Accies World

Being linked with West Brom with Pullis keen according to BBC gossip page. be surprised if we don't cash in in the summer.

In all fairness it's not a case of the club cashing in. If Michael McGovern gets a chance to play EPL football for a few years then the club can't stand in his way, and it's well deserved given his performances. The guy is 30 now and this could be his last chance to hit the big time before retirement.

West Brom will be able to offer a salary that could be upwards of £15K to £20K per week (and maybe more), which I'm assuming is a good bit more than what Accies could offer. I'm not sure what Michael McGovern earns at the moment, but I'd be surprised if it's any more than £1K per week. If someone came along and offered you a new job, on a bigger platform with 20 times the salary - would you accept? I think so.

The reality is that Accies have to work to a budget that is based on an average core attendance of around 1800 fans, and as such we can only keep punching above our weight and running as an SPFL club if we develop players and sell them on. I've read plenty of the 'spend this and spend that' style comments on this forum, but these comments don't take into account the economic reality of running a football club at the top level with very small attendance figures.

The BOD aren't perfect and they make mistakes just like the rest of us, and they will have a big judgement call to make in the summer based on results since January, and in turn they will be more than accountable for getting this right. Most of the big calls that they have made have been correct, and lets not forget that this season's target was survival. Let's be honest - if we'd all been told at the start of the season that we would have a great first half of the season, with a lousy second half, but would stay in the division we'd be more than happy.

If true we can not stand in his way! Would be a good move for him!

I have no problems with okayers moving on like #22 I do have the fear about who Less would bring in to replace him.

Replace him ?? Or stick with the goalies we have....

If true then good luck to him. He is a fantastic keeper and the club wont stand in his way. wonder how much we would get for him.

H9crx wrote:If true we can not stand in his way! Would be a good move for him!

I have no problems with okayers moving on like #22 I do have the fear about who Less would bring in to replace him.

Is this the same Les that brought him here in the first place ?

redandwhite1874 wrote:

H9crx wrote:If true we can not stand in his way! Would be a good move for him!

I have no problems with okayers moving on like #22 I do have the fear about who Less would bring in to replace him.

Is this the same Les that brought him here in the first place ?

Now now I think we all know that when Alex was in charge we got good players!(yes man with an eye for a olayer) Befour and after Alex we have had duds! #wheressumsky rose tinted googles

H9crx wrote:

redandwhite1874 wrote:

H9crx wrote:If true we can not stand in his way! Would be a good move for him!

I have no problems with okayers moving on like #22 I do have the fear about who Less would bring in to replace him.

Is this the same Les that brought him here in the first place ?

Now now I think we all know that when Alex was in charge we got good players!(yes man with an eye for a olayer) Befour and after Alex we have had duds! #wheressumsky rose tinted googles

Lee Lynch was a terrific Alex Neil signing

We will never know the answer to that one though .......

glasgow accie wrote:We will never know the answer to that one though .......

He played more than Sumsky and Lucas for the 20's so it's fair to assume he was not up to the standard required or he would still be here like the aforementioned two who, despite not playing, are still here.

Gaspode wrote:

glasgow accie wrote:We will never know the answer to that one though .......

He played more than Sumsky and Lucas for the 20's so it's fair to assume he was not up to the standard required or he would still be here like the aforementioned two who, despite not playing, are still here.

Or He was good had an opportunity to play football some wher else wher sumsky has no where to go and is signed for 12m and is happy to pick up a money.

H9crx wrote:

Gaspode wrote:

glasgow accie wrote:We will never know the answer to that one though .......

He played more than Sumsky and Lucas for the 20's so it's fair to assume he was not up to the standard required or he would still be here like the aforementioned two who, despite not playing, are still here.

Or He was good had an opportunity to play football some wher else wher sumsky has no where to go and is signed for 12m and is happy to pick up a money.

What are you talking about? Lynch also had an 18 month contract, but was obviously told he could move on if he wished as he wouldn't figure. Don't let facts get in the way of your constant tirade against the club.

Ok where's your sorce that the club said he could go on and it was not him asking to leave as he was pissed off not getting a game when we were getting pumed every week.

I was stating a different interpretation on the matter as you me and the rest of the fans know Jack!

My point was he may be a good player and got the nod of a contract and a game back in Irland. The ethos would not allow the club to stand in his way!

You are always at me for my negitive posts . I have never stated anything about your oranother posters who do not share my views! But why up am I wrong as you do not agree with my views?

your constent trolling and snide coments says a lot!

Jack is my son .

H9crx wrote:Ok where's your sorce that the club said he could go on and it was not him asking to leave as he was pissed off not getting a game when we were getting pumed every week.

I was stating a different interpretation on the matter as you me and the rest of the fans know Jack!

My point was he may be a good player and got the nod of a contract and a game back in Irland. The ethos would not allow the club to stand in his way!

You are always at me for my negitive posts . I have never stated anything about your oranother posters who do not share my views! But why up am I wrong as you do not agree with my views?

your constent trolling and snide coments says a lot!

Okay, why would we let a player out of his contract if we really rated him? And the ethos argument doesn't stand up because it is about us not standing in the way of a player if he is bettering himself and also, if it is good for the club. So, was him leaving without a club to go to. good for him and the club?

Not rated in the eyes of the new coaches doesn't not make you a bad player player.

Well time will tell where he pops up next,

H9crx wrote:Not rated in the eyes of the new coaches doesn't not make you a bad player player.

Even allowing for your dyslexia, H9crx, that's a quadruple negative (or a double double negative). Not rated doesn't not make you bad?

I genuinely have no idea what point you're trying to make.

Ye could not get down what I was looking to say.

The point was that by not being liked my one manager does not state you are a bad player or a poor signing. History has shown that players who have left various clubs have been fantastic else where. I don't think lynch would have been a bad player. In football you go where you are wanted Or get a game.

H9crx wrote:Ye could not get down what I was looking to say.

The point was that by not being liked my one manager does not state you are a bad player or a poor signing. History has shown that players who have left various clubs have been fantastic else where. I don't think lynch would have been a bad player. In football you go where you are wanted Or get a game.

Got you now. If one manager doesn't rate you, you might still be a good player, right?

To be fair, I'm struggling to think of a player who wasn't rated by Alex Neil or Billy Reid or Allan Maitland, who went on to be better player elsewhere. Happy to be proved wrong.