Conor Gallagher - Going to Athletico (p81)

BR7_addick said:

Had a bit of ITK on Taylor the other day as you may of seen on that thread, hope it wasn’t true.  

But unfortunately I have a bit of insider info on Conor, and it isn’t good, been told he’s heading to Swansea.  I promise no bull shit, just what I’ve been told by what I believe to be reliable.

Leeds_Addick said:

Ideally he does really well but we finish above Swansea

JamesSeed said:

PaddyP17 said:

colthe3rd said:

Sage said:

colthe3rd said:

Sage said:

colthe3rd said:

Sage said:

colthe3rd said:

Sage said:

Conor 100% did not instigate this, he was more than happy to stay and loved his time here.

I'll ask this again. How do you know this for a fact?

Because I do. I‘m not prepared to say how exactly, but in time you will see or hear it from Bowyer and Gallen, whenever they get asked. 

Let’s just say I know for fact, the same way you know for a fact that today is Wednesday. 

But yesterday you had no idea if this rumour was true or not and today you know the ins and outs of it? Starting to think you might not know what day of the week it is.

😂 you’re joking, right?

Yesterday I learnt the same as everyone else that this was happening. If you look at my comments over the last couple of days, I said that Gallen’s response didn’t sit right, I said that if he goes it’s rubbish because what can he learn elsewhere that he wouldn’t be able to here.

Last week I clearly stated that he was staying and the stories from The Sun and Mail were rubbish. And they were at that time. Things change in football, but that wasn’t Conor’s doing.

It’s early afternoon on Wednesday, in case you didn’t know, lots of conversations can happen at any time. Since the news came around yesterday, I’ve had one of those many conversations and can categorically say, for a fact, that Conor did not instigate this.

You’re more than entitled to question things, the same way I have said the same to Doucher when he says things without any statement or substance, such as the Field injury situation which he was wrong about, but then he gets very sarcastic and defensive straight after at times. On this occasion, I’ve said I’m not prepared to say how I know, but in time you will see or hear it from Bowyer and Gallen. It’s now you who has been sarcastic and defensive because I didn’t give you an insightful answer as to how I know 100%.

I'm not going to believe some random person on the internet just because they said so, that's why I'm getting defensive. I have a problem with people who state things as a fact without backing them up. 

As I said, you’re entitled to ask the question, but I’m not prepared to say who I spoke to or any personal details as to how I know for a fact. Do you go and say the same or have the same attitude when others on here who have information but aren’t prepared to explain or expose how they know on a public forum for the whole world to see?

If you look through my previous comments on here, over a long period of time, I am not some WUM or say things for the sake of it. I’ve said I know it for a fact, and that you will see or hear it for yourself in time by people at the club.

It should also be quite obvious anyway with the reaction from people at the club. Tracey Leaburn, Matt Southall, the players, all of them have said on social media how he gave his all and wishes him luck. Do you think that would be the case if he instigated this move? But I know because I’ve been told, he was happy here and happy to stay, this move or what’s happened did not come from Conor. 

Actually yes I do say the same for here or any other person/publication/website that states something without backing it up. It's a bit like when a tabloid runs an article on someone and then follows it with "a source close to X said..." followed by a load of bollocks they've just made up. You're well within your right to post anything you like and I'm well within mine to question it. 

Okay cool man, to go back to your initial questioning of Sage as to the instigation of the recall, I'll back him up and go a tad further. My source is mentioned, in a roundabout manner, here. 

And as has been said before, Sage's track record is good. I'm inclined to believe him.

With Sage it's not a question of believing him, it's a question of trusting him. He's never going to put anything on here that he doesn't think is true. He's got a very good track record with this stuff @colthe3rd. But of course when he's posting something he believes to be true you can take a different view, hopefully without  getting on his case unnecessarily.

DoctorCharlton said:

Doesn’t even look happy signing the dotted line.

ricky_otto said:

Would be Ironic and slightly satisfying if got a hamstring injury in his first game and was unable to play again this season. (not that I wish him an injury - it’s more directed at Chelsea and Swansea).

Good luck to him was a pleasure watching him in a Charlton shirt. Hopefully his replacement Emmanuel Frimpong can be just as good. 

Ben18 said:

Not directly Conor related, but a dig at Chelsea. And nothing new either.

Chelsea have 26 players out on loan at the moment. More than half of those are over 23 years old

Jamal Blackman - Vitesse - 25 years old
Matt Miazga - Reading - 24 years old
Baba Rahman - Mallorca - 25 years old
Davide Zappacosta - Roma - 27 years old
Tiemoue Bakayoko - Monaco - 25 years old
Lewis Baker - Fortuna Dusseldorf - 24 years old
Danny Drinkwater - Aston Villa - 28 years old
Kenedy - Getafe - 23 years old
Victor Moses - Fenerbahce - 29 years old
Charley Musonda - Vitesse - 23 years old
Nathan - Atletico Mineiro - 23 years old
Danilo Pantic - Fehevar - 23 years old
Mario Pasalic - Atalanta - 24 years old
Izzy Brown - Luton - 23 years old
Lucas Piazon - Rio Ave - 25 years old

They are stockpiling players and treating them as commodities.

There should be a limit on loaning out players over the age of 23. Maybe 2 per season

Players over 23, who don't make your 25 man squad, should be either released (paid up) or sold via tribunal.

Covered End said:

The Chelsea loans is a business who loans out more players than Chelsea ?

se9addick said:

Rufus is a dogs name said:

Confirmation that the main reason for the recall appears to be down to money, in that Swansea have offered a loan fee as well a bigger contribution to his wages.

Interesting also that when asked why we could not pay his wages, appears he is on a fair whack which would easily make him a top earner at Charlton!

https://twitter.com/RichCawleySLP/status/1217418458327126017?s=19

https://twitter.com/RichCawleySLP/status/1217418783029153794?s=19

So, provided we now have some money, let’s pay it for the next four months (what would that be, £500K in salary and then maybe the same again as a fee?). He’s the best bloody player we have so no issues with him being top paid player, especially as it’s not as though it would break the wage structure as it’s a loan rather than permanent deal.