Fryatt ....will he stay ?

[Matt_B]

I would guess that Nigel will want Matty to stay. Matty Fryatt's goalscoring this season is the kind of thing that keeps managers in a job. I would certainly not let him leave. I would try and get him to agree a new contract. Failing that I woujld tell him to play out his contract for Leicester and emphasize that the more goals he scores this season the better the deal he can demand in the summer.
I take a different attitude to Mattock. He is less important to the team and we have good cover. Also he is an England Under 21 player. If he is to have any chance of making the squad for next summer he needs to be playing premiership football. Therefore I feel we have an obligation to the player to accept a serious premiership offer.

In an age where players feel no obligation to a club why should the club feel obligated to anyone but it's fans and getting up the divisions?

 

[Redditch Fox]

Due to the circumstances, if the price is right he will go in January.

I regret this but my take is that he is more likely to want to play for Wolves chasing a place in the Premiership than Leicester chasing a place in the Championship.

At 22 he is not going to take the view that he is unlikely to score goals in the premiership let alone the Championship - no young sports professional is going to take that negative view. His attitude to those who say - he won't be good enough at that level will be to say stuff them. I expect that Wolves will be his first choice but if they don't come in for him, I would expect him to go elsewhere.

He's not performed well enough in previous seasons for us to be keen enough to have given him and enhanced, extended contract and this was understandable from our point of view.

It's unfortunate but hopefully Pearson is lining up a replacement but he is not at all likely to equal Fryatt's goal rate - but it's just one of those things I'm afraid.

 

[consty]

It's a simple case of economics - the financial reward of getting back into the Championship is far greater than any transfer fee we could hope to get for him in the January window.

This is my view exactly and is why I would keep him, even if it was at the expense of him leaving for free at the end of the season.
(However one poster points out that due to Fryatts age, the club may be entitled to a transfer fee anyway. I would still keep him in January even if that turned out not to be the case for the reason boc states.)

 

[Redditch Fox]

This is my view exactly and is why I would keep him, even if it was at the expense of him leaving for free at the end of the season.
(However one poster points out that due to Fryatts age, the club may be entitled to a transfer fee anyway. I would still keep him in January even if that turned out not to be the case for the reason boc states.)

With respect - I think both your post and Boc's misses the point.

Whilst I tend to agree that it would be almost certainly better for us to keep him until the end of the season and await the consequences - the real issue is that it is much more likely these days for the player and his agent to call the shots. If he really wants to go in January then he will surely go - clubs tend not to try to keep unhappy players these days. It will all come down to what he wants to do.

 

[bocadillo]

With respect - I think both your post and Boc's misses the point.

Whilst I tend to agree that it would be almost certainly better for us to keep him until the end of the season and await the consequences - the real issue is that it is much more likely these days for the player and his agent to call the shots. If he really wants to go in January then he will surely go - clubs tend not to try to keep unhappy players these days. It will all come down to what he wants to do.

Perhaps this is a case where the club should make sure that the player and his agent do not call the shots. If he has not been signed on a new contract by the end of January, he will in any case be able to sign a pre-contract agreement with Wolves or anybody else of his choosing - so what's the hurry?

He should be looking at the strikers in the Wolves squad and realising that he is not even going to be on their bench this season - and then thinking about really making a name for himself by leading us to promotion with a personal tally of 40+ goals in the season. The recognition of that type of achievement might even enhance the financial prospects for all concerned; the club, the player and the agent.

 

[TommyK]

If he has not been signed on a new contract by the end of January, he will in any case be able to sign a pre-contract agreement with Wolves or anybody else of his choosing

I thought that you could only sign a pre-contact with a foreign club? Although I might have got that wrong.

 

[bocadillo]

I thought that you could only sign a pre-contact with a foreign club? Although I might have got that wrong.

I think you're wrong.

 

[Blue Maniac]

I thought that you could only sign a pre-contact with a foreign club? Although I might have got that wrong.

I think that was a short-lived rule that was quickly binned off because of its arbitrary nature.

 

[glyn]

(However one poster points out that due to Fryatts age, the club may be entitled to a transfer fee anyway. I would still keep him in January even if that turned out not to be the case for the reason boc states.)

I don't think there's any question of 'may'. Unless the tribunal sets the fee at zero we would get a fee, is my reading.

 

[Billyjof]

He should be looking at the strikers in the Wolves squad and realising that he is not even going to be on their bench this season - and then thinking about really making a name for himself by leading us to promotion with a personal tally of 40+ goals in the season. The recognition of that type of achievement might even enhance the financial prospects for all concerned; the club, the player and the agent.

Couldn't agree more.

I just hope Matty see's it the same way. I guess he is young and ambitious but he should show caution. If Wolves are prommoted he won't get a sniff.

Someone remind me who David Nugent is playing for again??

 

[Blue Maniac]

I don't think there's any question of 'may'. Unless the tribunal sets the fee at zero we would get a fee, is my reading.

Correct. I think it would be an understatement to say that the majority of people within football and most fans have understood this to be the case for several years. In this sort of circumstance, the player will definitely not leave for free. I'm a little confused as to how it's become a digressive discussion point at the side of this thread :icon_conf

 

[Blue Maniac]

Someone remind me who David Nugent is playing for again??

David Nugent - Portsmouth. Not getting a sniff

 

[consty]

With respect - I think both your post and Boc's misses the point.

Whilst I tend to agree that it would be almost certainly better for us to keep him until the end of the season and await the consequences - the real issue is that it is much more likely these days for the player and his agent to call the shots. If he really wants to go in January then he will surely go - clubs tend not to try to keep unhappy players these days. It will all come down to what he wants to do.

Well this is also true. In an earlier post in this thread I noted that even if the club decide to keep him, it can be academic (as you say here) because players can declare they want to go and these days when this happens they are nearly always out of the door (as you also say).

My point I guess, is that prior to Fryatt and his agent declaring their hand... the club should take the view of actively wanting to keep him. They should only part if he declares he wants to go rather than jump willingly at an offer from a club.

 

[TommyK]

I think you're sexy.

Thanks. But I'm not interested.

 

[TommyK]

I think that was a short-lived rule that was quickly binned off because of its arbitrary nature.

oh

 

[FantasyFox]

Fryatt ....will he stay?

I think Leicester has an excellent public transport infrastructure, good hospitals and a clean water supply. Only a fool would leave.

There's not much more to say really, a bit of a no-brainer....he's a stayer!

 

[Redditch Fox]

Perhaps this is a case where the club should make sure that the player and his agent do not call the shots. If he has not been signed on a new contract by the end of January, he will in any case be able to sign a pre-contract agreement with Wolves or anybody else of his choosing - so what's the hurry?

He should be looking at the strikers in the Wolves squad and realising that he is not even going to be on their bench this season - and then thinking about really making a name for himself by leading us to promotion with a personal tally of 40+ goals in the season. The recognition of that type of achievement might even enhance the financial prospects for all concerned; the club, the player and the agent.

Where I think we are in a difficulty is that there tends to be a scarcity of decent players available in January and that particularly applies to goal scorers.

My fear is that Wolves who allegedly have money to spend will sign him to boost their squad and provide striker cover - and that Fryatt will see this as a potential step to playing Premiership football.

I realise that there will be some on here who will dismiss his credentials for playing at that level - but as I've suggested before I would expect him to rate his own ability.

Anyway, we shall soon see.

 

[DesertFox]

If City don't want Fryatt to leave in January, it's entirely up to them - he's under contract.

Whilst the big superstars and their agents may call the shots to some degree (and let's be realistic - even Himself wasn't allowed to pick Real Madrid as His new club when He fancied a move) I don't think that state of afairs has yet filtered down to the third tier.

 

[David Gwilliam]

At this level the player does not necessarily have the power. We are talking about Matty Fryatt and not Wayne Rooney; he is not a unique talent. If we won't sell Wolves and other clubs can look elsewhere. I don't believe Matty will stop playing for us if we do not sell him. I have seen players play badly because they were talentless, cowardly or just not fit enough. The only Leicester City player I believe deliberately played badly for us was Stan Colleymore.

 

[Redditch Fox]

If City don't want Fryatt to leave in January, it's entirely up to them - he's under contract.

Whilst the big superstars and their agents may call the shots to some degree (and let's be realistic - even Himself wasn't allowed to pick Real Madrid as His new club when He fancied a move) I don't think that state of afairs has yet filtered down to the third tier.

Then there is nothing to worry about is there?

I would wait and see what happens in January. Personally, I've found that only money talks in football and it will come down to what and how much we are offered.

I can't see too many parallels between the particular situation and Cristiano Ronaldo's mainly because of the differences in the unexpired contracts but in the general I don't think it matters whether we are talking third tier or first tier.

My own view is that many supporters under-valued the potential of Fryatt. A goal scorer is a goal scorer and I don't buy the view that a more confident Fryatt wouldn't get goals at a higher level. I think we should splash the cash to try to keep him.