agent ....an assumption was made that he would probably elect to leave the Club and pursue his career elsewhere.&quot;</span></span></p>

<span lang="EN-US"><span lang="EN-US">&quot;<span lang="EN-US">A letter to clearly finalise the position was therefore sent to him by the Club's General Manager officially withdrawing the offer, thanking him for his services to the Club and wishing him well wherever he went.&quot;</span></span></span></p>

<span lang="EN-US"></span></p>

 

Goodness me.

 

My word

It's a veritable conundrum and no mistake.

 

There is probably a good explanation but I cant see one.

I mean, why release a statement on the official site saying that he looks set to stay when you have already withdrawn your offer of a contract and wished him well at his new club?

 

What has gone off?

Shep's statement makes out that we have not talked to him, but AR has previously contradicted that?

Bizzare to say the least

 

There's a story to be told

 

What the hell do you want?

Consistency?

 

I think i've just thought of something

I think i've jsut thought of something? What sort of English is that? </p>

Maybe all three people are partly right in what they say but the way it has been said has led people to think the wrong thing?</p>

A theory...</p>

Shepherd offered Shuker a contract but when he didnt respond in the set timescale it was withdrawn.</p>

AR spoke to Shuker last week, AR wanted him to sign and Shuker said he wanted to. AR told shuker that he would speak to the chairman about allowing an extension to the contract offer.</p>

GS, not wanting to back down/be bullied into something, refused to change his decision to withdraw the contract.</p>

So far, both statements on the official site would be correct. AR would have been under the impression that the problem was going to be sorted out and he would sign the new contract, and GS would still be right to say that it WAS withdrawn in june and no other offer was made.</p>



Then Shuker released a statement saying that GS is picking the team because as far as he was concerned, AR wanted him to sign but GS said no.</p>



Or I could be talking my usual B*ll*cks</p>

 

There's even bigger inconsistencies in the last 2 paragraphs if you can be arsed to highlight them

I can't

 

In these paragraphs?

<span lang="EN-US">Since the end of last season the Club has been actively pursuing potential new players and several have been identified. In the absence of the Manager this work has been mainly carried out by our Chief Scout Martin Wilkinson but clearly nothing could be finalised until approved by Andy Ritchie on his return from his well-deserved holidays. Andy is now back and is pursuing these options personally which makes a complete nonsense of the claim that the Chairman or the Board are selecting the players.</span></p>



<span lang="EN-US">The Board can confirm that offers have been made for players, one was Jay Tabb who elected to join Coventry City and another was a cash offer for an ex Scottish under 21 international which was rejected by his Club. Andy has the Board's backing to bring in new players which he is actively trying to do but only with players who will augment our current squad.</span></p>

 

Exactly, it all just doesn't add up.

Last week he was going to sign, according to the official site.

Now, his contract offer was withdrawn before that. Which report was true

As for releasing that we made a bid for Jay Tabb, a week after he signed for someone else, talk about throwing crumbs to the masses in a desperate attempt to appease them.

 

Yes

clearly nothing could be finalised until approved by Andy Ritchie on his return from his well-deserved holidays...which makes a complete nonsense of the claim that the Chairman or the Board are selecting the players



The Board can confirm that offers have been made for players

 

Good call

To me that reads as no offers can be made while he's on holiday except for the offers that have been made while he's on holiday.

 

Crumbs to the masses

Well, you will stand around with your mouths open waiting for someone to throw crumbs at you. 'The masses' deserve what they get everytime, bloody stupid hoi-polloi, get on with your lives.

 

Let's just stick to food threads

far less controversial

 

RE: Let's just stick to food threads

Arses to it, they sit around waiting for statements, pick them to shreds, demand further statements, pick them to shreds. Bag of **** the lot of em, they must think the people involved in BFC are deliberately trying to burn oakwell to the ground, murder all the players and sow salt into the pitch. And after all that they think that they should have AR and GS come round their house for tea, be strapped to a polygraph machine and tell them all thats been going on. Big fat bummers all of em.

 

RE: Let's just stick to food threads

And, after all that, I had a salad for dinner, so I massively overestimated cheese & pickle sandwiches.

 

Why say last week that Shuker was about to sign if

his contract offer was withdrawn before that?

Simple question.

 

One thing..

perhaps communication between Chairman and manager is not the best?

 

RE: Why say last week that Shuker was about to sign if

I don't cnuting know, what am I the jeffing Oracle. But I'm not going to bleat on about it like a sodding girl in a tutu who's just fallen over and got her lollipop dirty. There's a significant lack of backbone and too much oestrogen on this website.