Barrow AFC.net

If players don't want to play for us then it's bye bye if that meant we had to play inexperienced kids and got relegated then as much as I would be gutted I'd rather have players who at least will give us 90 minutes of effort get rid I say!

Rather have players wanting to be here and not wanting to play just cos they think they should. Yussuf had potential. Moors was OK. Dixon is OK. Not much to choose but we have a very good number 1 here now with bags of experience plus a striker who maybe can play with/alongside Lord Byron of Harrison.

whitty1969 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:48 pm

Lightflood wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:15 pm Did Yussuf have a contract appearance clause ? Like others and the manager didn't fancy him long term hence wasn't starting him to activate it and moved him on to free up a wage. Only a thought !

Been on the bench is enough to trigger an appearance

I liked Yussef, lots of others I would of got rid of first. But if he doesnt want to play for us off you go....

Since when has a non-appearance counted as an appearance?
And this is pretty obviously the main reason for his departure now. Strangely enough, he was one of the only players making an effort in the last home game when he came off the bench.

Lightflood wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:15 pm Did Yussuf have a contract appearance clause ? Like others and the manager didn't fancy him long term hence wasn't starting him to activate it and moved him on to free up a wage. Only a thought !

Yes he did

beachy01 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:44 pm Wrong forward gone, would have got rid of Byron before him

Moribund wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2018 6:02 pm

whitty1969 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:48 pm

Been on the bench is enough to trigger an appearance

I liked Yussef, lots of others I would of got rid of first. But if he doesnt want to play for us off you go....

Since when has a non-appearance counted as an appearance?
And this is pretty obviously the main reason for his departure now. Strangely enough, he was one of the only players making an effort in the last home game when he came off the bench.

Remember when Jason Walker never made the bench or he would trigger a contract extension ????

Fazered wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2018 10:43 am

boyliegladbach wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2018 10:33 am Dixons better than moore

Oh no he isn't

Oh yes he is

Opinions. But tbh I think I am at the stage where I want someone commanding better than both, so good luck to the lad.

I didn't mind Yussuf, but clearly Pennock didn't fancy him asca player so free up some space. There are a few I would be a lot happier waving goodbye to!

Not really fussed about either of them leaving - we’ve been poor this season and if we want to bring in new blood then some of the existing players need to be shifted out.

Liked Adi, there's a player in there as that hat trick against Aldershot shown, but we didn't really see enough to be convinced one way or another in all honesty.
Stuart Moore has potential to be a decent keeper but so does Joel Dixon who just shades it for me.
I wish both Adi Yussuf and Stuart Moore well, but in Ady Pennock we have to trust!!!

whitty1969 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2018 6:40 pm

Moribund wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2018 6:02 pm

Since when has a non-appearance counted as an appearance?
And this is pretty obviously the main reason for his departure now. Strangely enough, he was one of the only players making an effort in the last home game when he came off the bench.

Remember when Jason Walker never made the bench or he would trigger a contract extension ????

That really wasn't the case - he wasn't on the bench because Cox said he wanted to try other players instead of him, because he knew he didn't want to keep him.
I really can't recall hearing about a clause that's triggered by sitting on the bench.

Moribund wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2018 8:01 pm

whitty1969 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2018 6:40 pm

Remember when Jason Walker never made the bench or he would trigger a contract extension ????

That really wasn't the case - he wasn't on the bench because Cox said he wanted to try other players instead of him, because he knew he didn't want to keep him.
I really can't recall hearing about a clause that's triggered by sitting on the bench.

Wrong. Walker had a clause. Coxy had it renegotiated then went on to play him. It was appearance based.

whitty1969 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2018 8:07 pm

Moribund wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2018 8:01 pm

That really wasn't the case - he wasn't on the bench because Cox said he wanted to try other players instead of him, because he knew he didn't want to keep him.
I really can't recall hearing about a clause that's triggered by sitting on the bench.

Wrong. Walker had a clause. Coxy had it renegotiated then went on to play him. It was appearance based.

Yeah, APPEARANCE based - being on the bench doesn't count as an appearance. Ever.

http://www.nwemail.co.uk/Jason-Walkers- ... ae481dd-ds

No mention of any bizarre subs bench clause.

An appearance clause can't be triggered by a player being sat on the bench, I can't believe I am having to explain this, it is a statement of the bleeding obvious.

Sorry to see Adi Yussuf leave as I think he is a decent striker in a side that is struggling to create chances. All our forwards have struggled this season, because they are not getting decent service into the box.

Always thought Stuart Moore did well, but was no clear number 1 choice with Dixon / Moore

Best of luck to both of them.