| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin 13:00 - Apr 13 with 9933 views | QJumpingJack |
Ben Rumsby is running the story that Swansea are now set to sue Russell Martin for £2m for "breach of contract" |  | | |  |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 18:49 - Apr 14 with 1436 views | cockett_jack |
So I wonder whether we were offered and accepted £1m from Southampton on a without prejudice basis or declined and held out for the £2m whilst reserving rights. Would be the latter if we are going against RM for £2m obviously. I just hope the owners sought and received decent legal advice at the outset when this began and all communications were made, particularly if we didn’t receive anything so we haven’t unintentionally legally waived rights to the full amount or indeed half if we received half. I’m no sports lawyer but I would be surprised if this question over whether a club is in a particular league or not when making an approach and how that is interpreted with respect to a release clause hasn’t arisen before/there isn’t legal precedent. If we lose the case (the fact a claim is being made and the costs that will involve gives me hope that a barrister has opined there is a better than 50% chance) then the solicitors who drew up the contract might have some restless nights as this feels like something whoever drew up the contract should have addressed.
My initial reaction is I’m not thrilled we are suing a former manager but that does have to be weighed against the reality that if Southampton just wouldn’t move from their guns and we didn’t budge at the time then it wouldn’t be in our interests for the coming season to drag things out. If Southampton have taken the piss then it is ultimately RM’s exposure under his contract and he would have or should have had talks with Southampton about the risk they created in not paying the £2m |  | | |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 19:55 - Apr 14 with 1369 views | Whiterockin |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 18:49 - Apr 14 by cockett_jack |
So I wonder whether we were offered and accepted £1m from Southampton on a without prejudice basis or declined and held out for the £2m whilst reserving rights. Would be the latter if we are going against RM for £2m obviously. I just hope the owners sought and received decent legal advice at the outset when this began and all communications were made, particularly if we didn’t receive anything so we haven’t unintentionally legally waived rights to the full amount or indeed half if we received half. I’m no sports lawyer but I would be surprised if this question over whether a club is in a particular league or not when making an approach and how that is interpreted with respect to a release clause hasn’t arisen before/there isn’t legal precedent. If we lose the case (the fact a claim is being made and the costs that will involve gives me hope that a barrister has opined there is a better than 50% chance) then the solicitors who drew up the contract might have some restless nights as this feels like something whoever drew up the contract should have addressed.
My initial reaction is I’m not thrilled we are suing a former manager but that does have to be weighed against the reality that if Southampton just wouldn’t move from their guns and we didn’t budge at the time then it wouldn’t be in our interests for the coming season to drag things out. If Southampton have taken the piss then it is ultimately RM’s exposure under his contract and he would have or should have had talks with Southampton about the risk they created in not paying the £2m |
Whatever the outcome its not a good look for our club. We already have a poor reputation within coaching and management as seen when we try to appoint coaches. This will do nothing to enhance our reputation only damage it further. Have they done this purely for revenge because I can't see a long term business positive. |  | | |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 20:18 - Apr 14 with 1325 views | QJumpingJack |
I wonder if Southampton win promotion at Wembley next month then this issue may disappear quite quickly? | | | |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 20:22 - Apr 14 with 1311 views | cockett_jack |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 19:55 - Apr 14 by Whiterockin |
Whatever the outcome its not a good look for our club. We already have a poor reputation within coaching and management as seen when we try to appoint coaches. This will do nothing to enhance our reputation only damage it further. Have they done this purely for revenge because I can't see a long term business positive. |
Yeah mate that was my initial reaction but we aren’t a big club so if there’s a million or two on the table which we have a right to claim then I’d be glad to get it. Say what you want about the owners (I am not a fan of them) but not only are they owners but presumably if they or their ‘people’ are directors (haven’t looked it up) they have their own personal legal obligations under the Companies Act to act in the best interests of the club (section 172). Whether or not foregoing 2m or 1m for reputation risk in being seen as a difficult club to work for well…that’s a question of fact but were it me, if I had barrister advice the claim is a goer I would go for it for the sake of the club and also because I would be a bit worried about exposure under the Companies Act if I didn’t. We aren’t suing Southampton (the contract is with RM, not them) so we aren’t damaging relationships with a club (at least not directly), the release clause will have formed a genuine and presumably significant commercial term of RM’s appointment and whilst our shared concern is putting off future appointments…I think we will be alright. Football is football, this isn’t going to kill our ability to recruit. RM gave the covenant under his contract. If he’s exposed himself to this claim then as I mentioned - if he had any sense he’d have protected himself in his contract with Southampton. This was all on the table and I wouldn’t be surprised, were he properly advised, he’d have got an indemnity from Southampton about all this | | | |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 21:44 - Apr 14 with 1239 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 19:55 - Apr 14 by Whiterockin |
Whatever the outcome its not a good look for our club. We already have a poor reputation within coaching and management as seen when we try to appoint coaches. This will do nothing to enhance our reputation only damage it further. Have they done this purely for revenge because I can't see a long term business positive. |
You are creating a false narrative out of a very clear situation. Swansea were due £2m and Southampton has refused to pay it. Somebody has to pay it and if Southampton do not then Martin must. This is part of the "manager is right the club is wrong " school of thinking. Potter / Cooper / Martin all failed to honour their contracts mid project. All made horrendous recruitment mistakes.
You are pedalling Martin's dubious narrative that this issue is personal. It is not personal. That is what fans do not serious football professionals. It is actually a good look for the club. The club will not be pushed around.
The long term business positive is £1m and depends on watson doing a better job than he did last summer. It is not relevant if SFC go up or not They had brought in £150m in transfer fees. It is small change to them whatever happens.
What is more relevant is if Martin tells them he wants to move to Brighton. I that case SFC would not cover his compensation. |  |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 21:50 - Apr 14 with 1231 views | QJumpingJack |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 21:44 - Apr 14 by ReslovenSwan1 |
You are creating a false narrative out of a very clear situation. Swansea were due £2m and Southampton has refused to pay it. Somebody has to pay it and if Southampton do not then Martin must. This is part of the "manager is right the club is wrong " school of thinking. Potter / Cooper / Martin all failed to honour their contracts mid project. All made horrendous recruitment mistakes.
You are pedalling Martin's dubious narrative that this issue is personal. It is not personal. That is what fans do not serious football professionals. It is actually a good look for the club. The club will not be pushed around.
The long term business positive is £1m and depends on watson doing a better job than he did last summer. It is not relevant if SFC go up or not They had brought in £150m in transfer fees. It is small change to them whatever happens.
What is more relevant is if Martin tells them he wants to move to Brighton. I that case SFC would not cover his compensation. |
The recruitment was not all down to the managers.
Andy Scott, Mark Allen and others have to take some responsibility & they were appointed by our owners.
You’re very quick to criticise our recent managers.
What is your view on Bob Bradley? | | | |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 21:56 - Apr 14 with 1211 views | Dr_Winston |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 21:50 - Apr 14 by QJumpingJack |
The recruitment was not all down to the managers.
Andy Scott, Mark Allen and others have to take some responsibility & they were appointed by our owners.
You’re very quick to criticise our recent managers.
What is your view on Bob Bradley? |
Everyone needs to be more grown up.
We seem to have gone through a succession of managers who have a bit of a paddy when the exact players that they want are not signed and subsequently don't even attempt to make the best out of what they have. Cooper and Martin especially.
But we also need to be a lot smarter in the transfer market. We clearly went all in on Duff this Summer and are now faced with offloading players who might have done quite well had he worked out but Williams clearly has no further use for.
We also have to consider the very real possibility based on performances so far that Williams might have to be replaced at some point next season. There needs to be a decision at the highest level about what our approach is going to be from here on in. |  |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 22:10 - Apr 14 with 1203 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 21:50 - Apr 14 by QJumpingJack |
The recruitment was not all down to the managers.
Andy Scott, Mark Allen and others have to take some responsibility & they were appointed by our owners.
You’re very quick to criticise our recent managers.
What is your view on Bob Bradley? |
This is part of the problem.
Scott / club picked Gyorkeres not Cooper. Guess what? he did not play.
Club picked Whitaker - did not play (inexplicably).
Club picked Obafemi - did not play (probably his own fault)
Club picked Manning - did not play much for Cooper
Club picked Kukharevych - did not play.
Levien gave Fletcher a trial at Swansea. He failed . (of course he did 17 goals in 3 months)
The player kicked out (by managers) are all better than Lowe and Cullen. (propably not Myk)
Bradley never had a chance. Respected everywhere out of UK where anti Americanism exists. He may have bombed after the transfer window. We will never know how good or bad he was at Swansea. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 22:12 - Apr 14 with 1202 views | Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 18:33 - Apr 14 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I watched a full game v Stevenage and he scored and gave away a penalty. He looked decent no world beater but had a clear potential at 21. Cooper saw this in training and saw improvements. He prefered Lowe. He actually scored a neat crip near post header.
Swansea do score these types of goal but Cardiff loan players do much better like yesterday. Cullen Lowe and Yates would never score agoal like that.
Martin prefered Cullen over the superior Whitaker who he virtually forced out of the club. |
The incident that stands out for me was him running through with routledge 2 on 1 against the keeper, instead of the simple pass across for a guaranteed goal he tried a stupid chip that he sliced well wide. Don’t think he played after that. He absolutely did not do anything to deserve a spot on the pitch during his time here. |  |
| |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 22:18 - Apr 14 with 1187 views | max936 |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 21:50 - Apr 14 by QJumpingJack |
The recruitment was not all down to the managers.
Andy Scott, Mark Allen and others have to take some responsibility & they were appointed by our owners.
You’re very quick to criticise our recent managers.
What is your view on Bob Bradley? |
It seems very clear to me, that the current regime at the club has damaged the decent reputation it once had in recent years, Managers who we wanted turning us down, players as well [although there are probably financial reasons regards players] but the word could well have got around in the mangers circle.
Seems like Coleman and Co could be attempting to repair that reputation, but it remains to be seen. |  |
| |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 22:50 - Apr 14 with 1160 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 22:12 - Apr 14 by Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
The incident that stands out for me was him running through with routledge 2 on 1 against the keeper, instead of the simple pass across for a guaranteed goal he tried a stupid chip that he sliced well wide. Don’t think he played after that. He absolutely did not do anything to deserve a spot on the pitch during his time here. |
He was raw and in fact top rated manager Cooper knew he would come good. He saw him in training every week. So why did Cooper not move to sign a player for only £1m-1.5m?. Even Haarland has missed an open goal this season. You have to considers a longer term body of work.
The reason was Cooper had no long term vision. He was passing through. Mark Robbins on the other hand saw his potential took a risks signed him and did a real good job for Coventry. He has a long term vision. [Post edited 14 Apr 22:54]
| |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 00:16 - Apr 15 with 1134 views | KeithHaynes |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 22:50 - Apr 14 by ReslovenSwan1 |
He was raw and in fact top rated manager Cooper knew he would come good. He saw him in training every week. So why did Cooper not move to sign a player for only £1m-1.5m?. Even Haarland has missed an open goal this season. You have to considers a longer term body of work.
The reason was Cooper had no long term vision. He was passing through. Mark Robbins on the other hand saw his potential took a risks signed him and did a real good job for Coventry. He has a long term vision. [Post edited 14 Apr 22:54]
|
For every Whittaker and Gyokeres there’s a Downs and a Piroe.
If a player doesn’t fit or isn’t good enough then they leave.
Dean Saunders a prime example. |  |
| |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 02:02 - Apr 15 with 1116 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 00:16 - Apr 15 by KeithHaynes |
For every Whittaker and Gyokeres there’s a Downs and a Piroe.
If a player doesn’t fit or isn’t good enough then they leave.
Dean Saunders a prime example. |
So you are happy with 2 out of 4 great players being kept and developed. SCFC has to do better than 50%. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 08:47 - Apr 15 with 1042 views | onehunglow |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 22:18 - Apr 14 by max936 |
It seems very clear to me, that the current regime at the club has damaged the decent reputation it once had in recent years, Managers who we wanted turning us down, players as well [although there are probably financial reasons regards players] but the word could well have got around in the mangers circle.
Seems like Coleman and Co could be attempting to repair that reputation, but it remains to be seen. |
We had a very good name in the game ,less so now. | |
| |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 09:52 - Apr 15 with 993 views | Whiterockin |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 22:10 - Apr 14 by ReslovenSwan1 |
This is part of the problem.
Scott / club picked Gyorkeres not Cooper. Guess what? he did not play.
Club picked Whitaker - did not play (inexplicably).
Club picked Obafemi - did not play (probably his own fault)
Club picked Manning - did not play much for Cooper
Club picked Kukharevych - did not play.
Levien gave Fletcher a trial at Swansea. He failed . (of course he did 17 goals in 3 months)
The player kicked out (by managers) are all better than Lowe and Cullen. (propably not Myk)
Bradley never had a chance. Respected everywhere out of UK where anti Americanism exists. He may have bombed after the transfer window. We will never know how good or bad he was at Swansea. |
Bradley would never have got the gig if he wasn't an American employed by Americans. He was never a Premier League standard manger as history since has showed. Respected everywhere outside of the UK, absolute crap what top European League club has he managed. Let's make it easier, what average European Club has he managed in the years since he was sacked by us. One of the worst coaches we have ever had, nothing to do with being anti American. | | | |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 11:23 - Apr 15 with 914 views | PrettySheetyCity |
It's things like this which totally undermine this narrative that they significantly breached his contract and/or made the conditions untenable to justify his resignation (e.g., constructive dismissal).
I recall that Dowie tried to run the same crap in the High Court when Simon Jordan and Crystal Palace sued him. You can read the judgment here: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/qb/2007/1392?query=iain+dowie (paragraphs 40, 79, 80, 82, 209 and 210).
Dowie asked for his release from Palace, and provided assurances that he was not about to take a job with Charlton and wanted to leave because he missed his family etc. Palace had previously refused Charlton permission to speak with Dowie, because Charlton were unwilling to pay the significant release fee. Following those assurances, Simon Jordan granted his release, but he took the Charlton job less than a week later. So Charlton got their man and didn't have to pay the fee (sound familiar...?).
Whilst the Judge in that case never determined whether he was constructively dismissed (as the trial dealt with a preliminary issue as to whether he deceived Simon Jordan into permitting his release), the underlying dispute was settled pretty promptly and by all accounts involved a hefty sum being paid by Dowie to Palace (in legal costs and compensation).
I have been pretty consistent with my posts on here that on an operational level, since 2016, the Club has been a joke. We can't effectively negotiate transfer fees (either inbound or outbound), we appear to run the Club at the behest of a vocal minority on social media, and we are renowned throughout football as being a soft touch.
I've seen quite a few lambast the Club for suing Russell Martin, but a football manager can't just decide to breach his contract and up sticks to join a divisional rival without any consequences. It's naïve to suggest otherwise and sends out a message that other clubs can come and poach our manager/players and we won't do anything because we don't want the negative PR. In my opinion, Russell Martin may have thought that Saints would cut a deal on his behalf or the Club wouldn't want to rock the boat and annoy fans. Unfortunately for him, that's not the case, and his apparent gamble has not paid off. I really feel for the guy but play stupid games and you win stupid prizes. | | | |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 11:48 - Apr 15 with 884 views | Whiterockin |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 11:23 - Apr 15 by PrettySheetyCity |
It's things like this which totally undermine this narrative that they significantly breached his contract and/or made the conditions untenable to justify his resignation (e.g., constructive dismissal).
I recall that Dowie tried to run the same crap in the High Court when Simon Jordan and Crystal Palace sued him. You can read the judgment here: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/qb/2007/1392?query=iain+dowie (paragraphs 40, 79, 80, 82, 209 and 210).
Dowie asked for his release from Palace, and provided assurances that he was not about to take a job with Charlton and wanted to leave because he missed his family etc. Palace had previously refused Charlton permission to speak with Dowie, because Charlton were unwilling to pay the significant release fee. Following those assurances, Simon Jordan granted his release, but he took the Charlton job less than a week later. So Charlton got their man and didn't have to pay the fee (sound familiar...?).
Whilst the Judge in that case never determined whether he was constructively dismissed (as the trial dealt with a preliminary issue as to whether he deceived Simon Jordan into permitting his release), the underlying dispute was settled pretty promptly and by all accounts involved a hefty sum being paid by Dowie to Palace (in legal costs and compensation).
I have been pretty consistent with my posts on here that on an operational level, since 2016, the Club has been a joke. We can't effectively negotiate transfer fees (either inbound or outbound), we appear to run the Club at the behest of a vocal minority on social media, and we are renowned throughout football as being a soft touch.
I've seen quite a few lambast the Club for suing Russell Martin, but a football manager can't just decide to breach his contract and up sticks to join a divisional rival without any consequences. It's naïve to suggest otherwise and sends out a message that other clubs can come and poach our manager/players and we won't do anything because we don't want the negative PR. In my opinion, Russell Martin may have thought that Saints would cut a deal on his behalf or the Club wouldn't want to rock the boat and annoy fans. Unfortunately for him, that's not the case, and his apparent gamble has not paid off. I really feel for the guy but play stupid games and you win stupid prizes. |
Its very difficult to form an opinion either way without all the facts. But I still feel it is a bad look for the club, time will tell who will come out on top with all this. I would have thought there might have been a statement by now from the League Managers Association, after all Martin is one of their members. | | | |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 11:59 - Apr 15 with 868 views | onehunglow |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 11:23 - Apr 15 by PrettySheetyCity |
It's things like this which totally undermine this narrative that they significantly breached his contract and/or made the conditions untenable to justify his resignation (e.g., constructive dismissal).
I recall that Dowie tried to run the same crap in the High Court when Simon Jordan and Crystal Palace sued him. You can read the judgment here: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/qb/2007/1392?query=iain+dowie (paragraphs 40, 79, 80, 82, 209 and 210).
Dowie asked for his release from Palace, and provided assurances that he was not about to take a job with Charlton and wanted to leave because he missed his family etc. Palace had previously refused Charlton permission to speak with Dowie, because Charlton were unwilling to pay the significant release fee. Following those assurances, Simon Jordan granted his release, but he took the Charlton job less than a week later. So Charlton got their man and didn't have to pay the fee (sound familiar...?).
Whilst the Judge in that case never determined whether he was constructively dismissed (as the trial dealt with a preliminary issue as to whether he deceived Simon Jordan into permitting his release), the underlying dispute was settled pretty promptly and by all accounts involved a hefty sum being paid by Dowie to Palace (in legal costs and compensation).
I have been pretty consistent with my posts on here that on an operational level, since 2016, the Club has been a joke. We can't effectively negotiate transfer fees (either inbound or outbound), we appear to run the Club at the behest of a vocal minority on social media, and we are renowned throughout football as being a soft touch.
I've seen quite a few lambast the Club for suing Russell Martin, but a football manager can't just decide to breach his contract and up sticks to join a divisional rival without any consequences. It's naïve to suggest otherwise and sends out a message that other clubs can come and poach our manager/players and we won't do anything because we don't want the negative PR. In my opinion, Russell Martin may have thought that Saints would cut a deal on his behalf or the Club wouldn't want to rock the boat and annoy fans. Unfortunately for him, that's not the case, and his apparent gamble has not paid off. I really feel for the guy but play stupid games and you win stupid prizes. |
That is quite brilliant | |
| |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 14:51 - Apr 15 with 804 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 11:48 - Apr 15 by Whiterockin |
Its very difficult to form an opinion either way without all the facts. But I still feel it is a bad look for the club, time will tell who will come out on top with all this. I would have thought there might have been a statement by now from the League Managers Association, after all Martin is one of their members. |
If I was Martin I would not be happy with Southampton FC.He might have expected a smooth transfer to SFC but his new club did not fill their obligations and pay up. He now finds himself taken to court.
It suggests SFC are not too concerned by Martin's well being and do not care about him taken to court or the " bad look" it gives Southampton. This is oblivious to Swans fans of course.
Southampton are saying to the next manager they poach " we might pay your compensation fee but then again we might not" | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 15:01 - Apr 15 with 805 views | QJumpingJack |
It is probably worth watching the press conferences Martin did around the Southampton vs Swansea fixtures this season.
I can remember one comment being "I like the people who are based in Swansea". Read between the lines..... | | | |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 15:10 - Apr 15 with 791 views | Whiterockin |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 14:51 - Apr 15 by ReslovenSwan1 |
If I was Martin I would not be happy with Southampton FC.He might have expected a smooth transfer to SFC but his new club did not fill their obligations and pay up. He now finds himself taken to court.
It suggests SFC are not too concerned by Martin's well being and do not care about him taken to court or the " bad look" it gives Southampton. This is oblivious to Swans fans of course.
Southampton are saying to the next manager they poach " we might pay your compensation fee but then again we might not" |
Again purely assumptions with no merit or substance. | | | |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 15:18 - Apr 15 with 763 views | QJumpingJack |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 14:51 - Apr 15 by ReslovenSwan1 |
If I was Martin I would not be happy with Southampton FC.He might have expected a smooth transfer to SFC but his new club did not fill their obligations and pay up. He now finds himself taken to court.
It suggests SFC are not too concerned by Martin's well being and do not care about him taken to court or the " bad look" it gives Southampton. This is oblivious to Swans fans of course.
Southampton are saying to the next manager they poach " we might pay your compensation fee but then again we might not" |
Martin's future at Southampton "may" depend on
1) if they win promotion via the play-offs
2) his relationship with the new sporting director now that Jason Wilcox has departed to Old Trafford. | | | |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 15:24 - Apr 15 with 752 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 15:10 - Apr 15 by Whiterockin |
Again purely assumptions with no merit or substance. |
I give you a different angle on the matter. It is a challenging concept for those who like to go along with the flow and comfortable narratives.
Martin tells Swansea "I am off". Swansea say "hang on you have a contract". Martin says "Southampton will sort that out for me" speak to them.
Then he gets a legal letter. It is stressful enough as it is.
"Mr Chairman why have you not dealt with this and paid Swansea.".
"Sorry Russell the Chairman does not want to pay you must. What can I say? ."
Oh dear. (Speculation of course). [Post edited 15 Apr 15:33]
| |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 15:39 - Apr 15 with 743 views | Whiterockin |
| The Telegraph: Swansea-Russell Martin on 15:24 - Apr 15 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I give you a different angle on the matter. It is a challenging concept for those who like to go along with the flow and comfortable narratives.
Martin tells Swansea "I am off". Swansea say "hang on you have a contract". Martin says "Southampton will sort that out for me" speak to them.
Then he gets a legal letter. It is stressful enough as it is.
"Mr Chairman why have you not dealt with this and paid Swansea.".
"Sorry Russell the Chairman does not want to pay you must. What can I say? ."
Oh dear. (Speculation of course). [Post edited 15 Apr 15:33]
|
As I say, wait for the facts. Some may be quite surprised. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
