Bolton Wanderers Football Club Fan Forum for all BWFC Supporters.

You are not connected. Please login or register

Bolton Nuts » BWFC » Bolton Wanderers News » Why the timing of Josh Magennis's no-show at Bolton could not have been worse

Why the timing of Josh Magennis's no-show at Bolton could not have been worse

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

karlypants

karlypants
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
When Wanderers’ players refused to play against Brentford last season, they did so knowing their actions would create an unwanted piece of history but unaware of what the consequence could be.

To force the cancellation of a league game was a last resort for a group who had but one card left to play in order to make Ken Anderson, Paul Aldridge, the EFL and the wider world understand their problems.

Many supporters stood behind the squad, blaming the hierarchal failures which left players, coaches and – at that stage – general staff, unpaid. Some, however, felt there had been a serious error in judgement, a short-term tantrum which would have longer-term ramifications.

We are still no wiser on what punishment Wanderers will receive, or when they will receive it. The EFL will not even divulge the details of who will sit on the independent panel which will decide how many points will be added to the minus 12 with which they have already been hobbled for administration, let alone the date.

Educated estimates inside the club and from those who have looked into becoming new owners forecast another three points on the pile.

Four months after the Brentford game, many of the players who voted to strike remain unpaid. Some have found new employers, and an alternate wage, others have not been so fortunate.

During the interim, the bill for football creditors rose to more than £2million. An offer by the Football Ventures consortium to defer 80 per cent of payments was roundly rejected, reflecting an attitude in the camp that has long since passed frustration.

That led to the potential new owners restructuring their approach, seeking a loan from the Professional Footballers’ Association to meet the costs up front.

It has been questioned whether such a loan is ethical, and whether the players’ union should really be playing such a pivotal role in a takeover. That same scrutiny has also been applied to the consortium itself. If their bid was, as joint-administrator Paul Appleton put it “the highest offer by a substantial margin” why it must it all be kicked-off with someone else’s money?

The long delays in completing a takeover have not helped the feeling of trust inside the dressing room, either. Tempers flared on Friday when a discrepancy arose in the back-payments issued to contracted players which very nearly threatened the Wycombe game going ahead.

Even before that drama, striker Josh Magennis decided he would not be taking part, informing manager Phil Parkinson of the fact shortly before the final training session on Friday.

Whereas the squad’s unanimous decision to down tools against Brentford, or Chester in pre-season, had been viewed with a degree of sympathy by the general public, the Northern Irishman’s brash announcement went very much against the grain in a weekend of great connect between players and fans.

Magennis is not the only player who chose to hand in his contract this summer. Other players examined that option but had their efforts blocked by the administrators, who pushed the matter to an appeal knowing it would buy time for new owners to come in and – potentially – convince the player in question to stay.

Some of those players took the field against Wycombe to give the team a vague air of stability and were praised by Phil Parkinson for their professional attitude.

Magennis, serenaded in a manner reserved only for luminaries like Kevin Davies or John McGinlay a year ago in victory at West Brom, was afforded a rather more industrial tune in the away end at Adams Park.

A return of four goals in last season’s relegation from the Championship did not afford the 28-year-old a lot of goodwill on the terraces. Even if Wanderers are successful in preventing Magennis from terminating the final year of his contract it seems unlikely that he will be embraced back into the Bolton fold again; once out, never back in.

For the senior players who did turn out, there is scope for a fresh start, if they want one.

Talk of rebirth at Wycombe was perhaps a little premature but did at least demonstrate the eagerness among the fanbase to move on from the negativity and drudgery of the Ken Anderson era.

Players lived through the same problems as those on the terraces and having been at odds with their employers for so long, bitterness has been allowed to brew. And it won’t disappear quickly.

Source

luckyPeterpiper

luckyPeterpiper
Frank Worthington
Frank Worthington
He doesn't care and nor should he. He did his job and now he's been offered a better job so his duty to his family and himself says he should take it. Frankly I think the club's attempt to force him to stay isn't just wrong it's plain stupid. Even if BWFC win they'll never get the best out of him again and he'll be banging in a written transfer request every day. Don't be surprised if he counter sues on the grounds of restriction of trade and failure to honour contractual obligations by his employer BWFC and don't be surprised if he wins.

Natasha Whittam

Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
@luckyPeterpiper wrote:He doesn't care and nor should he. He did his job and now he's been offered a better job so his duty to his family and himself says he should take it. Frankly I think the club's attempt to force him to stay isn't just wrong it's plain stupid. Even if BWFC win they'll never get the best out of him again and he'll be banging in a written transfer request every day. Don't be surprised if he counter sues on the grounds of restriction of trade and failure to honour contractual obligations by his employer BWFC and don't be surprised if he wins.

What a load of utter shite.

According to sluffy he'd been paid, so what reason did he have for refusing to play?

luckyPeterpiper

luckyPeterpiper
Frank Worthington
Frank Worthington
He wasn't paid in full until last week Nat. My understanding is that partial payments were made to the players by the PFA in the form of loans. But in truth I think there's a simpler question here. Leave aside the fact you're a fan for a moment.

If you were Josh Magennis or in fact any of the players or management who've been at the club for the last few months where would you think a secure future was most likely to lie for you and your family?

Because from where I sit I think Magennis has quite sensibly looked at the still ongoing chaos and uncertainty around this alleged takeover and the (now at least) financially stable Rangers and decided he's better off there. He hasn't just walked out either. He has, as is his right handed in his notice and the club is trying to prevent him from leaving but in law so far as I can tell they don't have a leg to stand on.

finlaymcdanger

finlaymcdanger
El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf
@Natasha Whittam wrote:
@luckyPeterpiper wrote:He doesn't care and nor should he. He did his job and now he's been offered a better job so his duty to his family and himself says he should take it. Frankly I think the club's attempt to force him to stay isn't just wrong it's plain stupid. Even if BWFC win they'll never get the best out of him again and he'll be banging in a written transfer request every day. Don't be surprised if he counter sues on the grounds of restriction of trade and failure to honour contractual obligations by his employer BWFC and don't be surprised if he wins.

What a load of utter shite.

According to sluffy he'd been paid, so what reason did he have for refusing to play?

He had no intention of playing because he doesn't want to get injured.

He's had his head turned by Rangers because it sounds more prestigious than playing in League1 for Bolton. The fact that they've shown an interest in him speaks volumes about how poor the standard is at the top of the SPL. We're bottom of L1, on -12(-15) points, no owners, no players, no pot to piss in etc. and we don't want him.

Also, he's probably a Liverpool fan and wants to tongue Gerrard to completion.

Natasha Whittam

Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
@finlaymcdanger wrote:He had no intention of playing because he doesn't want to get injured.


If that's his reason, would he get away with that at any other club?

Biggie

Biggie
Admin
His refusal to play was a smack in the face for the club.
The only logical reason not to play is to avoid injury. In that way it makes sense.
Look at Hall, maybe out for 3 months now - so if he wanted a move his chances are scuppered.

However, refusing to play on any other grounds, like some form of taking a stand, for example, are out of order. All he is doing is damaging the club. Playing the game wouldn't prevent him from still getting a move elsewhere - unless he thought another club would see how crap he was.

http://boltonnuts.forumotion.co.uk

Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum