Jump to content
Melbourne Football

Tim Cahill


Murfy1
 Share

Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, playmaker said:

Bullshit. He was told to walk. 

Bombshell? What bombshell. Wazza is there to set us up for the future by developing the team and Tim's attitude stunk and was resisting what Wazza was sent there to do.

Tim was so self centred about playing in the world cup that he wanted to be a priority which he wasn't and nor he should be.

Marwood came and probably said that Wazza's decisions are the ones that matter and to do what he is told. Tim didn't agree and Marwood said pay half of your front ended contract or you will be training on your own and not get any game time at all.

Why to I think this? Because I would have done exactly the same thing if I was Marwood.

Self centred big mouth got exactly what he deserved.

NO PLAYER IS BIGGER THAN THE CLUB

COME ON CITY!!

I'm glad we have a resident expert on the forum that knows what went on behind the scenes.

All that article suggests is that Tim wanted to secure a regular starting spot in a team, so he was willing to payout his own contract in order to do so. The inference obviously being that we (rightly) gave him no such guarantees of a starting spot here, and that he would have to pay back a portion of the money he received last year in order to break the contract. It also suggests a bad relationship between Cahill and Joyce, which is almost impossible to know much about unless you are in the inner circle.

I hate to break it to you, but you're not Marwood and nor do you have any semblance of qualifications to be. You are adding 2 + 2 and getting 17. 

Edited by bt50
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, bt50 said:

I'm glad we have a resident expert on the forum that knows what went on behind the scenes.

All that article suggests is that Tim wanted to secure a regular starting spot in a team, so he was willing to payout his own contract in order to do so. The inference obviously being that we (rightly) gave him no such guarantees of a starting spot here, and that he would have to pay back a portion of the money he received last year in order to break the contract. It also suggests a bad relationship between Cahill and Joyce, which is almost impossible to know much about unless you are in the inner circle.

I hate to break it to you, but you're not Marwood and nor do you have any semblance of qualifications to be. You are adding 2 + 2 and getting 17. 

Not sure how accurate the article is but Smithies is generally reasonably close but the actual truth which we have got zero chance of ever knowing is probably somewhere in between Smithies and old mate resident forum expert.

And if true TC walked and paid out his contract so quickly and not dragged it on is imo best outcome from a difficult situation. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jovan said:

Not sure how accurate the article is but Smithies is generally reasonably close but the actual truth which we have got zero chance of ever knowing is probably somewhere in between Smithies and old mate resident forum expert.

And if true TC walked and paid out his contract so quickly and not dragged it on is imo best outcome from a difficult situation. 

 

100%, the only thing that can be taken as approaching fact is the payout part imo, the relationship stuff will always be both hearsay and even subjective, and will probably lie somewhere in the middle.

Edited by bt50
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bt50 said:

100% the only thing that can be taken as approaching fact is the payout part imo, the relationship stuff will always be both hearsay and even subjective, and will probably lie somewhere in the middle.

Exactly.

Since the announcement both Cahill and the club seem to be handling it good manner. The only thing from my perspective is that it would sour if he lined up with another A League club in January. 

If he ends up in the Middle East or back in China and gets game time and makes the Socceroos squad to Russia then it's almost a win win outcome.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jovan said:

Exactly.

Since the announcement both Cahill and the club seem to be handling it good manner. The only thing from my perspective is that it would sour if he lined up with another A League club in January. 

If he ends up in the Middle East or back in China and gets game time and makes the Socceroos squad to Russia then it's almost a win win outcome.

 

Yeh agree with that. I doubt he will, I remember when he had EPL clubs, and MLS from memory, chasing him a few years back he always said that he couldn't play against a former club. Also his release certainly indicated this was the finish of his A League career.
IMO he's off to the UAE, given they have their transfer window open this week. Otherwise i dont know why you wouldnt just stay for another three weeks and make appearances off the bench here.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, bt50 said:

Yeh agree with that. I doubt he will, I remember when he had EPL clubs, and MLS from memory, chasing him a few years back he always said that he couldn't play against a former club. Also his release certainly indicated this was the finish of his A League career.
IMO he's off to the UAE, given they have their transfer window open this week. Otherwise i dont know why you wouldnt just stay for another three weeks and make appearances off the bench here.

Won't be long before we find out. I think the UAE league finishes on 29th April, about 6 weeks before the WC Finals begin. Our Round 27 is on the weekend of 14th April. Not a lot in it. How soon before the WC Finals will our squad assemble?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bt50 said:

I'm glad we have a resident expert on the forum that knows what went on behind the scenes.

All that article suggests is that Tim wanted to secure a regular starting spot in a team, so he was willing to payout his own contract in order to do so. The inference obviously being that we (rightly) gave him no such guarantees of a starting spot here, and that he would have to pay back a portion of the money he received last year in order to break the contract. It also suggests a bad relationship between Cahill and Joyce, which is almost impossible to know much about unless you are in the inner circle.

I hate to break it to you, but you're not Marwood and nor do you have any semblance of qualifications to be. You are adding 2 + 2 and getting 17. 

Don't know why you are arching up as I am criticising the article not you. Geez

Anyway, as for the article, it seems more speculative than anything where anyone who has been in or knows of any business crisis management process would know exactly what has transpired and I would back my theory together with many other posts on this forum any day than what was written in the article.

To suggest Tim  would offer up something without being forced is just rubbish.

He had to make a choice, I agree, but he put himself into a corner with his attitude and public display of dissent against the club's manager and vision so the choice was

1. To distance himself away from the club's facilities and fulfill his contractual obligation,

or

2. To break the contract which meant he was obliged to repay part of his front ended payment, which would have been stipulated in the contract anyway.

He made the choice he did because he wants to fulfill his personal goal and good for him, but not at the expense of our club's prosperity.

Also it was hardly a bombshell,as suggested, when news was out that Marwood was making the trip down to sort things out as the outcome was inevitable. And furthermore there is no way Marwood or Wazza wanted Tim anywhere near the club or players due to the unprofessional qualities and destuctive influences he had or would have had on the younger footballers and football culture in general. The guy was a knob for causing a fragmented culture towards Wazza and what he is trying to achieve.  A typical power play that went horrably wrong for him.

Marwood came and gave both Valkanis and Tim their marching orders on that weekend and the only reason why Tim played last week was PR more than anything. The rest of the fence sitters were also given notice.

That's what happened, because when the head honcho of a multinational corporation comes in to manage a crisis that threatens the future prosperity of their company, heads roll especially fat heads like Tim.

As far as Marwood is concerned the only person calling the shots at MCFC is Wazza and obviously he likes what he sees and backs him unequivocally.

In future whenever Marwood comes to visit I think we should expect drastic change until the swamp is truly drained.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, playmaker said:

Anyway, as for the article, it seems more speculative than anything where anyone who has been in or knows of any business crisis management process would know exactly what has transpired and I would back my theory together with many other posts on this forum any day than what was written in the article.

To suggest Tim  would offer up something without being forced is just rubbish.

He had to make a choice, I agree, but he put himself into a corner with his attitude and public display of dissent against the club's manager and vision so the choice was

1. To distance himself away from the club's facilities and fulfill his contractual obligation,

or

2. To break the contract which meant he was obliged to repay part of his front ended payment, which would have been stipulated in the contract anyway.

He made the choice he did because he wants to fulfill his personal goal and good for him, but not at the expense of our club's prosperity.

I agree with above generally, as i've said prior. Obviously anyone would choose not to payout if they didnt have to and as we've mentioned his interview was a poor way to go about trying to leave for game time elsewhere, and as i also mentioned, i dont think our club owed him a single thing to let him go without demanding a stack of cash back.

21 minutes ago, playmaker said:

And furthermore there is no way Marwood or Wazza wanted Tim anywhere near the club or players due to the unprofessional qualities and destuctive influences he had or would have had on the younger footballers and football culture in general. The guy was a knob for causing a fragmented culture towards Wazza and what he is trying to achieve.  A typical power play that went horrably wrong for him.

Marwood came and gave both Valkanis and Tim their marching orders on that weekend and the only reason why Tim played last week was PR more than anything. The rest of the fence sitters were also given notice.

That's what happened, because when the head honcho of a multinational corporation comes in to manage a crisis that threatens the future prosperity of their company, heads roll especially fat heads like Tim.

As far as Marwood is concerned the only person calling the shots at MCFC is Wazza and obviously he likes what he sees and backs him unequivocally.

In future whenever Marwood comes to visit I think we should expect drastic change until the swamp is truly drained.

 You've completely, 100% unequivocally speculated on each of the bold points. There's a possibility that they might be true, but there's also equally a possibility thats its plain wrong and slanderous. There's no way that you, me or a journo knows any of those things unless you are directly involved in the situation.
You can't keep coming on here and calling out pure speculation and then not expecting it to get called out when you produce it. And before you mention it, there's a fairly distinct difference between suggesting something speculative might have happened versus declaring something speculative has happened.

As a side note, it was reported at the time, and even before it, that Marwood was coming out here anyway for his regular checkup/update of the club and it just happened to coincide with the Timmy thing happening earlier that week.

Edited by bt50
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, bt50 said:

I agree with above generally, as i've said prior. Obviously anyone would choose not to payout if they didnt have to and as we've mentioned his interview was a poor way to go about trying to leave for game time elsewhere, and as i also mentioned, i dont think our club owed him a single thing to let him go without demanding a stack of cash back.

 You've completely, 100% unequivocally speculated on each of the bold points. There's a possibility that they might be true, but there's also equally a possibility thats its plain wrong and slanderous. There's no way that you, me or a journo knows any of those things unless you are directly involved in the situation.
You can't keep coming on here and calling out pure speculation and then not expecting it to get called out when you produce it. And before you mention it, there's a fairly distinct difference between suggesting something speculative might have happened versus declaring something speculative has happened.

As a side note, it was reported at the time, and even before it, that Marwood was coming out here anyway for his regular checkup/update of the club and it just happened to coincide with the Timmy thing happening earlier that week.

Come on

never let the truth get in the way of a good story !:D

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone hear the Cahill interview on Fox right now?  Flog says after the Syria game he should of played the 90 minutes for us the following game

'Every single minute I come on I make a difference'

Edited by haz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, n i k o said:

Got a link for it? 

Heard it on ABC radio broadcast during halftime, but was a FOX Sports Production. Im sure it will appear by Saturday morning (Australia time)

EDIT: @n i k o

This is it I think. Im not sure becuase I cant view it at work atm.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/football/full-tim-cahill-interview/video/76209ec159221362e75b9d197624a099

Edited by haz
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I knew I didn't fit [into the team], and that's fine"

If this was anyone else's player i'd be fuming at his arrogance. But, well fuck, he's got gift of the gab. He just sounds convincing

"I'd always train at the top level, do everything in training ... every player needs a criteria-- what do I need to do to get into the team, and if you can't figure out what it is then I think it's obvious".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jeffplz said:

"I knew I didn't fit [into the team], and that's fine"

If this was anyone else's player i'd be fuming at his arrogance. But, well fuck, he's got gift of the gab. He just sounds convincing

"I'd always train at the top level, do everything in training ... every player needs a criteria-- what do I need to do to get into the team, and if you can't figure out what it is then I think it's obvious".

Obviously its everyone else's fault, throw the club under the bus and destabilize the team simples. Then rip up the contract and move on. All about criteria to get into the team

Edited by HeartOfCity
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jeffplz said:

"I knew I didn't fit [into the team], and that's fine"

If this was anyone else's player i'd be fuming at his arrogance. But, well fuck, he's got gift of the gab. He just sounds convincing

"I'd always train at the top level, do everything in training ... every player needs a criteria-- what do I need to do to get into the team, and if you can't figure out what it is then I think it's obvious".

Isn't this what everyone here has been saying?

He doesn't fit in the team, he was just here for the colour change and hopefully bums on seats, is he right or not, he didn't fit into Wazza's team?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jeffplz said:

"I knew I didn't fit [into the team], and that's fine"

If this was anyone else's player i'd be fuming at his arrogance. But, well fuck, he's got gift of the gab. He just sounds convincing

"I'd always train at the top level, do everything in training ... every player needs a criteria-- what do I need to do to get into the team, and if you can't figure out what it is then I think it's obvious".

I haven’t heard the interview but aren’t all players the same in regards to that last bit?

why do you think Mauk is back here?  What do you reckon Kilkenny is going to do when the window opens?

Players want to play and if they’ve got options to achieve that, they’ll take it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim Cahill clearly hinted at this last month when the Socceroos qualified for the 2018 World Cup. He mentioned that he would need more game time between now and the WC tournament if he is to have any significant role. It was a message to the heartless bosses that he wasn't playing as much as he wanted to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, MCMLIII said:

Tim Cahill clearly hinted at this last month when the Socceroos qualified for the 2018 World Cup. He mentioned that he would need more game time between now and the WC tournament if he is to have any significant role. It was a message to the heartless bosses that he wasn't playing as much as he wanted to.

Have you been under a rock for the past few weeks? That's precisely how all this started, and it ended with his departure from the club.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, MCMLIII said:

Tim Cahill clearly hinted at this last month when the Socceroos qualified for the 2018 World Cup. He mentioned that he would need more game time between now and the WC tournament if he is to have any significant role. It was a message to the heartless bosses that he wasn't playing as much as he wanted to.

Perhaps you should listen to his most recent interview 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was thinking the other day about Cahill's repayment and haw this would interact with the salary cap.

It is well known that if a club pays out a player then the amount is counted as remuneration under the salary cap, however does the reverse circimstances result in remuneration counted under the cap being decreased? If yes would it only be limited to the wages the player received in the current season (As in Tim's buyout is highly likely to exceed his wages this year)? Or is it likely the ATO will deem him to be buying out his own contract? Would the terms of the deed of release in how it described the payment (i.e. reimbursement of wages v contract buyout) influence whether it could reduce or exclude any wages from being counted?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, malloy said:

Was thinking the other day about Cahill's repayment and haw this would interact with the salary cap.

It is well known that if a club pays out a player then the amount is counted as remuneration under the salary cap, however does the reverse circimstances result in remuneration counted under the cap being decreased? If yes would it only be limited to the wages the player received in the current season (As in Tim's buyout is highly likely to exceed his wages this year)? Or is it likely the ATO will deem him to be buying out his own contract? Would the terms of the deed of release in how it described the payment (i.e. reimbursement of wages v contract buyout) influence whether it could reduce or exclude any wages from being counted?

Don't know. But I'll guess that City's accountants have made sure that the result is at least neutral and that we have saved two-thirds of what we were to have paid Cahill this season and that that amount is now available to pay a replacement player (if we want one).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, malloy said:

Was thinking the other day about Cahill's repayment and haw this would interact with the salary cap.

It is well known that if a club pays out a player then the amount is counted as remuneration under the salary cap, however does the reverse circimstances result in remuneration counted under the cap being decreased? If yes would it only be limited to the wages the player received in the current season (As in Tim's buyout is highly likely to exceed his wages this year)? Or is it likely the ATO will deem him to be buying out his own contract? Would the terms of the deed of release in how it described the payment (i.e. reimbursement of wages v contract buyout) influence whether it could reduce or exclude any wages from being counted?

You would have to think its limited to whats under the cap in the current season, and anything else is deemed a recoupment of last years 'guest marquee' salary. Still its quite possible theres no such rule and a loophole exists knowing FFA's history when it comes to this sort of stuff. Either way we will have a pretty decent chunk of cap space available id say, hopefully we can put it to good use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, bt50 said:

You would have to think its limited to whats under the cap in the current season, and anything else is deemed a recoupment of last years 'guest marquee' salary. Still its quite possible theres no such rule and a loophole exists knowing FFA's history when it comes to this sort of stuff. Either way we will have a pretty decent chunk of cap space available id say, hopefully we can put it to good use.

I would not expect H.Delbridge to be on anything more then $200k. So if Timmy was on $400k (guess) we would have $200k to spend on someone for 1/2 season. So if Budzik goes we can have Ross as marquee, but if Brandan goes (mutual) then we can spend $200k on Ross.

If Kilkenny etc leave (mutual) then we would have $200k+ to spend on an OS Aussie..... Anyone out there looking to come home?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Merrick to go window shopping after O’Donovan blow

 

 

"While Caltex Socceroos legend Tim Cahill is available after leaving Melbourne City, Merrick all but ruled out a play for Australia’s all-time leading goalscorer.

“Tim will probably go overseas I would think. Tim’s a very good player. He’s not the type of player we actually want in our side.

“He’s an excellent player. He’ll have no trouble finding a club.”

 

ha ha Timmy 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Torn Asunder said:

Timmy seems to be enjoying life in Byron Bay at the moment, mentally preparing for the WC ... Does he have to wait till January to go to a new club, or can he sign whenever based on being a free agent?

@Torn Asunder Depends on the regulations governing the club (if any) that wants to sign him. Because he was released by City outside the transfer window, he can't play for another A-League club until the A-League transfer window opens in January. He could train with them, but not play for them. [The Harrison Delbridge case indicates that that rule applies to all transfers into the A-League. Delbridge's contract with USL club FC Cincinnati has expired (I think their contracts finish 30th November) but he still can't play for us until our window opens.]

If the same rules apply, Cahill will not be able to play for any non-Australian club until the relevant transfer window opens. But there may be some governing associations/leagues who would take him, but if he's in Byron Bay it doesn't look as though he's actively pursuing that sort of option.

He's mentally preparing for something he won't get to if he doesn't get himself match time first...

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...