Gus: Why I lost star striker (From The Argus)

So because of this totally crazy financial policy, the club has ultimately lost out financially. And before anyone tries to slate me for that comment, just think the whole situation through.
I've heard of trying to maintain stability and not running the risk of overspending etc, but come on, splitting the monies in this way is like tying your own hands behind your back. And there was me thinking that heads were screwed on in the correct manner at this club.

Well done Brighton! Does this insinuate though that although we signed Cms for 3m or whatever we were paying him a lower wage than Glenn wanted? No, we simply chose to sign Cms over Glenn, and that has been proved a mistake. We move on.....

Must welcome Glenn back tomorrow he has showed us nothing but respect since he left.

Who was responsable for this stupid financial policy it would have been more sensible and financially better to pay a bit more wages to Murray.I am sure if Gus had insisted that we kept Murray he would have been listened to.Like gold dust he just slipped through our fingers.

Good Morning All,Agree with both above. UTA

tug509 wrote:
Good Morning All,Agree with both above. UTA

Sorry PJ hadn`t posted when i was typing!.

Jesus, Move on!
He's gone get over it.
He's a palace player now and he's going to taste defeat tomorrow.

Like 'robbing Peter to pay Paul' I guess. Glad Gus has explained what went on--as some of us suspected. Maybe now it will shut up those who keep on about us letting Murray go to Palace. Bit like shutting the door after the horse has bolted. But, as stated above, thats gone we must look forward. As I have said before, cannot do anything about the past but look forward to the future, we CAN do something about that. Time is running out for Gus to get another striker and his options are very limited and again always seems down to money, which we have to keep a handle on as we have not got a bottomless pit. Its up to the current squad to step up to the mark and show us how good they really are---contracts are due to be reviewed and if they want to continue at BHA they have to be prepared to play at a better level,-- the consequences of NOT doing so are obvious.

But we can't move on. Every day we wake up hoping it was just a dream and that he's still here. But then we descend back into the nightmare, because we realise he's gone and we actually have Cms, and an injured one at that.....!

Hehe!

Unbelieveable,why admit this now?maybe someone at the club does read this forum and the constant questions about murray.I for one don't believe it,stinks of spin

Yes and CMS has NOT replaced GM as he cannot score goals--even when he is playing--great work ethic but that does not win matches if you don't know where the goal is!!!

Why doesn’t Gus man up admit he made a big mistake and didn’t think Murray was good enough we lost him after weeks of his agent trying to get a better deal gus only had eyes for the transfer market to bring players in to strengthen his own reputation

wjhen decent strikers receive decent service they will score goals,as is eveident with murray,I wonder why his perfomance with palace doesnt compare to that with the albion.

This is one of Gus's more complicated arguments but it's nice that he's finally acknowledged a mistake was made.

As an excuse it just says is we let GM go because we are all stupid at this club! £11k for his wages was peanuts in the context of the Champuonship and the amount of season tickets that had been sold.

Thats why it looks more like a footballing decision rather than a financial one. Perhaps it was felt that GM could only score in a successfull side but if Brighton struggled in the Championship he would be a liability. At the time Gus mentioned that Ash scored 20 goals in his first season whereas some finally managed it once after a few seasons.

mikeygit wrote:
Yes and CMS has NOT replaced GM as he cannot score goals--even when he is playing--great work ethic but that does not win matches if you don't know where the goal is!!!

Strange conclusion. Iirc Murray scored 22 goals in our promotion season, CMS 34 or something for Posh. CMS can and does score goals. None of us know how many GM would have scored if he had stayed. Give it up. He's gone. Move on please.

mrgull---maybe because GUS plays a different style and he seems so stubborn as not to change---old saying--put the same thing in you get the same thing out. No use playing attractive football if it does not result in goals!!! Many have been saying--even Gus-- we need to go and get 'em from the kick off, not when we are one or two goals down, and then have to play catch up. It does seem strange that when some of our ex- players are with another clubs they seem to play better football---proves it is the way we play. We also--for many reasons, injury, suspensions--can never play a consistent team, therefore although we may play well, we rae not consistent in our play--sometimes brilliant, sometimes diabolical--- there is not the gelling together of a team, we are not clicking, and I am convinced that this is not our season for going up a league, we need to do it when we have a squad that is consistently winning games and scoring goals, that way we have a chance of going up and staying up. We have everything in place apart from a good squad. Last season our discipline was poor and now it is getting worse--that certainly is an area that needs to be addressed---both on and off the field. And I have to say that it is good to stick up for ones Club but Gus needs to stick to getting the squad playing better football rather than making ill timed comments--needs to be a bit more tight lipped.

Why can't Poyet and the club just admit that they made a huge mistake ? Egos in the way maybe? First "we've been given the wrong ref" and now "it's not my fault if Murray scores". Palace must be loving it.

On a different note, I was under the impression that there was a great deal of "togetherness" at the club these days, but am not so sure now. If I went public in criticising the wage structure etc for my employer then I may well expect to be picking up my P45.

patcham albion wrote:
Unbelieveable,why admit this now?maybe someone at the club does read this forum and the constant questions about murray.I for one don't believe it,stinks of spin

Because Murray wasn't prolific last year so wasn't seen as much of an issue and this story would be picked out of general questions ahead of big match tomorrow.

Although I don't see why it wasn't mentioned when Seagulls visited Selhurst

I dont doubt Gus's hands were tied and I understand the complexity of funding for both purchases and salaries. At the time, we couldn't keep him, so he went. He was the best CF we've had since Zamora and he's probably playing better than ever this year with Palace.
Mind you with Bolasie and Zaha as his supply line, I'm not surprised he's doing well. Maybe Ulloa will be equally as effective with Buckley and Orlandi/Lua Lua as his supply line. Looking forward to tomorrow. Hope it's a cracking game with a few goals and that for once, we score more than they do. UTA

Truth is Murray never wanted to go! And would come back here tomo!
Loves the town and the club, Gus has changed his story on this, last time his demands were outside our wage structure, now it's which pot the cash was in! Cms on 17k a week, Murray would have taken less than he is on at palace, around 11k a week.. So we had wages for cms , but not Murray? Sorry I can't accept that... If Gus really rated Murray he would have signed him , as he did elabd in the run up to the end of season.. Anyway, lets move on, enough egg on face for Gus, lets hope there is not a batter mix tomo at 2pm

I love the way some players split opinion like this. I guess along with unpredictable results it is what makes the beautiful game so appealing.

Personally, I would like to think that had money had nothing to do with it, we'd have CMS and Ulloa ahead of Murray anyway. I see it as a major upgrade. Unless Murray has suddenly improved ten-fold, which is possible but I doubt it, I'd much rather have our current crop. The chances Murray has been getting is the thing that has improved. I think CMS would've scored just as many if the roles were reversed. Fact is, in our system and style, you have to be a much better player as a striker to score lots of goals. I think Ulloa has shown signs he could do this which will be great. Maybe some then think our system must be faulty but it has benefits in other areas, the main one being the time spent defending is drastically reduced.

It clearly doesn't please all but I am much happier watching our system of play, controlling the game with the burden of scoring goals spread around the team rather than playing more direct just so a striker can score more.

I found myself moaning about Murray for long spells of that last Withdean season. Yes, he scored a few, a few good ones but I found him slow and lazy for the most part. Just not my type of player, I guess. Anyway, whichever way you look at it, he is gone and we should get behind whoever is playing in the blue & white currently. It'll be an interesting game tomorrow. It's stopping Phillips I'm worried about!

It appears to me that Gus went for the 34 goals a season striker, over GM. CMS had a better season last year than GM. Hindsight is such a wonderful gift.

Gus has been consistently honest, it’s good to see his no nonsense, say it as it is, common sense approach put to good use at Brighton, he had an immensely successful playing career with Real Zaragoza winning The Copa Del Rey, The Spanish Super Cup and the UEFA Cup Winners Cup. With Chelsea winning The FA Cup, The UEFA Cup Winners Cup and The European Super Cup. Playing for his country he won The Copa America one of the world's most widely viewed sporting events.
His management career has also been impressive, after successful spells at Swindon and Leeds as assistant manager he was appointed by Tottenham Hotspur to work alongside manager Juande Ramos. During his first season as assistant manager at White Hart Lane, he won the2007–08 League Cup, beating Chelsea 2–1. In November 2009, Poyet was announced as the new manager of Albion. He had a brilliant start and steered us to safety. In his first full season Brighton became League One: Champions 2010–11 gaining promotion to the Championship, then he led the club to a top 10 finish the following season. He won Manager of the Year 2010-2011 and the football league award for Outstanding Managerial Achievement 2012. He is now one step away from leading us into the play-offs and deserves all the support he gets.

mikeygit wrote:
Yes and CMS has NOT replaced GM as he cannot score goals--even when he is playing--great work ethic but that does not win matches if you don't know where the goal is!!!

He out-scored GM last season, didn't he?

Clean Sheet wrote:
It appears to me that Gus went for the 34 goals a season striker, over GM. CMS had a better season last year than GM. Hindsight is such a wonderful gift.

Well said Clean Sheet - about the only calm voise of reason on this thread. This time last year it didn't look like a bad deal at all. When we signed CMS I don't recall anyone arguing we should have kept Murray. We were all delighted and excited. Plus when you look at Murrays previous injury record with us and CMS's record with Posh it looked a good deal.

We won't even be thinking about it if we win on Sunday.

When someone is brilliant, you keep them. It's basic stuff. Same if someone is playing brilliantly, you play them - it's basic stuff

In most businesses, capital and current spending is handled separately or, at least differently. If you buy a player for £3M then the club has an asset with that value. Wages of £3M are not an asset they are a liability. Obviously this is a simplification but some of the comments on here are from people who not only couldn't run a whelk stall but don't even realise they couldn't run a whelk stall!

Justin wrote:
In most businesses, capital and current spending is handled separately or, at least differently. If you buy a player for £3M then the club has an asset with that value. Wages of £3M are not an asset they are a liability. Obviously this is a simplification but some of the comments on here are from people who not only couldn't run a whelk stall but don't even realise they couldn't run a whelk stall!

Not really, Murray had the talent. Cms too, fact we lost one , pid out three million, then paid the new guy 70% more in wages, I don't have problem with that, but excuses are not great, when story changes.

tonytowner1 wrote:
When someone is brilliant, you keep them. It's basic stuff. Same if someone is playing brilliantly, you play them - it's basic stuff

I can cope with people having seen more in Murray than I did when he played for us. But "brilliant" he was/is not. Vicente is brilliant but Murray is some way off that standard in anyone's eyes surely.

Did someone just mention Murray?
I thought looking at all the posts recently that i had just landed on the Palarse sight by mistake.
He's gone, we have Ulloa and no other striker however we have plenty of people capable of scoring and have created the chances so let's just stick them away. Murray may have been a mistake but he is in a different team with a different style of play so how can we state that he would have the same number of goals. If ee had kept Murray and he did not perform there would be moans about not getting cms. It's not the strikers it's the style of play; it looks great but lacks the result of o lot of physical direct sides like Barnsley who sit at the bottom of our league. So all you Palarse fans go to the right site and we can all concentrate ob Brighton and how they need to adapt their style of play to the team they are playing... Rant over

Justin wrote:
In most businesses, capital and current spending is handled separately or, at least differently. If you buy a player for £3M then the club has an asset with that value. Wages of £3M are not an asset they are a liability. Obviously this is a simplification but some of the comments on here are from people who not only couldn't run a whelk stall but don't even realise they couldn't run a whelk stall!

Good post, but it is slightly different when you are looking at a player out of contract and therefore has no purchase price exactly. Once you have the player back under contract he becomes an asset with a saleable value. We could have paid Murray a signing on fee, equivalent to a transfer fee for a player of his ability and paid it in installments to resemble a wage.
I am sure there was a way to do the deal but I feel Gus found him a little difficult to work with and motivate.
I recall a comment after Saints away in League 1 where Gus said of Murray "if he plays like that every week he can name his price as a striker" or something to that effect.
I guess Murray thought he had done enough and Gus didn't.

Look how many years before Van Persie came good at Arsenal.He could have ended up on the scrap heap.The Club is evolving from praactically a standing start a few ricks will be made along the way both on and off of the field.TB and others have invested about a Hundred and fifty Million we haven't reached another Cup Final yet or the Premiership but look at the last 30 years and I think we are in the best shape the club has ever been in.

Baldseagull wrote:

Justin wrote:
In most businesses, capital and current spending is handled separately or, at least differently. If you buy a player for £3M then the club has an asset with that value. Wages of £3M are not an asset they are a liability. Obviously this is a simplification but some of the comments on here are from people who not only couldn't run a whelk stall but don't even realise they couldn't run a whelk stall!

Good post, but it is slightly different when you are looking at a player out of contract and therefore has no purchase price exactly. Once you have the player back under contract he becomes an asset with a saleable value. We could have paid Murray a signing on fee, equivalent to a transfer fee for a player of his ability and paid it in installments to resemble a wage.
I am sure there was a way to do the deal but I feel Gus found him a little difficult to work with and motivate.
I recall a comment after Saints away in League 1 where Gus said of Murray "if he plays like that every week he can name his price as a striker" or something to that effect.
I guess Murray thought he had done enough and Gus didn't.

Agreed. Are players really included in the annual accounts as assets? Must be some dodgy auditing. Gus is rewriting history - my hands were tied - cant imagine Harry red knapp letting these details get in his way.

what a fiasco this club is.they should have paid him more then there would have been no need to buy cms.murrays value has doubled.cms,s has halved.im convinced we would be in the top 2 if we had kept hold of him.

the taffster wrote:
what a fiasco this club is.they should have paid him more then there would have been no need to buy cms.murrays value has doubled.cms,s has halved.im convinced we would be in the top 2 if we had kept hold of him.

Rubbish - we don't play the same way as Palace so he would have the same type of chances. Even in the same Palace side he hardly ever scored last season - were you bleating about GM then? No. No-one was. I am happier with CMS and Ulloa than with GM.

I work in finance these days after being very much involved in football for many
years.
This reminds me of a huge mistake the banks made a few years ago.
They decided to offer preferential rates to new customers joining them and that it was ok to offer those that were already customers a lesser or worse product.
Weirdly the banks found themselves with a whole new batch of clients but with a mass exodus of existing clients and thus they had not grown as anticipated.
These days im pleased to say that those offered a preferential deal are those that are loyal and are already a customer of the financial institution in question.
Moral of the story is to not take those you already have for granted. They are the reason you are where you are in the first place and as such should be looked after 1st and foremost.
Im glad Brighton have changed their stance.

Ill never forget that after the last game at withdean when we won promotion, neither gus or tony gave glen a hug every one else got a hug but nothing from gus or tony for glen, it still sticks with me , he was by far the best player at the club, by a mile .. and im not talking in hindsight , glens only problem was that he was a bit of a loner..and more than likley quite shy..that i dont know

I don't believe a word of that Mr Poyet. You and other club officials have stated in the past, that you made Murray a fair offer for what you thought he was worth. So if that was the case, where does it matter what pot the money come from? You had made a fair offer? If that's the best excuse Poyet can come up with after two years, its a bit poor.

Are we meant to believe the club has seperate kittys for wages and transfers, and that Poyet has changed that policy. Poyet's amazing if that's the case, how silly of an amazing successful business man like Tony Bloom to make a mistake like that, and how lucky we are to have a ex-footballer, superman if you like, put the chairman straight on business matters like that. All hail Gus!

Comments like these from Poyet, smack of a manager under serve pressure to me. He is trying to turn his failings on the club, and in Murrays case it was his mistake, not the clubs, so to start turning it back at the club, isn't going to win him any friends.

Its a bit like his comment on the referee for tomorrows game. Is he trying to get his excuse in early. Calling the referees appointment embarrassing, it hardly going to warm the referee to us is it, but I suppose Poyet can use him as an excuse if things go wrong on Sunday. Because lets be honest, no one in the press/TV/radio actually questions anything Poyet tell them yet do they?

Even when Gus lays it out some either don't believe him about how Murray came to leave, or they do and yet still blame him, I don't get that.

Gus would have prefered to pay Murray the extra money he wanted, the Board Of Directors had a rule in place that would not allow him to do so. The Board makes the rules, NOT GUS.
If you want to point the finger of blame then point it at the board and not Gus.

If anyone should be squirming in their seats every time Murray scores a goal it's those fools on the board. The one that came up with the rule and those that voted yes to impliment it.

This rule is like paying your gas and electricity bills, money is set aside each month, some for gas and some for power. What the board said was, if you have surplus money for gas because you used less but need extra for power, because you used more, you can't use the money you saved on gas.

In football terms what that rule meant to Gus was, he might end up with money left over that he can buy players with but zero money to pay their wages. How the heck can some of you blame Gus for that.

Because, Vegas, some people just like blaming someone for something, anything, hence the c**p Barnes gets.

Old Scrote of the Amex wrote:
Because, Vegas, some people just like blaming someone for something, anything, hence the c**p Barnes gets.

this

mark by the sea wrote:

Justin wrote:
In most businesses, capital and current spending is handled separately or, at least differently. If you buy a player for £3M then the club has an asset with that value. Wages of £3M are not an asset they are a liability. Obviously this is a simplification but some of the comments on here are from people who not only couldn't run a whelk stall but don't even realise they couldn't run a whelk stall!

Not really, Murray had the talent. Cms too, fact we lost one , pid out three million, then paid the new guy 70% more in wages, I don't have problem with that, but excuses are not great, when story changes.

I read Gus's comment a second time very carefully and had a new slant on it. When he said that in his world a pound on wages is the same as a pound on transfer fees but that wasnt how the club was run at the time, it almost seems like he's taking the the micky out of the twerps that were doing the contract negotiations. So either Gus is not responsible or he's playing mind games

Regarding others point that GM would not fit in with our system, they forget he fitted in with Gus's system the last time

VegasSeagull wrote:
Even when Gus lays it out some either don't believe him about how Murray came to leave, or they do and yet still blame him, I don't get that.

Gus would have prefered to pay Murray the extra money he wanted, the Board Of Directors had a rule in place that would not allow him to do so. The Board makes the rules, NOT GUS.
If you want to point the finger of blame then point it at the board and not Gus.

If anyone should be squirming in their seats every time Murray scores a goal it's those fools on the board. The one that came up with the rule and those that voted yes to impliment it.

This rule is like paying your gas and electricity bills, money is set aside each month, some for gas and some for power. What the board said was, if you have surplus money for gas because you used less but need extra for power, because you used more, you can't use the money you saved on gas.

In football terms what that rule meant to Gus was, he might end up with money left over that he can buy players with but zero money to pay their wages. How the heck can some of you blame Gus for that.

Because some of us don't believe every single word Poyet tells us. If it was as simple a case of this, why not say it last year? You also have to remember Glenn Murray still lives locally, so whilst he has never put his side to the press, a lot of people know the "other side" to the story.

Poyet in the past has tried to spin the story that Palace offered him three times more than what he got he. They may have done, but it wasn't three times more than we offered him, but the way Poyet says things, he wants you to believe Murray left for money and nothing else, and that it was out of our hands, and that certainly wasn't the case judging from the numerous people I've spoken to about it.

Wayne Collins wrote:
I don't believe a word of that Mr Poyet. You and other club officials have stated in the past, that you made Murray a fair offer for what you thought he was worth. So if that was the case, where does it matter what pot the money come from? You had made a fair offer? If that's the best excuse Poyet can come up with after two years, its a bit poor. Are we meant to believe the club has seperate kittys for wages and transfers, and that Poyet has changed that policy. Poyet's amazing if that's the case, how silly of an amazing successful business man like Tony Bloom to make a mistake like that, and how lucky we are to have a ex-footballer, superman if you like, put the chairman straight on business matters like that. All hail Gus! Comments like these from Poyet, smack of a manager under serve pressure to me. He is trying to turn his failings on the club, and in Murrays case it was his mistake, not the clubs, so to start turning it back at the club, isn't going to win him any friends. Its a bit like his comment on the referee for tomorrows game. Is he trying to get his excuse in early. Calling the referees appointment embarrassing, it hardly going to warm the referee to us is it, but I suppose Poyet can use him as an excuse if things go wrong on Sunday. Because lets be honest, no one in the press/TV/radio actually questions anything Poyet tell them yet do they?

Of the finger pointing comments posted today this one has to be the worst.

Who ever Wayne is his comment is meant as nothing more than an attack on Gus, the article has nothing to do with his comment, he was just waiting for his chance and now he feels he has it.

The only point Wayne is trying to make is, Gus is a liar.

SMF20 wrote:
I work in finance these days after being very much involved in football for many
years.
This reminds me of a huge mistake the banks made a few years ago.
They decided to offer preferential rates to new customers joining them and that it was ok to offer those that were already customers a lesser or worse product.
Weirdly the banks found themselves with a whole new batch of clients but with a mass exodus of existing clients and thus they had not grown as anticipated.
These days im pleased to say that those offered a preferential deal are those that are loyal and are already a customer of the financial institution in question.
Moral of the story is to not take those you already have for granted. They are the reason you are where you are in the first place and as such should be looked after 1st and foremost.
Im glad Brighton have changed their stance.

You know a similar attitude prevails throughout middle management and above in this country. Whenever, a position needs to be filled they never promote someone from within prefering to get an outsider, a fresh face. If anyone wants promotion the only way they can get it is by moving company. Those that stay loyal to the company are doomed to stay at the same level for the rest of their careers as their worth is never recognised.

This is why players move and I groan every time a fan moans about the disloyal player moving for money. Where is the loyalty to the player

VegasSeagull wrote:

Wayne Collins wrote:
I don't believe a word of that Mr Poyet. You and other club officials have stated in the past, that you made Murray a fair offer for what you thought he was worth. So if that was the case, where does it matter what pot the money come from? You had made a fair offer? If that's the best excuse Poyet can come up with after two years, its a bit poor. Are we meant to believe the club has seperate kittys for wages and transfers, and that Poyet has changed that policy. Poyet's amazing if that's the case, how silly of an amazing successful business man like Tony Bloom to make a mistake like that, and how lucky we are to have a ex-footballer, superman if you like, put the chairman straight on business matters like that. All hail Gus! Comments like these from Poyet, smack of a manager under serve pressure to me. He is trying to turn his failings on the club, and in Murrays case it was his mistake, not the clubs, so to start turning it back at the club, isn't going to win him any friends. Its a bit like his comment on the referee for tomorrows game. Is he trying to get his excuse in early. Calling the referees appointment embarrassing, it hardly going to warm the referee to us is it, but I suppose Poyet can use him as an excuse if things go wrong on Sunday. Because lets be honest, no one in the press/TV/radio actually questions anything Poyet tell them yet do they?

Of the finger pointing comments posted today this one has to be the worst.

Who ever Wayne is his comment is meant as nothing more than an attack on Gus, the article has nothing to do with his comment, he was just waiting for his chance and now he feels he has it.

The only point Wayne is trying to make is, Gus is a liar.

VegasSeagulls, you can believe everything a football manager tells you, that's your choice, but some of us will take other things into account, including previous comments from the manager and make our own minds up.

For what its worth, I haven't waitied for this article to critise Gus. I've said since the end of last season I don't believe Poyet is the manger we all thought he was. So you are completely wrong on the one issue that takes up most of your reply.

But if Gus wants to come out nearly two years after the event, and lay the blame for Murray joining Palace on club policies (policies that make no sense in business) , when locally many people know a completely side of events, then people will pull him up on it.

Now if you want believe every word of Poyets interviews, or any manager interviews for that case, thats your choice, but who are you to tell me what the only point I am trying to make is, because you are so far out its laughable.

Seriously if all you can come up with is trying to belittle other people views, whats the point in posting. Go to NSC you'll fit in well there. Have a view mate. Discuss someone elses view. Agree, dont agree, football is all about opinions. But dont just try and tell everyone what sole points people are trying to make, but like in this case, you'll normally get it wrong.

Haven't the club appointed new people in the last year or so that have changed the way contracts and money is spent? Murray left before then

Wayne you started your comment with, 'I don't believe a word of that Mr. Poyet,' your first claim that he is telling lies.

Your next point, 'you and club officials have stated int he past, that you made Murray a fair offer for what you thought he was worth. So if that was the case, where does it matter what pot the money come from?
The reason why it matters is because there were seperate pots. If the money needed to retain Murray was too large of a percentage of the wages pot further contracts for other players would have been put in jeopardy. Taking that to it's extreme, if all the money from the wages pot had gone to Murray then none would have been left for any new player or contract renewal of an existing player.
It's not the size of the wage it's the percentage of the pot that is really important.

Your next point is to ask if we are to believe that there were indeed two pots, again you accuse him of telling lies.
Next you ask if we should believe that Gus was able to change that policy, again you think he is telling lies.

You say that Gus is trying to turn his mistakes onto the club, and that in Murray's case it was his mistake. Gus has told you that the wage pot was not big enough to be able to keep Murray, but you think he was telling lies about the wage pot even existing.

In short you think that Gus is telling lies on everything to do with the Murray leaving issue. If what I have just written is wrong, then I suggestt you look at your own posted comment.

The board installed the policy of two pots, Gus had no choice but to work within the board's rules. Was it a stupid rule, yes, but that does not make Gus a liar.

mark by the sea wrote:
Truth is Murray never wanted to go! And would come back here tomo!
Loves the town and the club, Gus has changed his story on this, last time his demands were outside our wage structure, now it's which pot the cash was in! Cms on 17k a week, Murray would have taken less than he is on at palace, around 11k a week.. So we had wages for cms , but not Murray? Sorry I can't accept that... If Gus really rated Murray he would have signed him , as he did elabd in the run up to the end of season.. Anyway, lets move on, enough egg on face for Gus, lets hope there is not a batter mix tomo at 2pm

Agree Mark, I know for a fact that he contacted GP mid way through last season and pleaded to come back. This is just a smoke screen to cover up one of the worst bits of business since Ian Wright was told by the club he wasn't good enough for a contract.

Alfie I agree with you, it was one of the worst bits of business we have done but I don't see how it's a, 'smoke screen.'

Gus has come out and told us of the stupid rule that the board put in place that stopped him offering Murray more money. Far from being a smoke screen isn't it just the opposite, has he not now told us the truth behind this fiasco and by doing so removed the smoke?

Alfie T wrote:

mark by the sea wrote:
Truth is Murray never wanted to go! And would come back here tomo!
Loves the town and the club, Gus has changed his story on this, last time his demands were outside our wage structure, now it's which pot the cash was in! Cms on 17k a week, Murray would have taken less than he is on at palace, around 11k a week.. So we had wages for cms , but not Murray? Sorry I can't accept that... If Gus really rated Murray he would have signed him , as he did elabd in the run up to the end of season.. Anyway, lets move on, enough egg on face for Gus, lets hope there is not a batter mix tomo at 2pm

Agree Mark, I know for a fact that he contacted GP mid way through last season and pleaded to come back. This is just a smoke screen to cover up one of the worst bits of business since Ian Wright was told by the club he wasn't good enough for a contract.

If that was true then surely GM would be in serous breach of club discipline. Therefore probably BS.

graham w wrote:
Ill never forget that after the last game at withdean when we won promotion, neither gus or tony gave glen a hug every one else got a hug but nothing from gus or tony for glen, it still sticks with me , he was by far the best player at the club, by a mile .. and im not talking in hindsight , glens only problem was that he was a bit of a loner..and more than likley quite shy..that i dont know

"He was by far the best player at the club, by a mile"?!

You'd swap Murray for Bridcutt?! Really???

Don't really see the point of pointing fingers or making accusations at who was to "blame". If u liked Murray, it won't get him back. I never did so I'm pleased. They offered him a contract what they thought was fair for his ability and within the structure at the time. Someone else was happy to pay him more so he went there. End of. Good deal for everyone, IMHO, lets move on. Onwards and consistently upwards!

VegasSeagull wrote:
Even when Gus lays it out some either don't believe him about how Murray came to leave, or they do and yet still blame him, I don't get that.

Gus would have prefered to pay Murray the extra money he wanted, the Board Of Directors had a rule in place that would not allow him to do so. The Board makes the rules, NOT GUS.
If you want to point the finger of blame then point it at the board and not Gus.

If anyone should be squirming in their seats every time Murray scores a goal it's those fools on the board. The one that came up with the rule and those that voted yes to impliment it.

This rule is like paying your gas and electricity bills, money is set aside each month, some for gas and some for power. What the board said was, if you have surplus money for gas because you used less but need extra for power, because you used more, you can't use the money you saved on gas.

In football terms what that rule meant to Gus was, he might end up with money left over that he can buy players with but zero money to pay their wages. How the heck can some of you blame Gus for that.

Very, very well said. The one thing I think Gus is above all others is honest - and he is plenty of other things as well. he had no need to say anything at all. there are too many people around not ready to trust anyone. If people do not trust messrs Bloom, Poyet, Barber et al, maybe they should move on.

But then again, if you care about the club, you probably can't.

GM was on £4k a week, Palace came in and offered him £11k, we went up to £7.5k and GM said he would stay with us for £9k.

TB asked Gus if we should go up to £9k and Gus said let him go.

If you knew that an employee could earn an extra £100k a year than your best offer. Maybe you would say take it?

Normally players only get better wage deals when they move club and GM is no different to this.

Murray is a much better player now than when he was with us, we did not know this would be the case at the time, and for him to take the £11k was a good move for him.

GM loves this club, still lives in Brighton, and maybe this bitter sweet move has made him a better player because he has something to prove.

Wayne Collins wrote:

VegasSeagull wrote:

Wayne Collins wrote: I don't believe a word of that Mr Poyet. You and other club officials have stated in the past, that you made Murray a fair offer for what you thought he was worth. So if that was the case, where does it matter what pot the money come from? You had made a fair offer? If that's the best excuse Poyet can come up with after two years, its a bit poor. Are we meant to believe the club has seperate kittys for wages and transfers, and that Poyet has changed that policy. Poyet's amazing if that's the case, how silly of an amazing successful business man like Tony Bloom to make a mistake like that, and how lucky we are to have a ex-footballer, superman if you like, put the chairman straight on business matters like that. All hail Gus! Comments like these from Poyet, smack of a manager under serve pressure to me. He is trying to turn his failings on the club, and in Murrays case it was his mistake, not the clubs, so to start turning it back at the club, isn't going to win him any friends. Its a bit like his comment on the referee for tomorrows game. Is he trying to get his excuse in early. Calling the referees appointment embarrassing, it hardly going to warm the referee to us is it, but I suppose Poyet can use him as an excuse if things go wrong on Sunday. Because lets be honest, no one in the press/TV/radio actually questions anything Poyet tell them yet do they?

Of the finger pointing comments posted today this one has to be the worst. Who ever Wayne is his comment is meant as nothing more than an attack on Gus, the article has nothing to do with his comment, he was just waiting for his chance and now he feels he has it. The only point Wayne is trying to make is, Gus is a liar.

VegasSeagulls, you can believe everything a football manager tells you, that's your choice, but some of us will take other things into account, including previous comments from the manager and make our own minds up. For what its worth, I haven't waitied for this article to critise Gus. I've said since the end of last season I don't believe Poyet is the manger we all thought he was. So you are completely wrong on the one issue that takes up most of your reply. But if Gus wants to come out nearly two years after the event, and lay the blame for Murray joining Palace on club policies (policies that make no sense in business) , when locally many people know a completely side of events, then people will pull him up on it. Now if you want believe every word of Poyets interviews, or any manager interviews for that case, thats your choice, but who are you to tell me what the only point I am trying to make is, because you are so far out its laughable. Seriously if all you can come up with is trying to belittle other people views, whats the point in posting. Go to NSC you'll fit in well there. Have a view mate. Discuss someone elses view. Agree, dont agree, football is all about opinions. But dont just try and tell everyone what sole points people are trying to make, but like in this case, you'll normally get it wrong.

you sound just like beckett. Wayne

Old Scrote of the Amex wrote:

Alfie T wrote:

mark by the sea wrote:
Truth is Murray never wanted to go! And would come back here tomo!
Loves the town and the club, Gus has changed his story on this, last time his demands were outside our wage structure, now it's which pot the cash was in! Cms on 17k a week, Murray would have taken less than he is on at palace, around 11k a week.. So we had wages for cms , but not Murray? Sorry I can't accept that... If Gus really rated Murray he would have signed him , as he did elabd in the run up to the end of season.. Anyway, lets move on, enough egg on face for Gus, lets hope there is not a batter mix tomo at 2pm

Agree Mark, I know for a fact that he contacted GP mid way through last season and pleaded to come back. This is just a smoke screen to cover up one of the worst bits of business since Ian Wright was told by the club he wasn't good enough for a contract.

If that was true then surely GM would be in serous breach of club discipline. Therefore probably BS.

Not the case, Murray has family in hove, and he loves the club, scored enough to earn decent money, point is Gus stated something completely different a year ago.
The argus covers up anything that puts club under the spot light,.. Bit like 80 gameswithout coming from behind!

Wayne asks who would who would operate, 'policies that make no sense in business,' exactly Wayne, that's the point Gus is making, the policy was crap and cost us Murray.

The truth behind your orginal post, and you reply to mine is, you want Gus gone and have for some time now. Since the end of last season you have thought him not right for Brighton.

If you were to accept what Gus has told us about the wage and transfer pots, then you would have to admit that Gus was not to blame for Murray leaving, but that would go against your desire to get rid of Gus so you call him a liar.

You are a tad transparent Wayne.

VegasSeagull wrote:
Alfie I agree with you, it was one of the worst bits of business we have done but I don't see how it's a, 'smoke screen.'

Gus has come out and told us of the stupid rule that the board put in place that stopped him offering Murray more money. Far from being a smoke screen isn't it just the opposite, has he not now told us the truth behind this fiasco and by doing so removed the smoke?

Vegas, how do you know it's the truth, with each goal that Murray has scored, 30 if we need reminding,the embarrassment of letting him go on a free to our arch rivals is growing. Why has Gus only now revealed what I still think is a smoke screen, the reasoning behind his departure. 100% Murray wanted away from Palace and back to us last season, and Gus didn't want him. And old scrote he would not have been in breach of his contract, hundreds of players are unhappy for many reasons at their current clubs and make a move on loan with a view to a permanent deal.

Murray has got one more season with Palace and then he will be available as a free transfer.

If Gus had really have wanted to keep him then I am pretty sure he would have found a way.
The galling thing is that he left on a free
transfer, I am surprised that a deal wasn't done whereby he signed a contract with a built in clause re percentage of transfer. At least this way both parties could have gained, we would have got a good transfer fee and he his increased percentage of that fee.

Write this down:

Glen Murray will be re-joining Brighton during the summer.

You heard it here first !

Now stop all the twaddle above. The club made a mistake, Murray also knew it was going to be a mistake, but all parties concerned allowed it to reach the conclusion it did because nobody wanted to lose face. Sounds silly, but its true.

But.....all parties have now laid plans to rectify it. Watch the summer activity.

I wouldn't be surprised PBTB, however I think this would still depend on whether Palace were promoted. I don't see it being in any player's interest not to grab their chance in the prem.

It sounds like you are saying that you have some inside info and I wouldn't dispute that, however there is no such thing as a done deal because of the different scenarios.

If we get promoted and Palace miss out, that will be a deal he couldn't refuse, if the offer was on the table.

PressBoxTeaBoy wrote:
Write this down:

Glen Murray will be re-joining Brighton during the summer.

You heard it here first !

Now stop all the twaddle above. The club made a mistake, Murray also knew it was going to be a mistake, but all parties concerned allowed it to reach the conclusion it did because nobody wanted to lose face. Sounds silly, but its true.

But.....all parties have now laid plans to rectify it. Watch the summer activity.

OK Glen is coming back in the summer. How much is the transfer fee?
Will the transfer pot be big enough or will we have to dip into the wages pot to subsidise the transfer pot? Can we raid the frying pan account if necessary?


By the way in the first season Glen blew hot and cold and talking to a Palace fan at the beginning of the season they would have been quite happy to sell him back for 500k. But maybe that would have caused too much embarassment at the club

VegasSeagull wrote:
Wayne asks who would who would operate, 'policies that make no sense in business,' exactly Wayne, that's the point Gus is making, the policy was crap and cost us Murray.

The truth behind your orginal post, and you reply to mine is, you want Gus gone and have for some time now. Since the end of last season you have thought him not right for Brighton.

If you were to accept what Gus has told us about the wage and transfer pots, then you would have to admit that Gus was not to blame for Murray leaving, but that would go against your desire to get rid of Gus so you call him a liar.

You are a tad transparent Wayne.

As I said Vegas. You believe everything Poyet says in his press conferences if you want. After all, since he's been doing them, no one has asked him an awkward question, or pressed him on an issue, and I suppose after 3 plus years you can say what you like,as its not going to be questioned.

It has taken two years for Poyet to tell us this. Why? This is not the first time the issue of Murray leaving has come up, so why is he telling is this now. Why not last year? From what I am told by two different sources, Murray went to Palace for £2k extra a week. Now whether you choose to beleive this wages/transfer pot issue, Murray was a free agent. If Poyet had wanted him to stay, it would have been very very easy to argue the fact that Murray's contract could come from either pot, as he was no longer our player the second his contract expired. That alone to me would be enough to suggest Poyet isn't being completely up front about this. A pot for wages, use that. No can't, okay use the pot for transfers then when is contract expires.

So calling the board fools Vega is a tad silly, and likening it to gas and electric bills is irrelevant, as if Poyet had wanted him to stay, he could have easily argued that point. He could have taken from the contract pot, or the new player pot.

Dont forget Poyet was on the crest of a wave when Murray left, so I'm sure he could have convinced the "fools" on the board to dip into either pot for the sake of 2k if he was that keen for Murray to stay.

As I said before, I would not be sorry to see Poyet go. I don't need to use this to have a pop at him. I could use many other things for that. But really, think for yourself mate, and don't believe everything one man wants you to believe......

.... and congratulations on being the plum of the day. QUOTE "If anyone should be squirming in their seats every time Murray scores a goal it's those fools on the board. The one that came up with the rule and those that voted yes to impliment it." Referring to the board as fools doesn't give you any credit mate. I'm glad these "fools" are running the club and not you.

I appreciate that everyone is entitled to their opinion and I guess this will drag on tomorrow whether Murray scores or not--but please guys can we put this one to bed as it is now getting boring. Murray is a Palace player not a BHA one--unless he comes back, which I would doubt, no one has a crystal ball, but so much time taken up talking about someone elses player, and whatever you say it will not alter things---only good thing is that a lot of posters here are passionate about the club and do not like to see what happened or whats happening with the results now. UTA

Godstone Gull wrote:

Wayne Collins wrote:

VegasSeagull wrote:

Wayne Collins wrote: I don't believe a word of that Mr Poyet. You and other club officials have stated in the past, that you made Murray a fair offer for what you thought he was worth. So if that was the case, where does it matter what pot the money come from? You had made a fair offer? If that's the best excuse Poyet can come up with after two years, its a bit poor. Are we meant to believe the club has seperate kittys for wages and transfers, and that Poyet has changed that policy. Poyet's amazing if that's the case, how silly of an amazing successful business man like Tony Bloom to make a mistake like that, and how lucky we are to have a ex-footballer, superman if you like, put the chairman straight on business matters like that. All hail Gus! Comments like these from Poyet, smack of a manager under serve pressure to me. He is trying to turn his failings on the club, and in Murrays case it was his mistake, not the clubs, so to start turning it back at the club, isn't going to win him any friends. Its a bit like his comment on the referee for tomorrows game. Is he trying to get his excuse in early. Calling the referees appointment embarrassing, it hardly going to warm the referee to us is it, but I suppose Poyet can use him as an excuse if things go wrong on Sunday. Because lets be honest, no one in the press/TV/radio actually questions anything Poyet tell them yet do they?

Of the finger pointing comments posted today this one has to be the worst. Who ever Wayne is his comment is meant as nothing more than an attack on Gus, the article has nothing to do with his comment, he was just waiting for his chance and now he feels he has it. The only point Wayne is trying to make is, Gus is a liar.

VegasSeagulls, you can believe everything a football manager tells you, that's your choice, but some of us will take other things into account, including previous comments from the manager and make our own minds up. For what its worth, I haven't waitied for this article to critise Gus. I've said since the end of last season I don't believe Poyet is the manger we all thought he was. So you are completely wrong on the one issue that takes up most of your reply. But if Gus wants to come out nearly two years after the event, and lay the blame for Murray joining Palace on club policies (policies that make no sense in business) , when locally many people know a completely side of events, then people will pull him up on it. Now if you want believe every word of Poyets interviews, or any manager interviews for that case, thats your choice, but who are you to tell me what the only point I am trying to make is, because you are so far out its laughable. Seriously if all you can come up with is trying to belittle other people views, whats the point in posting. Go to NSC you'll fit in well there. Have a view mate. Discuss someone elses view. Agree, dont agree, football is all about opinions. But dont just try and tell everyone what sole points people are trying to make, but like in this case, you'll normally get it wrong.

you sound just like beckett. Wayne

I think you are right; perhaps we will get another name change, not so much Superman but Batman, Bruce Wayne.

mark by the sea wrote:

Old Scrote of the Amex wrote:

Alfie T wrote:

mark by the sea wrote:
Truth is Murray never wanted to go! And would come back here tomo!
Loves the town and the club, Gus has changed his story on this, last time his demands were outside our wage structure, now it's which pot the cash was in! Cms on 17k a week, Murray would have taken less than he is on at palace, around 11k a week.. So we had wages for cms , but not Murray? Sorry I can't accept that... If Gus really rated Murray he would have signed him , as he did elabd in the run up to the end of season.. Anyway, lets move on, enough egg on face for Gus, lets hope there is not a batter mix tomo at 2pm

Agree Mark, I know for a fact that he contacted GP mid way through last season and pleaded to come back. This is just a smoke screen to cover up one of the worst bits of business since Ian Wright was told by the club he wasn't good enough for a contract.

If that was true then surely GM would be in serous breach of club discipline. Therefore probably BS.

Not the case, Murray has family in hove, and he loves the club, scored enough to earn decent money, point is Gus stated something completely different a year ago.
The argus covers up anything that puts club under the spot light,.. Bit like 80 gameswithout coming from behind!

My point, mark, is that GM would not dare to speak to another club without the express permission of his employers. I'm not saying he didn't want to come back, I'm saying he didn't ask Gus if he could.

mark, I would say he might have had an informal word, but what surprises me is how this information got out, if it is true?

I do recall this as a rumour last year.

If you are correct, how many people did this information go through before it came to you out of interest?

Was this info leaked via Murray or the Club?

Old Scrote of the Amex wrote:

mark by the sea wrote:

Old Scrote of the Amex wrote:

Alfie T wrote:

mark by the sea wrote:
Truth is Murray never wanted to go! And would come back here tomo!
Loves the town and the club, Gus has changed his story on this, last time his demands were outside our wage structure, now it's which pot the cash was in! Cms on 17k a week, Murray would have taken less than he is on at palace, around 11k a week.. So we had wages for cms , but not Murray? Sorry I can't accept that... If Gus really rated Murray he would have signed him , as he did elabd in the run up to the end of season.. Anyway, lets move on, enough egg on face for Gus, lets hope there is not a batter mix tomo at 2pm

Agree Mark, I know for a fact that he contacted GP mid way through last season and pleaded to come back. This is just a smoke screen to cover up one of the worst bits of business since Ian Wright was told by the club he wasn't good enough for a contract.

If that was true then surely GM would be in serous breach of club discipline. Therefore probably BS.

Not the case, Murray has family in hove, and he loves the club, scored enough to earn decent money, point is Gus stated something completely different a year ago.
The argus covers up anything that puts club under the spot light,.. Bit like 80 gameswithout coming from behind!

My point, mark, is that GM would not dare to speak to another club without the express permission of his employers. I'm not saying he didn't want to come back, I'm saying he didn't ask Gus if he could.

Why wouldnt he dare speak to the club? Is he a little boy who wouldnt be so naughty? What would or could his club do about it. If he lives locally and he bumps into Gus or Charlie in the street, is he going to blank them or be an obedient **** and say: "sorry I cant speak to you because I must do as I'm told"!

Come on, provided they're on good terms of course the're going to talk. They'd probably talk even if they were'nt on good terms to either show no hard feelings or to get inside info.

We all do this and in football they are no different

pte - there is a great difference, as you well know, between exchanging pleasantries if you bump into someone and the original claim "he contacted GP mid way through last season and pleaded to come back".

Old Scrote of the Amex wrote:
pte - there is a great difference, as you well know, between exchanging pleasantries if you bump into someone and the original claim "he contacted GP mid way through last season and pleaded to come back".

Scrotey, There is a difference but there wouldnt be much Palace could have done about it if GM had "dared" to talk to Gus. In any event GM wasnt such a hot property last season so maybe Palace wouldnt have minded.

But I agree with you on one point. while I believe that GM would be keen on a move back to Brighton a bigger club than Palace (Gus did bring back Crofts and Hammond so informal links do exist), I find it difficult to believe that a guy who earns 11k a week got down on his hands and knees and begged Gus the guy who let him go, take him back. Never in a million years did it happen like that

pte wrote:

Old Scrote of the Amex wrote:

mark by the sea wrote:

Old Scrote of the Amex wrote:

Alfie T wrote:

mark by the sea wrote:
Truth is Murray never wanted to go! And would come back here tomo!
Loves the town and the club, Gus has changed his story on this, last time his demands were outside our wage structure, now it's which pot the cash was in! Cms on 17k a week, Murray would have taken less than he is on at palace, around 11k a week.. So we had wages for cms , but not Murray? Sorry I can't accept that... If Gus really rated Murray he would have signed him , as he did elabd in the run up to the end of season.. Anyway, lets move on, enough egg on face for Gus, lets hope there is not a batter mix tomo at 2pm

Agree Mark, I know for a fact that he contacted GP mid way through last season and pleaded to come back. This is just a smoke screen to cover up one of the worst bits of business since Ian Wright was told by the club he wasn't good enough for a contract.

If that was true then surely GM would be in serous breach of club discipline. Therefore probably BS.

Not the case, Murray has family in hove, and he loves the club, scored enough to earn decent money, point is Gus stated something completely different a year ago.
The argus covers up anything that puts club under the spot light,.. Bit like 80 gameswithout coming from behind!

My point, mark, is that GM would not dare to speak to another club without the express permission of his employers. I'm not saying he didn't want to come back, I'm saying he didn't ask Gus if he could.

Why wouldnt he dare speak to the club? Is he a little boy who wouldnt be so naughty? What would or could his club do about it. If he lives locally and he bumps into Gus or Charlie in the street, is he going to blank them or be an obedient **** and say: "sorry I cant speak to you because I must do as I'm told"!

Come on, provided they're on good terms of course the're going to talk. They'd probably talk even if they were'nt on good terms to either show no hard feelings or to get inside info.

We all do this and in football they are no different

Pte, correct, as I have said categorically, Murray wanted to come back, i doubt there is any clause in his contract that would forbid him to speak with other clubs should he want to. Neither is there anything in my contract forbidding me to talk to my companies competitors about similar positions to the one I currently hold.

It would be counted as tapping up, whomever initiated it. Unless you are employed as pro footballer then any comparisons are bogus.

Gus .can spin it any way he likes but the brutal truth is he never rated Murray who spent much of his time with the Albion under Poyet on the bench.Gus also never rated Dobbie,ditto as above.The team talk for Holloway before the game tomorrow will be very simple,go and show Poyet how wrong he was..

barnieb wrote:
Gus .can spin it any way he likes but the brutal truth is he never rated Murray who spent much of his time with the Albion under Poyet on the bench.Gus also never rated Dobbie,ditto as above.The team talk for Holloway before the game tomorrow will be very simple,go and show Poyet how wrong he was..

Can only apply to Murray, Dobbie cannot play against us tomorrow.

barnieb wrote:
Gus .can spin it any way he likes but the brutal truth is he never rated Murray who spent much of his time with the Albion under Poyet on the bench.Gus also never rated Dobbie,ditto as above.The team talk for Holloway before the game tomorrow will be very simple,go and show Poyet how wrong he was..

Wonder how Dobbie came to be here in the first place if Gus never rated him?

Baldseagull wrote:

barnieb wrote:
Gus .can spin it any way he likes but the brutal truth is he never rated Murray who spent much of his time with the Albion under Poyet on the bench.Gus also never rated Dobbie,ditto as above.The team talk for Holloway before the game tomorrow will be very simple,go and show Poyet how wrong he was..

Wonder how Dobbie came to be here in the first place if Gus never rated him?

The tea lady dipped into the pot

All this talk of Murray is paid £9k to £11k by CP. I can assure you all that Murray and his agent asked for £6k from the Albion, they refused and that is all CP are paying him.

He was a League One forward, albeit a fantastic one improving all the time, and CP who had little money and small crowds, did not award him this fantastic contract mentioned here.

Either Gus or the Board were incompetent on this. CMS and many of the current squad are paid in excess of £10k per week, showing that once the Amex was on its way with all mega s/t and 1901 sales from winter 2010/11 onwards, the relatively reasonable money to retain our star forward was there.

It is good though that Poyet has finally commented. Until now Glenn haters have made up a pack of lies that Glenn always wanted to leave us, and secretly planned a future at CP.

Old Scrote of the Amex wrote:

the taffster wrote:
what a fiasco this club is.they should have paid him more then there would have been no need to buy cms.murrays value has doubled.cms,s has halved.im convinced we would be in the top 2 if we had kept hold of him.

Rubbish - we don't play the same way as Palace so he would have the same type of chances. Even in the same Palace side he hardly ever scored last season - were you bleating about GM then? No. No-one was. I am happier with CMS and Ulloa than with GM.

he scored many goals the season before we sold him to palace.what further proof do you need to suggest he was worth keeping.

WestStander17 wrote:

graham w wrote:
Ill never forget that after the last game at withdean when we won promotion, neither gus or tony gave glen a hug every one else got a hug but nothing from gus or tony for glen, it still sticks with me , he was by far the best player at the club, by a mile .. and im not talking in hindsight , glens only problem was that he was a bit of a loner..and more than likley quite shy..that i dont know

"He was by far the best player at the club, by a mile"?!

You'd swap Murray for Bridcutt?! Really???

Don't really see the point of pointing fingers or making accusations at who was to "blame". If u liked Murray, it won't get him back. I never did so I'm pleased. They offered him a contract what they thought was fair for his ability and within the structure at the time. Someone else was happy to pay him more so he went there. End of. Good deal for everyone, IMHO, lets move on. Onwards and consistently upwards!

how can that possibly be a good deal for bha?he was the outstanding player at the club.he didnt want to go.but just wanted his worth,which is wht palace paid, just a couple of grand more a week. please go to reading gus.

the taffster wrote:

WestStander17 wrote:

graham w wrote: Ill never forget that after the last game at withdean when we won promotion, neither gus or tony gave glen a hug every one else got a hug but nothing from gus or tony for glen, it still sticks with me , he was by far the best player at the club, by a mile .. and im not talking in hindsight , glens only problem was that he was a bit of a loner..and more than likley quite shy..that i dont know

"He was by far the best player at the club, by a mile"?! You'd swap Murray for Bridcutt?! Really??? Don't really see the point of pointing fingers or making accusations at who was to "blame". If u liked Murray, it won't get him back. I never did so I'm pleased. They offered him a contract what they thought was fair for his ability and within the structure at the time. Someone else was happy to pay him more so he went there. End of. Good deal for everyone, IMHO, lets move on. Onwards and consistently upwards!

how can that possibly be a good deal for bha?he was the outstanding player at the club.he didnt want to go.but just wanted his worth,which is wht palace paid, just a couple of grand more a week. please go to reading gus.

"The outstanding player at the club"?! Again, IMHO, Bridcutt is in a different league. If you are right, we have come an awful long way since then!

He performed today just how I remember him for us.....slow and lazy.

Major upgrade to our style of play in Ulloa. Whatever the reason he left, its all good with me! Gone and forgotten.

the taffster wrote:

Old Scrote of the Amex wrote:

the taffster wrote: what a fiasco this club is.they should have paid him more then there would have been no need to buy cms.murrays value has doubled.cms,s has halved.im convinced we would be in the top 2 if we had kept hold of him.

Rubbish - we don't play the same way as Palace so he would have the same type of chances. Even in the same Palace side he hardly ever scored last season - were you bleating about GM then? No. No-one was. I am happier with CMS and Ulloa than with GM.

he scored many goals the season before we sold him to palace.what further proof do you need to suggest he was worth keeping.

After today, what further proof do you need to suggest we are much stronger now without him?

fratsomrover wrote:
I dont doubt Gus's hands were tied and I understand the complexity of funding for both purchases and salaries. At the time, we couldn't keep him, so he went. He was the best CF we've had since Zamora and he's probably playing better than ever this year with Palace.
Mind you with Bolasie and Zaha as his supply line, I'm not surprised he's doing well. Maybe Ulloa will be equally as effective with Buckley and Orlandi/Lua Lua as his supply line. Looking forward to tomorrow. Hope it's a cracking game with a few goals and that for once, we score more than they do. UTA

Tomorrow NEVER comes as you will know by now ,fact is that hair cutter is here and Gus was not allowed to sign Norwich front man hence you see very little of him pre & post match interviews and even less in Tech box .
With C O now doing Gab bit' god help us' mark my words again Gus will sadly be gone at end of season and good luck to him at club who will back him.

Withdean-er wrote:
All this talk of Murray is paid £9k to £11k by CP. I can assure you all that Murray and his agent asked for £6k from the Albion, they refused and that is all CP are paying him.

He was a League One forward, albeit a fantastic one improving all the time, and CP who had little money and small crowds, did not award him this fantastic contract mentioned here.

Either Gus or the Board were incompetent on this. CMS and many of the current squad are paid in excess of £10k per week, showing that once the Amex was on its way with all mega s/t and 1901 sales from winter 2010/11 onwards, the relatively reasonable money to retain our star forward was there.

It is good though that Poyet has finally commented. Until now Glenn haters have made up a pack of lies that Glenn always wanted to leave us, and secretly planned a future at CP.

Where were you he said this ages ages ago a non story