Slava Speaking About Stephen Humphrys.

[Mince n Tatties]

He will be getting more game minutes,we know all about his talent,but he must keep working hard.
Also said Matt Smith is an excellent professional.
So with Martin here till season end we might not be going after another striker.

[Mince n Tatties]

No,that's me saying that about Martin.

[fulhamben]

No,that's me saying that about Martin.

We will have to watch this space then.

[Samsara]

He will be getting more game minutes,we know all about his talent,but he must keep working hard.
Also said Matt Smith is an excellent professional.
So with Martin here till season end we might not be going after another striker.

Did he say Martin is here till end of season. From what I heard, Derby want him back in January and mcclarren wants to give him a bumper new contract. Of course my news is a few weeks old and I'll get no more updates now that Rigg has left

The only way he'll be recalled if Derby, Fulham, and Martin all mutually agree on the recall. Which we won't, and I want to assume Martin wouldn't either as it seems he's invested with us. If he returns to Derby at all, it'll be this summer.

[Mince n Tatties]

Pleased that Humphrys will get game time off the bench no doubt.

[fulhamben]

Pleased that Humphrys will get game time off the bench no doubt.

Yes me too. Need to get him to sign up though. Would hate to lose another one to a free

[Mince n Tatties]

Pleased that Humphrys will get game time off the bench no doubt.

Yes me too. Need to get him to sign up though. Would hate to lose another one to a free

I have said on another post somewhere today that Tony Pulis was on about this that Prem clubs should have to pay 5 million to the clubs who have educated and looked after them from a young age.

[BestOfBrede]

If he doesn't want to be here then that's his perogative,  I would personally say your problem son!
I don't think he will, but have no inside knowledge and am never certain anyone actually does.
I like him but he isnt irreplaceable.

Edit: I'm talking about Martin not Humphries!

[Mince n Tatties]

Anyone who's interested should follow the players on social media, instagram etc, because you get some real insight there. One thing I've seen is that Matt Smith appears to be loved by the rest of the squad, most of all by our captain, Cairney. I'm not at all surprised at This comment from slav. He seems to be the epitomy of a "team" player, worth his weight in gold for that, and I wouldn't be surprised to see him stay on in a coaching role or similar later because he's a really bright bloke

I go along with that,but can still see him going as I'm sure he wants to play regularly.

[westcliff white]

He will be getting more game minutes,we know all about his talent,but he must keep working hard.
Also said Matt Smith is an excellent professional.
So with Martin here till season end we might not be going after another striker.

Did he say Martin is here till end of season. From what I heard, Derby want him back in January and mcclarren wants to give him a bumper new contract. Of course my news is a few weeks old and I'll get no more updates now that Rigg has left

The only way he'll be recalled if Derby, Fulham, and Martin all mutually agree on the recall. Which we won't, and I want to assume Martin wouldn't either as it seems he's invested with us. If he returns to Derby at all, it'll be this summer.

well from what I heard, martin was keen to return and sign new contract. Of course this doesn't mean he wouldn't also be happy to sign for us if we match it or better it. But that part wasn't discussed when I was chatting about it.

Its a fact he can only go back if all three parties agree, it is known to be true that Derby asked after McClaren took over about the possibility of taking him back (just around when he started scoring) and are rumoured to have offered then to pay back the 2.5 million fee and half of the salaries we have paid, however it was a firm rebuttal with SJ also saying at that time he sees it as important that we turn the loan permanent.

My understanding on the original deal was that both clubs agreed a 9 million fee, contractual terms agreed with Martin and the only reason it was a loan was down to timing in the end as it took so long to complete. The reason for that was Derby wanted to sign Vydra and another unnamed striker, Pearson didn't want Martin so when they could not get the deal for the second striker done he sanctioned a loan move instead. We used Adebayor as a back up plan in case it didn't pan out. So  back to the original deal, our option is exercisable (with all terms agreed) in either January or June, I suspect we will look to January but this is FFC lol.

[ToodlesMcToot]

He will be getting more game minutes,we know all about his talent,but he must keep working hard.
Also said Matt Smith is an excellent professional.
So with Martin here till season end we might not be going after another striker.

Did he say Martin is here till end of season. From what I heard, Derby want him back in January and mcclarren wants to give him a bumper new contract. Of course my news is a few weeks old and I'll get no more updates now that Rigg has left

The only way he'll be recalled if Derby, Fulham, and Martin all mutually agree on the recall. Which we won't, and I want to assume Martin wouldn't either as it seems he's invested with us. If he returns to Derby at all, it'll be this summer.

well from what I heard, martin was keen to return and sign new contract. Of course this doesn't mean he wouldn't also be happy to sign for us if we match it or better it. But that part wasn't discussed when I was chatting about it.

Its a fact he can only go back if all three parties agree, it is known to be true that Derby asked after McClaren took over about the possibility of taking him back (just around when he started scoring) and are rumoured to have offered then to pay back the 2.5 million fee and half of the salaries we have paid, however it was a firm rebuttal with SJ also saying at that time he sees it as important that we turn the loan permanent.

My understanding on the original deal was that both clubs agreed a 9 million fee, contractual terms agreed with Martin and the only reason it was a loan was down to timing in the end as it took so long to complete. The reason for that was Derby wanted to sign Vydra and another unnamed striker, Pearson didn't want Martin so when they could not get the deal for the second striker done he sanctioned a loan move instead. We used Adebayor as a back up plan in case it didn't pan out. So  back to the original deal, our option is exercisable (with all terms agreed) in either January or June, I suspect we will look to January but this is FFC lol.

For the sake of my own clarity on the subject, he can only go back to Derby if all three parties agree to it,....since terms have been agreed. And the only thing needed to make the deal permanent is for Fulham to pay the remainder of the transfer fee (9 minus the 2.5 already paid) in either January or in the summer window?? Have I put that all correctly??

[westcliff white]

He will be getting more game minutes,we know all about his talent,but he must keep working hard.
Also said Matt Smith is an excellent professional.
So with Martin here till season end we might not be going after another striker.

Did he say Martin is here till end of season. From what I heard, Derby want him back in January and mcclarren wants to give him a bumper new contract. Of course my news is a few weeks old and I'll get no more updates now that Rigg has left

The only way he'll be recalled if Derby, Fulham, and Martin all mutually agree on the recall. Which we won't, and I want to assume Martin wouldn't either as it seems he's invested with us. If he returns to Derby at all, it'll be this summer.

well from what I heard, martin was keen to return and sign new contract. Of course this doesn't mean he wouldn't also be happy to sign for us if we match it or better it. But that part wasn't discussed when I was chatting about it.

Its a fact he can only go back if all three parties agree, it is known to be true that Derby asked after McClaren took over about the possibility of taking him back (just around when he started scoring) and are rumoured to have offered then to pay back the 2.5 million fee and half of the salaries we have paid, however it was a firm rebuttal with SJ also saying at that time he sees it as important that we turn the loan permanent.

My understanding on the original deal was that both clubs agreed a 9 million fee, contractual terms agreed with Martin and the only reason it was a loan was down to timing in the end as it took so long to complete. The reason for that was Derby wanted to sign Vydra and another unnamed striker, Pearson didn't want Martin so when they could not get the deal for the second striker done he sanctioned a loan move instead. We used Adebayor as a back up plan in case it didn't pan out. So  back to the original deal, our option is exercisable (with all terms agreed) in either January or June, I suspect we will look to January but this is FFC lol.

For the sake of my own clarity on the subject, he can only go back to Derby if all three parties agree to it,....since terms have been agreed. And the only thing needed to make the deal permanent is for Fulham to pay the remainder of the transfer fee (9 minus the 2.5 already paid) in either January or in the summer window?? Have I put that all correctly??

That's how I understand it Toodles, and that's how the deal when it was explained to me just after he signed.

It was meant to be a permanent deal but Derby delayed it till the last moment so a loan was all that could be completed in time.

[westcliff white]

He will be getting more game minutes,we know all about his talent,but he must keep working hard.
Also said Matt Smith is an excellent professional.
So with Martin here till season end we might not be going after another striker.

Did he say Martin is here till end of season. From what I heard, Derby want him back in January and mcclarren wants to give him a bumper new contract. Of course my news is a few weeks old and I'll get no more updates now that Rigg has left

The only way he'll be recalled if Derby, Fulham, and Martin all mutually agree on the recall. Which we won't, and I want to assume Martin wouldn't either as it seems he's invested with us. If he returns to Derby at all, it'll be this summer.

well from what I heard, martin was keen to return and sign new contract. Of course this doesn't mean he wouldn't also be happy to sign for us if we match it or better it. But that part wasn't discussed when I was chatting about it.

Its a fact he can only go back if all three parties agree, it is known to be true that Derby asked after McClaren took over about the possibility of taking him back (just around when he started scoring) and are rumoured to have offered then to pay back the 2.5 million fee and half of the salaries we have paid, however it was a firm rebuttal with SJ also saying at that time he sees it as important that we turn the loan permanent.

My understanding on the original deal was that both clubs agreed a 9 million fee, contractual terms agreed with Martin and the only reason it was a loan was down to timing in the end as it took so long to complete. The reason for that was Derby wanted to sign Vydra and another unnamed striker, Pearson didn't want Martin so when they could not get the deal for the second striker done he sanctioned a loan move instead. We used Adebayor as a back up plan in case it didn't pan out. So  back to the original deal, our option is exercisable (with all terms agreed) in either January or June, I suspect we will look to January but this is FFC lol.

For the sake of my own clarity on the subject, he can only go back to Derby if all three parties agree to it,....since terms have been agreed. And the only thing needed to make the deal permanent is for Fulham to pay the remainder of the transfer fee (9 minus the 2.5 already paid) in either January or in the summer window?? Have I put that all correctly??

That's how I understand it Toodles, and that's how the deal when it was explained to me just after he signed.

It was meant to be a permanent deal but Derby delayed it till the last moment so a loan was all that could be completed in time.

which is all well and dandy, but if Derby want him back, and he wants to go, do you think we will shell out best part of 7 mil to keep a player here against his will? We can't keep the players we own, let alone the ones who we don't, when they force their hand. This reply is all me, and nothing to do with what I reported Rigg to have said. ( so no one blow a gasket, as I'm not saying he is forcing his hand, just merely stating how easy it would be should he choose too)  and then there is the ole would Martin truly give 100% if it were between us and Derby for 6th place, if he has decided to back in jan or the summer. Major conundrum for slavisa. Or then again he might sign in jan. Like I said time will tell

All I said was that's how I understand it, But if he wants to go I would keep him till June anyway, that way he doesn't play for us or them if that's the way it has to be. No room for sentiment.

As for Rigg seeing as you bought him up, I truly hope he was sacked for giving out information to those outside the club if that's what he was doing, Glad he has gone.

[Mince n Tatties]

Derby being linked with a move for Rhodes this evening, if that the case they would surely want the money for Martin.

[westcliff white]

He will be getting more game minutes,we know all about his talent,but he must keep working hard.
Also said Matt Smith is an excellent professional.
So with Martin here till season end we might not be going after another striker.

Did he say Martin is here till end of season. From what I heard, Derby want him back in January and mcclarren wants to give him a bumper new contract. Of course my news is a few weeks old and I'll get no more updates now that Rigg has left

The only way he'll be recalled if Derby, Fulham, and Martin all mutually agree on the recall. Which we won't, and I want to assume Martin wouldn't either as it seems he's invested with us. If he returns to Derby at all, it'll be this summer.

well from what I heard, martin was keen to return and sign new contract. Of course this doesn't mean he wouldn't also be happy to sign for us if we match it or better it. But that part wasn't discussed when I was chatting about it.

Its a fact he can only go back if all three parties agree, it is known to be true that Derby asked after McClaren took over about the possibility of taking him back (just around when he started scoring) and are rumoured to have offered then to pay back the 2.5 million fee and half of the salaries we have paid, however it was a firm rebuttal with SJ also saying at that time he sees it as important that we turn the loan permanent.

My understanding on the original deal was that both clubs agreed a 9 million fee, contractual terms agreed with Martin and the only reason it was a loan was down to timing in the end as it took so long to complete. The reason for that was Derby wanted to sign Vydra and another unnamed striker, Pearson didn't want Martin so when they could not get the deal for the second striker done he sanctioned a loan move instead. We used Adebayor as a back up plan in case it didn't pan out. So  back to the original deal, our option is exercisable (with all terms agreed) in either January or June, I suspect we will look to January but this is FFC lol.

For the sake of my own clarity on the subject, he can only go back to Derby if all three parties agree to it,....since terms have been agreed. And the only thing needed to make the deal permanent is for Fulham to pay the remainder of the transfer fee (9 minus the 2.5 already paid) in either January or in the summer window?? Have I put that all correctly??

That's how I understand it Toodles, and that's how the deal when it was explained to me just after he signed.

It was meant to be a permanent deal but Derby delayed it till the last moment so a loan was all that could be completed in time.

which is all well and dandy, but if Derby want him back, and he wants to go, do you think we will shell out best part of 7 mil to keep a player here against his will? We can't keep the players we own, let alone the ones who we don't, when they force their hand. This reply is all me, and nothing to do with what I reported Rigg to have said. ( so no one blow a gasket, as I'm not saying he is forcing his hand, just merely stating how easy it would be should he choose too)  and then there is the ole would Martin truly give 100% if it were between us and Derby for 6th place, if he has decided to back in jan or the summer. Major conundrum for slavisa. Or then again he might sign in jan. Like I said time will tell

All I said was that's how I understand it, But if he wants to go I would keep him till June anyway, that way he doesn't play for us or them if that's the way it has to be. No room for sentiment.

As for Rigg seeing as you bought him up, I truly hope he was sacked for giving out information to those outside the club if that's what he was doing, Glad he has gone.

one would very much doubt that Rigg gave out sensitive information about the club. But he probably will now. Always makes me nervous when we lose someone who knows every detail of every contract we have with our players

Agree.

For info a bad phrasing on my initial response, should have read.....I truly hope that if he was guilty of giving out information to those outside then he was sacked for that.

All speculation as apparently it was all very "Mutual"

[ToodlesMcToot]

He will be getting more game minutes,we know all about his talent,but he must keep working hard.
Also said Matt Smith is an excellent professional.
So with Martin here till season end we might not be going after another striker.

Did he say Martin is here till end of season. From what I heard, Derby want him back in January and mcclarren wants to give him a bumper new contract. Of course my news is a few weeks old and I'll get no more updates now that Rigg has left

The only way he'll be recalled if Derby, Fulham, and Martin all mutually agree on the recall. Which we won't, and I want to assume Martin wouldn't either as it seems he's invested with us. If he returns to Derby at all, it'll be this summer.

well from what I heard, martin was keen to return and sign new contract. Of course this doesn't mean he wouldn't also be happy to sign for us if we match it or better it. But that part wasn't discussed when I was chatting about it.

Its a fact he can only go back if all three parties agree, it is known to be true that Derby asked after McClaren took over about the possibility of taking him back (just around when he started scoring) and are rumoured to have offered then to pay back the 2.5 million fee and half of the salaries we have paid, however it was a firm rebuttal with SJ also saying at that time he sees it as important that we turn the loan permanent.

My understanding on the original deal was that both clubs agreed a 9 million fee, contractual terms agreed with Martin and the only reason it was a loan was down to timing in the end as it took so long to complete. The reason for that was Derby wanted to sign Vydra and another unnamed striker, Pearson didn't want Martin so when they could not get the deal for the second striker done he sanctioned a loan move instead. We used Adebayor as a back up plan in case it didn't pan out. So  back to the original deal, our option is exercisable (with all terms agreed) in either January or June, I suspect we will look to January but this is FFC lol.

For the sake of my own clarity on the subject, he can only go back to Derby if all three parties agree to it,....since terms have been agreed. And the only thing needed to make the deal permanent is for Fulham to pay the remainder of the transfer fee (9 minus the 2.5 already paid) in either January or in the summer window?? Have I put that all correctly??

That's how I understand it Toodles, and that's how the deal when it was explained to me just after he signed.

It was meant to be a permanent deal but Derby delayed it till the last moment so a loan was all that could be completed in time.

which is all well and dandy, but if Derby want him back, and he wants to go, do you think we will shell out best part of 7 mil to keep a player here against his will? We can't keep the players we own, let alone the ones who we don't, when they force their hand. This reply is all me, and nothing to do with what I reported Rigg to have said. ( so no one blow a gasket, as I'm not saying he is forcing his hand, just merely stating how easy it would be should he choose too)  and then there is the ole would Martin truly give 100% if it were between us and Derby for 6th place, if he has decided to back in jan or the summer. Major conundrum for slavisa. Or then again he might sign in jan. Like I said time will tell

All I said was that's how I understand it, But if he wants to go I would keep him till June anyway, that way he doesn't play for us or them if that's the way it has to be. No room for sentiment.

As for Rigg seeing as you bought him up, I truly hope he was sacked for giving out information to those outside the club if that's what he was doing, Glad he has gone.

one would very much doubt that Rigg gave out sensitive information about the club. But he probably will now. Always makes me nervous when we lose someone who knows every detail of every contract we have with our players

Ben, if I remember correctly, you've got friends or family who get inside tidbits from time to time. Have you spoken to them over the holidays? Any sense of how January is looking for us?

Apologies if you've discussed this elsewhere. I haven't seen such though.

[fulhamben]

Derby being linked with a move for Rhodes this evening, if that the case they would surely want the money for Martin.

you would have thought so if that is the case.

[BestOfBrede]

Sorry Fulhamben but it was you that said:
"Of course my news is a few weeks old and I'll get no more updates now that Rigg has left"

Therefore that suggests that he was giving away club info outside?

[ToodlesMcToot]

He will be getting more game minutes,we know all about his talent,but he must keep working hard.
Also said Matt Smith is an excellent professional.
So with Martin here till season end we might not be going after another striker.

Did he say Martin is here till end of season. From what I heard, Derby want him back in January and mcclarren wants to give him a bumper new contract. Of course my news is a few weeks old and I'll get no more updates now that Rigg has left

The only way he'll be recalled if Derby, Fulham, and Martin all mutually agree on the recall. Which we won't, and I want to assume Martin wouldn't either as it seems he's invested with us. If he returns to Derby at all, it'll be this summer.

well from what I heard, martin was keen to return and sign new contract. Of course this doesn't mean he wouldn't also be happy to sign for us if we match it or better it. But that part wasn't discussed when I was chatting about it.

Its a fact he can only go back if all three parties agree, it is known to be true that Derby asked after McClaren took over about the possibility of taking him back (just around when he started scoring) and are rumoured to have offered then to pay back the 2.5 million fee and half of the salaries we have paid, however it was a firm rebuttal with SJ also saying at that time he sees it as important that we turn the loan permanent.

My understanding on the original deal was that both clubs agreed a 9 million fee, contractual terms agreed with Martin and the only reason it was a loan was down to timing in the end as it took so long to complete. The reason for that was Derby wanted to sign Vydra and another unnamed striker, Pearson didn't want Martin so when they could not get the deal for the second striker done he sanctioned a loan move instead. We used Adebayor as a back up plan in case it didn't pan out. So  back to the original deal, our option is exercisable (with all terms agreed) in either January or June, I suspect we will look to January but this is FFC lol.

For the sake of my own clarity on the subject, he can only go back to Derby if all three parties agree to it,....since terms have been agreed. And the only thing needed to make the deal permanent is for Fulham to pay the remainder of the transfer fee (9 minus the 2.5 already paid) in either January or in the summer window?? Have I put that all correctly??

That's how I understand it Toodles, and that's how the deal when it was explained to me just after he signed.

It was meant to be a permanent deal but Derby delayed it till the last moment so a loan was all that could be completed in time.

which is all well and dandy, but if Derby want him back, and he wants to go, do you think we will shell out best part of 7 mil to keep a player here against his will? We can't keep the players we own, let alone the ones who we don't, when they force their hand. This reply is all me, and nothing to do with what I reported Rigg to have said. ( so no one blow a gasket, as I'm not saying he is forcing his hand, just merely stating how easy it would be should he choose too)  and then there is the ole would Martin truly give 100% if it were between us and Derby for 6th place, if he has decided to back in jan or the summer. Major conundrum for slavisa. Or then again he might sign in jan. Like I said time will tell

All I said was that's how I understand it, But if he wants to go I would keep him till June anyway, that way he doesn't play for us or them if that's the way it has to be. No room for sentiment.

As for Rigg seeing as you bought him up, I truly hope he was sacked for giving out information to those outside the club if that's what he was doing, Glad he has gone.

one would very much doubt that Rigg gave out sensitive information about the club. But he probably will now. Always makes me nervous when we lose someone who knows every detail of every contract we have with our players

Ben, if I remember correctly, you've got friends or family who get inside tidbits from time to time. Have you spoken to them over the holidays? Any sense of how January is looking for us?

Apologies if you've discussed this elsewhere. I haven't seen such though.

Yes that is or was the case as it all came through Rigg. And as I posted early doors, the only tidbit I got was that mcclarren wants Martin back and has offered him a  new contract. Martin was said to be keen on it, but a lot can happen in a few weeks, and even as we speak Derby have now been linked with Rhodes, so only time will tell on this one.

Thanks. Sorry for making you repeat yourself. I hadn't put you and Rigg together, so the Martin back to Derby for a new contract bit seemed more hypothetical.

[fulhamben]

Sorry Fulhamben but it was you that said:
"Of course my news is a few weeks old and I'll get no more updates now that Rigg has left"

Therefore that suggests that he was giving away club info outside?

it's not sensitive info though. Everyman and his dog connected to football would probably be aware.