Foster Wants To Stay

[Darlo_Weststand19]

Big Steve is eager to get things sorted and get back to playing again. He has expressed the desire to stay and fight for the cause. Top man! Article in the League paper.

[Darlospike]

Good news......just hope someone agrees to honour the contract.

[hesoneofthem]

its great to here that foster wants to stay but the matter of the fact is can the club afford to keep him. And the way its looking i doubt that, surely it would have been sorted out by now if the club had the money too.

[DrDarloSA]

I hope the situation regarding the `big man` is resolved soon. He has shown he is a true darloid and deserves to be playing. then we come down to the malaise of football today-money. In a just world football fans would be lottery winners and buy a stake in the local club.

[MikeinBlack]

We could certainly do with Foster until the end of the season, but maybe if that's not possible he could get some sort of rolling month to month contract?

[loan_star]

Not wanting to pour cold water over this but how often do you hear players say they want to stay at their clubs only to move on a few weeks later!?! Usually its down to a clause in their contracts saying that if they ask for a move then they lose out financially whereas if they are told to move then they get a better payout.

[MikeinBlack]

I guess we will find out soon enough, I for one am feeling slightly more confident for the 2nd half of the season - difficult to be less confident though!

[RenoRaines]

This seems easy to solve

he changes the contract to

I feel I can keep the club up so I will agree to an extension if we remain in league 2 and no extension if we are relegated

that would prove to me he feels he has something to offer us and is prepared tobattle to keep us up

no other club will give him a 2 year deal

[TeessideQuaker]

Since when did Foster have to prove anything to you?

Foster has a contract, and has every right to hold us to that. Having said that, I am sure Foster understands the situation, as he has always come across as a decent footballing man each time I have spoken to him.

[AndyPark]

I'd love Foster to stay, but he is getting messed about.

[shawry]

This seems easy to solve

he changes the contract to

I feel I can keep the club up so I will agree to an extension if we remain in league 2 and no extension if we are relegated

that would prove to me he feels he has something to offer us and is prepared tobattle to keep us up

no other club will give him a 2 year deal

Or the club honour the contract? Oh we cant do that, we have a winner here in that we shafted a big earner got him to stay, then change the goalposts so that he doesnt get the extension.

If we arent prepared to honour this contract in the way it was put together, then we should have the decency to revert to the contract Foster already ripped up to sign the current one!

[TeessideQuaker]

Of course "someone would take him".

He's still a quality defender at this level, it just happens that he's having to do the work of three defenders at the same time, as well as his own work. It's not easy playing alongside baboons you know.

[TeessideQuaker]

Both Miiller and Foster haven't exactly had much help from their teammates though have they?

[TeessideQuaker]

So you're suggesting that two of our more senior players in Miller and Foster didn't really put the effort in?

Since when has pace ever been a major attribute of Steve? His reading of the game is that good, pace isn't really an issue.

[princebishop]

On the Echo website Foster is quoted ''At the beginning of the season I renegotiated my terms to accept a wage cut and, in turn, they agreed that if I played 20 games, it would assure me of another season on my deal.''

This new contract was renegotiated when Singh was Chairman, yet the Chairman now turns round and states that the club cannot afford to play him and honour the contract. Why offer the new contract then Mr Singh? Appalling behaviour.

[wylam_rangers]

On the Echo website Foster is quoted ''At the beginning of the season I renegotiated my terms to accept a wage cut and, in turn, they agreed that if I played 20 games, it would assure me of another season on my deal.''

This new contract was renegotiated when Singh was Chairman, yet the Chairman now turns round and states that the club cannot afford to play him and honour the contract. Why offer the new contract then Mr Singh? Appalling behaviour.

You honestly think that the Chairman scrutinises every contract - I doubt it and I bloody well wouldn't. He gives the manager a budget to stick to.

[DL5]

I don't know whether this has been mentioned before and maybe I'm missing something but the 20 game clause excludes sub appearances.

What's to stop us bringing Foster on in the 2nd minute of the game? Ok it's a gamble as we sacrifice a sub but Foster in the team is worth the gamble IMO, we need him, he wants to play and it won't affect his clause. Just something to consider short term until hopefully all parties can thrash out a deal.

[shawry]

I don't know whether this has been mentioned before and maybe I'm missing something but the 20 game clause excludes sub appearances.

What's to stop us bringing Foster on in the 2nd minute of the game? Ok it's a gamble as we sacrifice a sub but Foster in the team is worth the gamble IMO, we need him, he wants to play and it won't affect his clause. Just something to consider short term until hopefully all parties can thrash out a deal.

you are having a laugh right?

the first time that happened we would be at a tribunal.

secondly, how would you feel if it was you? knowing that you were playing 88 minutes of a game so you lost out on a years contract? I hazard a guess you certainly wouldnt feel like doing your employer any favours.

[DL5]

I don't know whether this has been mentioned before and maybe I'm missing something but the 20 game clause excludes sub appearances.

What's to stop us bringing Foster on in the 2nd minute of the game? Ok it's a gamble as we sacrifice a sub but Foster in the team is worth the gamble IMO, we need him, he wants to play and it won't affect his clause. Just something to consider short term until hopefully all parties can thrash out a deal.

you are having a laugh right?

the first time that happened we would be at a tribunal.

secondly, how would you feel if it was you? knowing that you were playing 88 minutes of a game so you lost out on a years contract? I hazard a guess you certainly wouldnt feel like doing your employer any favours.

Sorry, I meant if all parties agree until this is sorted out, I didn't mean force him against his will He says he wants to stay, so it's not as though the situation is beyond repair, it's a way for him to be able to play. I don't think we would be breaking any rules would we?

[shawry]

Sorry, I meant if all parties agree until this is sorted out, I didn't mean force him against his will He says he wants to stay, so it's not as though the situation is beyond repair, it's a way for him to be able to play. I don't think we would be breaking any rules would we?

The only way this can be sorted is if he removed the clause, the club have made that plainly clear, the fact that he still hasnt played, or the article is in the paper indicates that foster is unwilling (rightly so) to remove the clause.

With regards to breaking the rules, yes we would be breaking rules if we put him on the bench then made a 'tactical' substitution after 2 minutes.

[DL5]

Sorry, I meant if all parties agree until this is sorted out, I didn't mean force him against his will He says he wants to stay, so it's not as though the situation is beyond repair, it's a way for him to be able to play. I don't think we would be breaking any rules would we?

The only way this can be sorted is if he removed the clause, the club have made that plainly clear, the fact that he still hasnt played, or the article is in the paper indicates that foster is unwilling (rightly so) to remove the clause.

With regards to breaking the rules, yes we would be breaking rules if we put him on the bench then made a 'tactical' substitution after 2 minutes.

Ok, it was just hypothetical and I was thinking how we could get round this, can we not choose when and who we use as substitutes?

[shawry]

Ok, it was just hypothetical and I was thinking how we could get round this, can we not choose when and who we use as substitutes?

Within reason you can choose who you want to use as subs, its the manner its done that leaves you open, if you are using someone as a sub, yet bringing them on after 5 minutes, clearly to avoid giving them a contract you have signed, then you are liable to a hefty slap, including compensation, loss of earnings etc.

[TeessideQuaker]

That would also be highly unfair to the player who was being taken off. How would you feel in that situation?