Pinny Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Swindon offered £6000, then £8000 to buy Andersen?! Is it any wonder Peterborough turned them down! Two insulting offers . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reliant Robin Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Swindon offered £6000, then £8000 to buy Andersen?! Is it any wonder Peterborough turned them down! Two insulting offers . 8-10k doesn't seem unreasonable to me for a 33 year old. He's hardly going to command a fee much higher than 2-3 seasons worth of loan fee. When you consider approx 4k has already been paid for a 2012 loan fee it shouldn't seem so insulting imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinny Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 He is 33.... he will probably go on to finish his career in the EL (cant see him ever dropping to the PL)... I'd say he probably has 5 years left in him at EL level . He isn't world class any more and isn't getting better but still a solid EL number 1 and will do a heatleaders job for years to come. Regardless of the £4000ish loan fee last season, thats irrelevant. He should be valued from 2013 onwards and I am sorry but £6 or £8 thousand is no where near what he is worth. Even if he did only do 3 more seasons, thats £4000 a year loan fees making him worth £12000. Thats double Swindons initial offer and I can see him goingfor longer than 3 years. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Swindon offered £6000, then £8000 to buy Andersen?! Is it any wonder Peterborough turned them down! Two insulting offers . Wasn't that 'higher' offer quickly withdrawn before Panthers even had time to consider it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinny Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Apparently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YerRopes Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 (edited) 8-10k doesn't seem unreasonable to me for a 33 year old. He's hardly going to command a fee much higher than 2-3 seasons worth of loan fee. When you consider approx 4k has already been paid for a 2012 loan fee it shouldn't seem so insulting imo. Seems reasonable to me too, especially with the longer term future of PBoro, the Elite League and the asset system by no means assured Edited to add :- Welcome back Hans ! Edited January 28, 2013 by yerropes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreverblue Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 I am glad this sorry saga has been resolved and common sense has prevailed.Always liked Hans and many Panthers fans have too until recently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hboy Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Hans is not 33 he is 32 😏😏 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A ORLOV Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Glad this has been sorted, welcome back Hans a good number 1 for Swindon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Seems reasonable to me too, especially with the longer term future of PBoro, the Elite League and the asset system by no means assured Edited to add :- Welcome back Hans ! Yeah, but according to this:- Although Andersen has signed on loan, Robins co-owner Gary Patchett has not ruled out the possibility of signing the Dane on a full transfer. “Hans is not only a quality rider, he is a fantastic captain, and we are delighted to have him back,” he said. “There were riders in need of his advice and his motivation last season, and he knew what was needed and when, and he contributed a lot to the team spirit of the side. “We still wouldn’t discount purchasing Hans’ contract from Peterborough despite the decision (to allow him to return on loan), but I firmly believe that should be an issue of choice and a fee reached by negotiation rather than by obligation.” that no longer sems a problem. Just seems Patchett's intransigence was down to wanting the deal on his terms not the MC's or Panthers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Wasn't that 'higher' offer quickly withdrawn before Panthers even had time to consider it? That was because of being told to purchase Batch!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
500cc Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Interesting if you read between the lines. It would appear Peterborough still haven't given Swindon permission to talk to Andersen. Bit of bad blood over this winter's dealings me thinks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.N.T. Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 (edited) Swindon have built a very strong team but I'm shocked to see that Nick Morris has EIGHT definate fixture clashes plus a possible one more in August. With him only having an 8.00 PL average at present, guests will be vital on trips to Lakeside and Peterborough while home clashes with Birmingham (Doyle missing too), Coventry (Summers missing) and Kings Lynn (Stead missing) shouldn't be so bad. Edited January 28, 2013 by T.N.T. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 That was because of being told to purchase Batch!!! Possibly, but the article reads as if the offer was still on the table at the time Robins were given the go ahead to sign Hans on loan. Nowhere does it say the offer to buy was withdrawn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
500cc Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Swindon have built a very strong team but I'm shocked to see that Nick Morris has EIGHT definate fixture clashes plus a possible one more in August. With him only having an 8.00 PL average at present, guests will be vital on trips to Lakeside and Peterborough while home clashes with Birmingham (Doyle missing too), Coventry (Summers missing) and Kings Lynn (Stead missing) shouldn't be so bad. That does highlight that riders on low PL averages may find their services very quickly dispensed with if they suffer short(ish) term injuries. Morris could fall into that category. Wells most certainly would. Your stats do highlight the biggest weakness of the Swindon team. They look a strong team to me, with the biggest question mark at reserve. They are built on a powerful top 5. But if Morris misses at least a third of those meetings and the quality of replacement is not great, then there is massive pressure on Gomolski. Certainly could be their achilles heel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrum Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Interesting if you read between the lines. It would appear Peterborough still haven't given Swindon permission to talk to Andersen. Bit of bad blood over this winter's dealings me thinks. Bet Hans is delighted he hasn't been prevented from working in the UK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 (edited) Is the situation that Swindon might have to wait until March 1st? then the two riders can go out on loan.If refused Swindon can take the legal route which to be honest Peterborough haven't a prayer.Its the riders i feel sorry for as not knowing must be a hindrance to them.If Swindon lose out so be it ,i think Patch/Rosco have done the right thing for the future of the club and if we are weaker so what they have still done what they feel is right for the club longterm. Edited January 28, 2013 by sidney Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Is the situation that Swindon might have to wait until March 1st? then the two riders can go out on loan.If refused Swindon can take the legal route which to be honest Peterborough haven't a prayer.Its the riders i feel sorry for as not knowing must be a hindrance to them.If Swindon lose out so be it ,i think Patch/Rosco have done the right thing for the future of the club and if we are weaker so what they have still done what they feel is right for the club longterm. What 2 riders? Andersen has signed for Swindon on loan, Batch has to be signed full time. What legal route? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluPanther Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Is the situation that Swindon might have to wait until March 1st? then the two riders can go out on loan.If refused Swindon can take the legal route which to be honest Peterborough haven't a prayer.Its the riders i feel sorry for as not knowing must be a hindrance to them.If Swindon lose out so be it ,i think Patch/Rosco have done the right thing for the future of the club and if we are weaker so what they have still done what they feel is right for the club longterm. What are you on about ? ? ? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC2 Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Batch has to be signed full time. No, he doesn't. Don't think the BSPA or Peterborough could do anything if Swindon just sign him without buying him, without risking a court case that they would lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.