Krystian Bielik

[ram59]

Bielik may not be an attacking player himself, but I felt that he brought out the best in Joziak last season and allowed him to play more on the front foot.

I think we'd all like to see Joziak either running at or behind defenders from Bielik's accurate passes.

[Adslegend]

 

 

 

[B4ev6is]

27 minutes ago, Adslegend said:

 

 

 

We have thank arsenal for them telling us dont worry about it tell next year.

[Wolfie20]

On 04/10/2021 at 15:44, Sparkle said:

True yet young clough would have purchased a whole team for Mac one to be successful with for the same expenditure 

Maybe he should have just done the recruitment and not the managing?

[Abu Derby]

He’ll be gone next year, not wanting to ply his trade in League One. Ditto Jozwiak. 

[B4ev6is]

12 minutes ago, Abu Derby said:

He’ll be gone next year, not wanting to ply his trade in League One. Ditto Jozwiak. 

Not having that talk here

Derby will stay up or go down fighting.

[cannable]

On 04/10/2021 at 22:47, GenBr said:

Why would either play give us more of a cutting edge? Bielik is a fantastic player who may contribute a couple of goals, but he is ultimately defensive in nature.

And whilst i love Kazim he has never been profilic either for us or anybody else. 

It’s the influence their reintroduction can have on everybody else though. 

With Bielik back you can tweak the midfield and let him do all of Shinnie’s job and some of Bird’s (cropping people and progressing the ball). 

You can push whichever of the latter pair you decide to play ten/twenty yards further up the pitch and also have Ravel stay further up the pitch rather than dropping deep. 

Then with everybody further up the pitch you’d also have them playing off Kazim. 
 

 

You’d probably have to keep a full-back back though, I suppose, or even with Bielik sitting you’re gonna have the back two exposed.

[DCFC Kicks]

1 hour ago, Adslegend said:

 

 

 

Not sure I'd call it as "classy"

They're probably just trying to help us avoid liquidation. If we get liquidated there's a chance they might not get the full amount owed.

[B4ev6is]

10 minutes ago, DCFC Kicks said:

Not sure I'd call it as "classy"

They're probably just trying to help us avoid liquidation. If we get liquidated there's a chance they might not get the full amount owed.

I call them helping us out they did not have defar that amount they could have said we want that money this month but they have not.

[Chris_Martin]

12 hours ago, B4ev6is said:

I call them helping us out they did not have defar that amount they could have said we want that money this month but they have not.

but if we get liquidated, Arsenal probably won't get paid, so it's better for them to defer it. 

[Crewton]

1 hour ago, Chris_Martin said:

but if we get liquidated, Arsenal probably won't get paid, so it's better for them to defer it. 

Reading the EFL rules, if a club goes out of business, academy players registrations are released immediately (they effectively become free agents) but all other players registrations revert to the EFL. They can arrange transfer of individual players and pay the fees received on to any club owed transfer fees for that player. Excess fees otherwise are shared pro-rata to any clubs owed money. So, if that's correct, Arsenal would still possibly get their money, or at least a good part of it. 

[Sparkle]

1 minute ago, Crewton said:

Reading the EFL rules, if a club goes out of business, academy players registrations are released immediately (they effectively become free agents) but all other players registrations revert to the EFL. They can arrange transfer of individual players and pay the fees received on to any club owed transfer fees for that player. Excess fees otherwise are shared pro-rata to any clubs owed money. So, if that's correct, Arsenal would still possibly get their money, or at least a good part of it. 

Players can still refuse to sign for other clubs though 

[Crewton]

6 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

Players can still refuse to sign for other clubs though 

True, but any club signing them would be required to pay compensation if the player was under contract - it's another Football Creditor protection measure. 

Given that most of what we owe other clubs is for Bielik and Joswiak, they'd have a fighting chance of getting their money, unless the players are sold by the Administrators to keep the club going beforehand of course. 

[Chris_Martin]

19 minutes ago, Crewton said:

Reading the EFL rules, if a club goes out of business, academy players registrations are released immediately (they effectively become free agents) but all other players registrations revert to the EFL. They can arrange transfer of individual players and pay the fees received on to any club owed transfer fees for that player. Excess fees otherwise are shared pro-rata to any clubs owed money. So, if that's correct, Arsenal would still possibly get their money, or at least a good part of it. 

its more risky for Arsenal that way though

[Boycie]

Surely there must be a rule where you can play him and omit another fit player from the squad?

[Sparkle]

9 minutes ago, Crewton said:

True, but any club signing them would be required to pay compensation if the player was under contract - it's another Football Creditor protection measure. 

Given that most of what we owe other clubs is for Bielik and Joswiak, they'd have a fighting chance of getting their money, unless the players are sold by the Administrators to keep the club going beforehand of course. 

We haven’t got many players under contract after this season though have we? So in January they are at the cheapest they ever would be to buy generally 

[Crewton]

23 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

We haven’t got many players under contract after this season though have we? So in January they are at the cheapest they ever would be to buy generally 

No, but under 24s attract compensation regardless. 

[ilkleyram]

14 hours ago, DCFC Kicks said:

Not sure I'd call it as "classy"

They're probably just trying to help us avoid liquidation. If we get liquidated there's a chance they might not get the full amount owed.

Well they didn't have to do it.  And considering that we have voluntarily had more practical help from Arsenal in the past 48 hours than from any other organisation including the EFL, FA and PL, I would call it classy.  Perhaps some of those other organisations could now stand up and help a member in difficulty, instead of making it harder

[DCFC Kicks]

2 hours ago, Crewton said:

Reading the EFL rules, if a club goes out of business, academy players registrations are released immediately (they effectively become free agents) but all other players registrations revert to the EFL. They can arrange transfer of individual players and pay the fees received on to any club owed transfer fees for that player. Excess fees otherwise are shared pro-rata to any clubs owed money. So, if that's correct, Arsenal would still possibly get their money, or at least a good part of it. 

That's the key point, they're not desperate for the £8m. It's in there interest overall to defer, not "classy"

[DCFC Kicks]

1 hour ago, ilkleyram said:

Well they didn't have to do it.  And considering that we have voluntarily had more practical help from Arsenal in the past 48 hours than from any other organisation including the EFL, FA and PL, I would call it classy.  Perhaps some of those other organisations could now stand up and help a member in difficulty, instead of making it harder

I know they didn't have to do it. I originally said why I think they deferred it, it's in Arsenal's interest overall to not demand it straight away, as they have a better chance of getting the full pay if we avoid going bust, and they don't need the £8m straight away. Football is incredibly selfish these days, everyone's only looking out for themselves.