Torquay United Fans Forum

yellowforever wrote:To be honest, if they're spending silly money like that on a striker, they might as well have kept Benyon. Connell did look pretty good when he played for us though..

Not 100 grand good!

To be honest, if they're spending silly money like that on a striker, they might as well have kept Benyon. Connell did look pretty good when he played for us though..

Yes - we were robbed with Zebroski - or rather, we gave him away. Swindon must have some serious money to waste, to spend what they did on Benyon and have wasted on Connell.

I have to agree with you Fonda.

A bit of both would make sense to me. I could possibly stomach the whole deal a little more if, for example, we sold Zebroski for £75-80k (double the reported amount) if Swindon are paying over £100k for Connell. I read the article and thought 'Six figures? He's good but not that good!' So maybe they're paying over the odds?
As some have suggested on here, there's more to Zebs game than Connells. So why didn't they (Swindon) come in for him when he put in a transfer request and his details were circulated to other clubs? Assuming his details were circulated to other clubs? Two clubs wanting a player would at least create a bidding war of sorts.
Then you have to consider whether the player actually wanted to go anywhere but Bristol? He probably wasn't interested in anywhere else (although Swindon is his home)! Maybe the opportunity wasn't there at the time?

I guess we can speculate over this deal until the cows come home and be none the wiser (just more frustrated).

The deals are done and we'll just have to take six points off the Gas when we meet. That will go a little way to making me feel better. But not much.

Always thought Connell had something about him when he played for us. But i think Zebroski offers more of a challenge to defences, so if we recieved less than half for him than AC went for, either we got robbed or Swindon got robbed. Or a bit of both...

Now, now Smiffy - we all know that size doesn't matter - it's whether you find the back of the net regularly that counts!

yellow wrote: I hadn’t heard the figure of £20k before, but that is derisory.

It is further evidence that we are a soft touch.

It isn't further evidence of anything other than brucie talking tosh, as usual.

I was led to believe the fee was £40k with a sell on clause. Was that a good deal for us? probably not, but ultimately Zebroski forced the move through, he was the highest earner at the club and we couldn't afford to keep him.

The major blow for us was it was Buckle who knew our finances and knew he could get him cut price. If Swindon or some other mugs had got involved I have no doubt we'd have got more for him.

royalgull wrote:Even if he did it was about 6/7 years ago and more than expired.

Has Connell demanded a transfer? Has he said he's not going to play for Grimsby anymore? Are they struggling for money this year? Is he their highest earner? Does the buying club know what the selling club will find hard to turn down?

If we're doing comparisons to the Zebroski deal why not actually get some decent comparisons.

Love your pro-regime stance royal (as ever) but the comparison made seems perfectly valid.

It is after all the comparative fees for two Div 2 strikers that were under contract, notwithstanding whether they asked for, or as in Zeb’s case manoeuvred a move.

I hadn’t heard the figure of £20k before, but that is derisory.

It is further evidence that we are a soft touch.

Even if he did it was about 6/7 years ago and more than expired.

Has Connell demanded a transfer? Has he said he's not going to play for Grimsby anymore? Are they struggling for money this year? Is he their highest earner? Does the buying club know what the selling club will find hard to turn down?

If we're doing comparisons to the Zebroski deal why not actually get some decent comparisons.

royalgull wrote:Of course football works just like that. A player is worth what a club is willing to buy for and the other club is willing to sell for Comparisons are utterly pointless.

except when its torquay united!! ripped off yet again, when connell left did he have any sell on clause?

Of course football works just like that. A player is worth what a club is willing to buy for and the other club is willing to sell for. Comparisons are utterly pointless.

if thats true Swindon have been mugged. 100k for Connell and 20k for Zebroski - Our directors should habg their heads in shame.

They do seem desperate for a decent striker at Swindon. And their record for uncovering lower league talent was legendary.

I can only conclude that the six figure sum in this instance was about £7,500.00.

I hope that this time we will be showing them Howe to do it.

My point exactly. Though I think Connell has improved as a player, it still makes you think we could/should have got more for Zebroski (assuming the sale figure is what we've been led to believe it to).