Transfer News, Gossip & Speculation Transfer Rumours Thread 2023-24

[CMRandall92]

Ultimately if they don't want to play for us/the Amigos anymore then best to let them go and get someone in who does want to play.

Didn't someone say the NL has already made concessions that we could sign contracts, rather than non-contract, players up to the 16?

My understanding is we can fill the remaining spots with non-contracts.
So 2 currently, hence we have to keep the contracted players.

Should we lose more I believe we'd have to fill them with others on a non-contract week to week basis. We can not offer contracts. Period.

Essentially we're not fit to fulfill fixtures now and that will only be more concrete if more leave.

Also who's going to want to play for us that's good enough at this level on a non-contract basis week-to-week knowing they may not get paid?

The above is my understanding, but feel free to correct me anyone if I'm wrong

 

[kentblues]

Ultimately if they don't want to play for us/the Amigos anymore then best to let them go and get someone in who does want to play.

Didn't someone say the NL has already made concessions that we could sign contracts, rather than non-contract, players up to the 16?

Unfortunately I think the idea we could sign people on contract (rather than non-contract terms) up to a squad of 16 was more due to not 100% understanding the rule, rather the the NL giving us special dispensation. Happy to be corrected.

 

[kentblues]

Just seen this on BBC Sports website

Cardiff are currently under an EFL transfer embargo after they defaulted on the initial payment of the £15m transfer fee for the late Emiliano Sala.

However under the embargo, which was recently reduced to January 2024, the club is still permitted to sign players on free transfers.

Is NL embargo different to EFL?

It would appear so. Although that sanction is around a very specific issue and hence the EFL may have concluded a limited embargo was more appropriate. Our embargo is “full fat”…

 

[Holy Joe]

Unfortunately I think the idea we could sign people on contract (rather than non-contract terms) up to a squad of 16 was more due to not 100% understanding the rule, rather the the NL giving us special dispensation. Happy to be corrected.

Maybe, there's too many posts on here for me to search through to see who posted it and why they thought we could sign contracted players upto 16. I agree rules say only non contract players can sign, but that seems pretty harsh at NL level, maybe a few years ago when league was part time that was ok or for NLS and NLN again might be appropriate, but doesn't seem like it enables a team to maintain a squad of 16 in the main national League which I think is the spirit of the rules.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Just seen this on BBC Sports website

Cardiff are currently under an EFL transfer embargo after they defaulted on the initial payment of the £15m transfer fee for the late Emiliano Sala.

However under the embargo, which was recently reduced to January 2024, the club is still permitted to sign players on free transfers.

Is NL embargo different to EFL?

Yes.

 

[kentblues]

Maybe, there's too many posts on here for me to search through to see who posted it and why they thought we could sign contracted players upto 16. I agree rules say only non contract players can sign, but that seems pretty harsh at NL level, maybe a few years ago when league was part time that was ok or for NLS and NLN again might be appropriate, but doesn't seem like it enables a team to maintain a squad of 16 in the main national League which I think is the spirit of the rules.

We it does because at this level there are players who will sign on a non-contract basis if they don't have a club. They might not be any good but that's our problem. Better playing and in the shop window than clubless... and there is no NL transfer window and even if there were as out of contract it wouldn't matter?

 

[Holy Joe]

We it does because at this level there are players who will sign on a non-contract basis if they don't have a club. They might not be any good but that's our problem. Better playing and in the shop window than clubless... and there is no NL transfer window and even if there were as out of contract it wouldn't matter?

I guess my point is players that sign at this level on a non contract basis will likely be not of the normal standard for NL as if they were they should be able to command a full contract at another NL club. Whereas a few years ago when the NL was part-time then playing non-contract was probably not as much as a differing factor. It might be the rules haven't kept up with the development of clubs in the NL.

 

[Boreham Blue]

I'm assuming that we can bring in loans as they will be non-contract? Hopefully the football department have got a loan whiteboard.

 

[Streaky]

I'm assuming that we can bring in loans as they will be non-contract? Hopefully the football department have got a loan whiteboard.

I would presume not, we arent even allowed trialists (which does seem unfair).

 

[CMRandall92]

I'm assuming that we can bring in loans as they will be non-contract? Hopefully the football department have got a loan whiteboard.

You assume wrong. A loan is a contract between two clubs. Loans also a no go, otherwise we’d have had a few by now

 

[kentblues]

I guess my point is players that sign at this level on a non contract basis will likely be not of the normal standard for NL as if they were they should be able to command a full contract at another NL club. Whereas a few years ago when the NL was part-time then playing non-contract was probably not as much as a differing factor. It might be the rules haven't kept up with the development of clubs in the NL.

I think the idea is that you can't enter to enter any more longer term (i.e. on contract) commitments whilst plainly not being able to service the ones you have. And players on a non-contract basis are available. Beyond that it's hard cheese.

 

[Holy Joe]

Unfortunately I think the idea we could sign people on contract (rather than non-contract terms) up to a squad of 16 was more due to not 100% understanding the rule, rather the the NL giving us special dispensation. Happy to be corrected.

Here's what I was referring to. No idea if correct. Some subsequent posts thought Sandat was one player, and probably Bridge the other, although some confusion what they signed and if they could actually play!!!!

Hear a couple of players have signed new deals as the National league allowed us to get a couple of contracts done to meet the minimum squad requirements..

 

[fbm]

Here's what I was referring to. No idea if correct. Some subsequent posts thought Sandat was one player, and probably Bridge the other, although some confusion what they signed and if they could actually play!!!!

I think it was Sandat and Ralph

 

[BoyWonder2]

Ryan Boot has departed Solihull Moors…

 

[RHB]

Ryan Boot has departed Solihull Moors…

Is that good or bad?

 

[Andy_S]

Ryan Boot has departed Solihull Moors…

Phil was interested in him before Arnie signed I believe?

 

[flangejackrabbit]

Harry Bunn is available too, now where are Whackett and Buzzard?

 

[Supershrimper]

Has Dallas signed for anyone or even featured in anyone's pre-season? Seems strange someone that scored 32 in 77 for Solihull Moors and then 6 in 12 hasn't pitched up anywhere yet

 

[damien]

You wait all this stress we have endured and gone through this summer I bet that we will be purchased by mid next week, all conditions satisfied for NL entry, 5 new signings all of good quality will be announced and then after our own pre season of august, we will be up to speed and be competing for play off spots by November.

This time next year Rodney

 

[meerkat54]

Has Dallas signed for anyone or even featured in anyone's pre-season? Seems strange someone that scored 32 in 77 for Solihull Moors and then 6 in 12 hasn't pitched up anywhere yet

I’ve been following Dallas all summer. I’m not a stalker before anybody says.
I can’t believe he hasn’t signed for anybody else. I can only think someone connected to the club is paying him a retainer.
Wouldn’t it be great that he was announced as our first signing, under new ownership.
Well it’s only my take on things, I’m not ITK.