Didn't find anything about him having a trial at Stevenage, from what I gathered he signed straight from the academy. The two lads this summer appear to be a similar situation to Reynolds (at least the clubs don't seem to mention signing off the back of a trial), but playing at a level above.

Although I completely agree that we handled him terribly, I find it more likely that the the club took and managed a gamble poorly, with it not paying off, instead of us colluding with some agency.

Bush wrote:Two year deal for a parks player. Yes I find that deal dodgy. Alan Bryant you can say stuff about Flynny but you won’t find anywhere I accused him of anything. Just more distraction tactics from you.

Why didn’t he sign for Northampton, gillingham or Colchester when the Chairman was telling everyone in the club we were gonna make 500k off him in January. Who fucked up alan? Why didn’t we scout him? Why did the manager give up on him after a few months? Why was he moved to the most inappropriate club in the conference? How come you were on here in jan telling people he didn’t work hard enough? What’s the real story Alan? Who got paid from this transfer to Dagenham?

So you find the deal dodgy , but do not say who was benefited from it ? Are you therefore saying Flynn is signing players that he does not want?
So who benefited financially from this deal. You genuinely seem to hate our football club, but back up very little. Lamar Reynolds is not the first signing to not work out at a club, and I am sure he won't be the last.
Dodgiest deal in the clubs history you say?
Who benefited , care to enlighten us?

Alan G Bryant wrote:

Bush wrote:Two year deal for a parks player. Yes I find that deal dodgy. Alan Bryant you can say stuff about Flynny but you won’t find anywhere I accused him of anything. Just more distraction tactics from you.

Why didn’t he sign for Northampton, gillingham or Colchester when the Chairman was telling everyone in the club we were gonna make 500k off him in January. Who fucked up alan? Why didn’t we scout him? Why did the manager give up on him after a few months? Why was he moved to the most inappropriate club in the conference? How come you were on here in jan telling people he didn’t work hard enough? What’s the real story Alan? Who got paid from this transfer to Dagenham?

So you find the deal dodgy , but do not say who was benefited from it ? Are you therefore saying Flynn is signing players that he does not want?
So who benefited financially from this deal. You genuinely seem to hate our football club, but back up very little. Lamar Reynolds is not the first signing to not work out at a club, and I am sure he won't be the last.
Dodgiest deal in the clubs history you say?
Who benefited , care to enlighten us?

It may not be dodgy but the 2yr deal was. Butler, an exceptional player at our level...1yr deal.

Alan G Bryant wrote:

Bush wrote:Two year deal for a parks player. Yes I find that deal dodgy. Alan Bryant you can say stuff about Flynny but you won’t find anywhere I accused him of anything. Just more distraction tactics from you.

Why didn’t he sign for Northampton, gillingham or Colchester when the Chairman was telling everyone in the club we were gonna make 500k off him in January. Who fucked up alan? Why didn’t we scout him? Why did the manager give up on him after a few months? Why was he moved to the most inappropriate club in the conference? How come you were on here in jan telling people he didn’t work hard enough? What’s the real story Alan? Who got paid from this transfer to Dagenham?

So you find the deal dodgy , but do not say who was benefited from it ? Are you therefore saying Flynn is signing players that he does not want?
So who benefited financially from this deal. You genuinely seem to hate our football club, but back up very little. Lamar Reynolds is not the first signing to not work out at a club, and I am sure he won't be the last.
Dodgiest deal in the clubs history you say?
Who benefited , care to enlighten us?

No but as I have said many times before I hate having a agency be so close to our club at all levels. I hate the fact few years back under a different board and manager we missed out on a striker worth 1m now who was on trial but wasn’t even considered by the manager at the time because we lined up a player from his agency. I hate the fact we paid 19k to this agency and you were adamant it wasn’t all on amond. So are you saying we actually paid money to them for Reynolds? That’s crazy when you consider where he came from.

Down the years there has been a particularly nasty tactic used on this board. The names change, the latest incarnation being Alan Bryant, but that is a minor matter.

The tactic, now being used against Bush, is to take something that has been said, claim that something else was said and then shamelessly repeat the lie.

Bush it seems to me has been quite clear. He has said a two year contract for a trialist who happens to be on the books of an agency, who many of us think has an unhealthy relationship with the club, is dodgy.

Now it is quite proper that any poster can disagree with Bush. That any poster can be critical of Bush's view. However Bush has not called Mike Flynn a liar, nor has he accused Michael Flynn of being dishonest.

Not only has Alan Bryant made this allegation but notwithstanding that Bush has clarified that he has not said this Alan Bryant repeats his allegation.

Shameful little lies from a shameful little man.

Bush wrote:

Alan G Bryant wrote:

Bush wrote:Two year deal for a parks player. Yes I find that deal dodgy. Alan Bryant you can say stuff about Flynny but you won’t find anywhere I accused him of anything. Just more distraction tactics from you.

Why didn’t he sign for Northampton, gillingham or Colchester when the Chairman was telling everyone in the club we were gonna make 500k off him in January. Who fucked up alan? Why didn’t we scout him? Why did the manager give up on him after a few months? Why was he moved to the most inappropriate club in the conference? How come you were on here in jan telling people he didn’t work hard enough? What’s the real story Alan? Who got paid from this transfer to Dagenham?

So you find the deal dodgy , but do not say who was benefited from it ? Are you therefore saying Flynn is signing players that he does not want?
So who benefited financially from this deal. You genuinely seem to hate our football club, but back up very little. Lamar Reynolds is not the first signing to not work out at a club, and I am sure he won't be the last.
Dodgiest deal in the clubs history you say?
Who benefited , care to enlighten us?

No but as I have said many times before I hate having a agency be so close to our club at all levels. I hate the fact few years back under a different board and manager we missed out on a striker worth 1m now who was on trial but wasn’t even considered by the manager at the time because we lined up a player from his agency. I hate the fact we paid 19k to this agency and you were adamant it wasn’t all on amond. So are you saying we actually paid money to them for Reynolds? That’s crazy when you consider where he came from.

So why was it the dodgiest deal in our history? Who benefited? You seem reluctant to answer.

Alan G Bryant wrote:
So why was it the dodgiest deal in our history? Who benefited? You seem reluctant to answer.

Well Elite Management would seem to be the obvious answer to that one. The talentless Mr Ripley, I mean Reynolds for two. Who knows if there was a third man.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Alan G Bryant wrote:
So why was it the dodgiest deal in our history? Who benefited? You seem reluctant to answer.

Well Elite Management would seem to be the obvious answer to that one. The talentless Mr Ripley, I mean Reynolds for two. Who knows if there was a third man.

You seem reluctant to answer? How do you have the bare faced cheek to ask that? I have been asking you for a month to name the so called hysterical minority that you previously mentioned with no reply. It seems you like asking questions but you do not like answering them yourself. You are more than reluctant to answer that one.

Note - I did try to reply to the initial post but my iPad says only three embedded replies are allowed, hence the reply here.

What is more worrying is the fact that Flynn has said that he hasn't got time to "bring people on" which is why Reynolds was let go. That to me is a little worrying for the youngsters coming through the club - the insinuation is hit the ground running or you are out. This may work short term for MF but if we are going to be gambling on seasoned players then the club will continue to pay money to these agencies for players services and potentially tying these players to 2 year contracts. It also devalues the academy in my opinion.

Mr Figo wrote:What is more worrying is the fact that Flynn has said that he hasn't got time to "bring people on" which is why Reynolds was let go. That to me is a little worrying for the youngsters coming through the club - the insinuation is hit the ground running or you are out. This may work short term for MF but if we are going to be gambling on seasoned players then the club will continue to pay money to these agencies for players services and potentially tying these players to 2 year contracts. It also devalues the academy in my opinion.

County developing and selling on players via the academy and/or in the first team is literally the only way the club can be sustainable, and the failure to develop young players is pretty much my least favourite of all Mike Flynn's attributes as a manager.

Especially from late January onwards last season, safe in the division, unlikely to make the playoffs, in a bad run of form - why not give some of the kids experience? Instead we see Owen-Evans and Reynolds sent out on loan and then "sold"/released with sell on fees, and no sign of Touray, Foulston or anyone else at a time when they could learn their trade in competitive games without much pressure.

So short sighted.

SJG99 wrote:

Mr Figo wrote:What is more worrying is the fact that Flynn has said that he hasn't got time to "bring people on" which is why Reynolds was let go. That to me is a little worrying for the youngsters coming through the club - the insinuation is hit the ground running or you are out. This may work short term for MF but if we are going to be gambling on seasoned players then the club will continue to pay money to these agencies for players services and potentially tying these players to 2 year contracts. It also devalues the academy in my opinion.

County developing and selling on players via the academy and/or in the first team is literally the only way the club can be sustainable, and the failure to develop young players is pretty much my least favourite of all Mike Flynn's attributes as a manager.

Especially from late January onwards last season, safe in the division, unlikely to make the playoffs, in a bad run of form - why not give some of the kids experience? Instead we see Owen-Evans and Reynolds sent out on loan and then "sold"/released with sell on fees, and no sign of Touray, Foulston or anyone else at a time when they could learn their trade in competitive games without much pressure.

So short sighted.

Could agree more, especially when i seem to recall MF saying he wants to build a club and not just a team. Lastest comments seem to contradict that?

Vital minutes once we were confirmed safe went to players no longer at the club instead of two young academy boys. Real shame that. Didn’t get the reasoning behind it then and definitely still don’t get it.

Just imagine last 5 games foulston playing alongside Mickey D and O’Brien and tourey playing alongside amond. What vital experience they would get. A lot more than a loan to Gloucester or Tamworth etc there was a chance they could impress and that’s one less position this summer we needed to invest in.

"Dagenham & Redbridge from Sky Bet League Two outfit Newport County for an undisclosed fee"

There's no ambiguity there, it was an outright lie, so what else have we been lied to about?

I'm still annoyed Williams didn't get more of a chance instead of letting him go for free (for the sake of freeing up about £5000 in wages) while we had a host of useless strikers on the books.

Marky wrote:"Dagenham & Redbridge from Sky Bet League Two outfit Newport County for an undisclosed fee"

There's no ambiguity there, it was an outright lie, so what else have we been lied to about?

I'm still annoyed Williams didn't get more of a chance instead of letting him go for free (for the sake of freeing up about £5000 in wages) while we had a host of useless strikers on the books.

An outright lie by who? The club didn't report it as an undisclosed fee, the club just said that he signed a permanent deal with D & R

I wouldn't read much into the undisclosed fee. I highly doubt the club will see any money straight away from either deal. probably means the other clubs are taking on the players contracts. Strange that the press seem to be using the agents press release and not the clubs mind.