| cook extension official ✅ on 14:42 - May 14 with 1942 views | Northernr |
One thing that isn't really being discussed here atm is this injury.
There seems to be an assumption it'll have cleared up by August. Will it? It's a pretty notorious injury this one. We saw what happened and what he looked like when he tried to come back in the spring.
Love to be wrong but I think, sadly, this could be a chunk of salary being eaten up by somebody who won't play much next season.
Pleased he's staying for the experience and leadership, which as previously said is bleeding out of this squad this summer, but concerned that we start next season with two main, high earning centre backs neither of whom are going to play much - JCS, Cook.
I think it was pretty obvious anyway, even before the "my captor's are treating me well" statement that the club probably wouldn't have wanted to do this deal.
And, as you would expect, completely agree with those above rolling their eyes that we can, as it turns out, give out contract details when it suits us. |  | |  |
| cook extension official ✅ on 14:56 - May 14 with 1823 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| cook extension official ✅ on 14:42 - May 14 by Northernr |
One thing that isn't really being discussed here atm is this injury.
There seems to be an assumption it'll have cleared up by August. Will it? It's a pretty notorious injury this one. We saw what happened and what he looked like when he tried to come back in the spring.
Love to be wrong but I think, sadly, this could be a chunk of salary being eaten up by somebody who won't play much next season.
Pleased he's staying for the experience and leadership, which as previously said is bleeding out of this squad this summer, but concerned that we start next season with two main, high earning centre backs neither of whom are going to play much - JCS, Cook.
I think it was pretty obvious anyway, even before the "my captor's are treating me well" statement that the club probably wouldn't have wanted to do this deal.
And, as you would expect, completely agree with those above rolling their eyes that we can, as it turns out, give out contract details when it suits us. |
I understand and share your concerns about going into the new season with 2 fragile centre backs. However, as I stated moments ago if the club didn't want to do this deal then it could have achieved it by simply not allowing Steve to pass 60 games.
That all being said, Steve's a tough cookie and I expect him to make some contribution. I'm more concerned about JCS. He's barely featured since announcing a contract extension at Nourry's stage managed Fans Forum. [Post edited 15 May 0:36]
|  | | |
| cook extension official ✅ on 15:11 - May 14 with 1774 views | daveB |
| cook extension official ✅ on 14:56 - May 14 by Benny_the_Ball |
I understand and share your concerns about going into the new season with 2 fragile centre backs. However, as I stated moments ago if the club didn't want to do this deal then it could have achieved it by simply not allowing Steve to pass 60 games.
That all being said, Steve's a tough cookie and I expect him to make some contribution. I'm more concerned about JCS. He's barely featured since announcing a contract extension at Nourry's stage managed Fans Forum. [Post edited 15 May 0:36]
|
Kevin Gallen was saying in his podcast Cook triggered the new deal in february so it was always likely he was going to get the deal |  | | |
| cook extension official ✅ on 15:20 - May 14 with 1718 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| cook extension official ✅ on 15:11 - May 14 by daveB |
Kevin Gallen was saying in his podcast Cook triggered the new deal in february so it was always likely he was going to get the deal |
That's Kevin's opinion which he's entitled to of course but the facts say otherwise. As David Mc said to trigger a new deal Steve had to complete 60 matches over 2 seasons AND QPR retain its championship status. In the end, Steve completed 69 matches and QPR only confirmed its championship status in April. Clearly then, the new deal wasn't triggered in February. [Post edited 15 May 0:23]
| | | |
| cook extension official ✅ on 15:27 - May 14 with 1685 views | QPunkR |
| cook extension official ✅ on 14:56 - May 14 by Benny_the_Ball |
I understand and share your concerns about going into the new season with 2 fragile centre backs. However, as I stated moments ago if the club didn't want to do this deal then it could have achieved it by simply not allowing Steve to pass 60 games.
That all being said, Steve's a tough cookie and I expect him to make some contribution. I'm more concerned about JCS. He's barely featured since announcing a contract extension at Nourry's stage managed Fans Forum. [Post edited 15 May 0:36]
|
If so, doesn't that go some way to explaining the strained (broken) relationship between the CEO and the manager? If the Club (ie CEO) didn't want to trigger the extension but Martí was adamant he was going to play him anyway, given our sometimes cratering form, crocked defence and need to grind out results. |  |
| |
| cook extension official ✅ on 15:39 - May 14 with 1633 views | nix |
They're not Mystic Meg though. Maybe when he got here you wouldn't have expected Dunne to be turned into a RB and later for Morrison to be sidelined so much so they might've expected to play him less. It is disappointing we couldn't get him a bit cheaper this season. However he's been a big part of us staying up the last two seasons, so maybe worth every penny overall. |  | | |
| cook extension official ✅ on 15:44 - May 14 with 1602 views | eastside_r |
| cook extension official ✅ on 14:42 - May 14 by Northernr |
One thing that isn't really being discussed here atm is this injury.
There seems to be an assumption it'll have cleared up by August. Will it? It's a pretty notorious injury this one. We saw what happened and what he looked like when he tried to come back in the spring.
Love to be wrong but I think, sadly, this could be a chunk of salary being eaten up by somebody who won't play much next season.
Pleased he's staying for the experience and leadership, which as previously said is bleeding out of this squad this summer, but concerned that we start next season with two main, high earning centre backs neither of whom are going to play much - JCS, Cook.
I think it was pretty obvious anyway, even before the "my captor's are treating me well" statement that the club probably wouldn't have wanted to do this deal.
And, as you would expect, completely agree with those above rolling their eyes that we can, as it turns out, give out contract details when it suits us. |
Clive. I was wondering similar.
Perhaps did the player himself push to come back earlier than may have been advised, just so he could complete the requisite number of games to trigger the extension?
Even if that was the case, I wouldn’t be condemning the player. |  | | |
| cook extension official ✅ on 16:04 - May 14 with 1558 views | ed_83 |
| cook extension official ✅ on 14:39 - May 14 by Benny_the_Ball |
Great point that the micro analysts have missed. If the club didn't want to offer Cook a new deal they would've simply not selected him for 10 matches in order to avoid triggering the extension clause. Indeed, they were presented with the perfect opportunity when Steve injured his foot. None of us would've thought it unusual had Steve remained on the sidelines for a little longer. As it was, Steve looked like he was rushed back from that injury as his performances fell below his usual high standards for a few weeks. |
From looking at transfermarkt it seems like his 60th appearance for us was the Preston game he got injured in. Entirely possible that the club were happy to extend his contract at that point, but that things have changed in the last month or two. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| cook extension official ✅ on 16:10 - May 14 with 1540 views | QPR_Jim |
| cook extension official ✅ on 15:44 - May 14 by eastside_r |
Clive. I was wondering similar.
Perhaps did the player himself push to come back earlier than may have been advised, just so he could complete the requisite number of games to trigger the extension?
Even if that was the case, I wouldn’t be condemning the player. |
Other people will have a better recollection than me, I'm sure, but he came back against Millwall with 64mins (league game 58), played the full 90 in the win over Blackburn (league game 59), played the full 90 in the loss to Coventry (league game 60) then 84 mins in the 4-0 over Derby (league game 61) and I'm guessing would have played the full 90 if we weren't coasting.
Looking at the bench it looks like there were limited options with Fox and Edwards being relied upon and Ashby used to cover as well. So I wonder whether it was a case of playing him because we didn't have much else. In which case it's another cost of our poor injury record this season.
Anyway, it's been done to death, best we can hope for is a good recovery and a fit Cook next season. |  | | |
| cook extension official ✅ on 16:19 - May 14 with 1505 views | TheChef |
| cook extension official ✅ on 14:42 - May 14 by Northernr |
One thing that isn't really being discussed here atm is this injury.
There seems to be an assumption it'll have cleared up by August. Will it? It's a pretty notorious injury this one. We saw what happened and what he looked like when he tried to come back in the spring.
Love to be wrong but I think, sadly, this could be a chunk of salary being eaten up by somebody who won't play much next season.
Pleased he's staying for the experience and leadership, which as previously said is bleeding out of this squad this summer, but concerned that we start next season with two main, high earning centre backs neither of whom are going to play much - JCS, Cook.
I think it was pretty obvious anyway, even before the "my captor's are treating me well" statement that the club probably wouldn't have wanted to do this deal.
And, as you would expect, completely agree with those above rolling their eyes that we can, as it turns out, give out contract details when it suits us. |
I'm hoping modern professional sport science is brilliant, but yeah doesn't plantar fasciitis take a while to heal, and can reoccur quite easily? |  |
| |
| cook extension official ✅ on 16:23 - May 14 with 1477 views | wombat |
| cook extension official ✅ on 16:19 - May 14 by TheChef |
I'm hoping modern professional sport science is brilliant, but yeah doesn't plantar fasciitis take a while to heal, and can reoccur quite easily? |
yep comes from over training , running etc . not sure how easy it is to diagnose over a teams call to our absent medcial chief either . |  |
| |
| cook extension official ✅ on 16:47 - May 14 with 1398 views | Nushnool |
| cook extension official ✅ on 15:20 - May 14 by Benny_the_Ball |
That's Kevin's opinion which he's entitled to of course but the facts say otherwise. As David Mc said to trigger a new deal Steve had to complete 60 matches over 2 seasons AND QPR retain its championship status. In the end, Steve completed 69 matches and QPR only confirmed its championship status in April. Clearly then, the new deal wasn't triggered in February. [Post edited 15 May 0:23]
|
If Cook passed 60 matches in February and did "his part" of the bargain to earn a new deal, then the only way QPR could have subsequently avoided giving him a new contract would have been to purposely get relegated. Which even by QPR's standards is a bit of a stretch. |  | | |
| cook extension official ✅ on 17:27 - May 14 with 1306 views | Mr_Beef |
| cook extension official ✅ on 15:20 - May 14 by Benny_the_Ball |
That's Kevin's opinion which he's entitled to of course but the facts say otherwise. As David Mc said to trigger a new deal Steve had to complete 60 matches over 2 seasons AND QPR retain its championship status. In the end, Steve completed 69 matches and QPR only confirmed its championship status in April. Clearly then, the new deal wasn't triggered in February. [Post edited 15 May 0:23]
|
Cook's 60th game was against Preston in December, so bar relegation effectively triggered then. [Post edited 14 May 17:28]
|  | | |
| cook extension official ✅ on 23:56 - May 14 with 1074 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| cook extension official ✅ on 16:47 - May 14 by Nushnool |
If Cook passed 60 matches in February and did "his part" of the bargain to earn a new deal, then the only way QPR could have subsequently avoided giving him a new contract would have been to purposely get relegated. Which even by QPR's standards is a bit of a stretch. |
QPR could easily have been relegated on merit, in which case the deal isn't done, irrespective of appearances. The deal could only be triggered once safety was assured so Kevin's point about the deal being done in February is incorrect. [Post edited 15 May 0:30]
| | | |
| cook extension official ✅ on 00:16 - May 15 with 1047 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| cook extension official ✅ on 16:04 - May 14 by ed_83 |
From looking at transfermarkt it seems like his 60th appearance for us was the Preston game he got injured in. Entirely possible that the club were happy to extend his contract at that point, but that things have changed in the last month or two. |
That's more plausible and would be typical of QPR's luck with injuries. [Post edited 15 May 0:17]
| | | |
| cook extension official ✅ on 00:26 - May 15 with 1031 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| cook extension official ✅ on 17:27 - May 14 by Mr_Beef |
Cook's 60th game was against Preston in December, so bar relegation effectively triggered then. [Post edited 14 May 17:28]
|
Nope. Contracts are a strict legal matter and there's no such thing as "effectively triggered". It's black and white. A clause is either triggered or it isn't and it wasn't triggered until championship safety was mathematically assured in April. | | | |
| cook extension official ✅ on 00:53 - May 15 with 1012 views | QPR_Jim |
| cook extension official ✅ on 16:04 - May 14 by ed_83 |
From looking at transfermarkt it seems like his 60th appearance for us was the Preston game he got injured in. Entirely possible that the club were happy to extend his contract at that point, but that things have changed in the last month or two. |
I appreciate this is being pedantic but the statement said league appearances, his overall appearances included 2 league cup games which is why I think it was triggered by playing him in the Coventry game and would explain why Gallen said Feb rather than Dec.
Looking at the teams for the games end of January early February, I don't think dropping him was an option as we were short of fit centre backs, especially when you had Dunne at RB with no decent cover and I think Edwards moving into CM on occasions to cover there as well. | | | |
| cook extension official ✅ on 05:39 - May 15 with 916 views | Mr_Beef |
| cook extension official ✅ on 00:26 - May 15 by Benny_the_Ball |
Nope. Contracts are a strict legal matter and there's no such thing as "effectively triggered". It's black and white. A clause is either triggered or it isn't and it wasn't triggered until championship safety was mathematically assured in April. |
Thanks! But if you'd looked up the meaning of the word "effectively" first then we could have been spared the pedantic explanation. | | | |
| cook extension official ✅ on 05:53 - May 15 with 903 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| cook extension official ✅ on 00:53 - May 15 by QPR_Jim |
I appreciate this is being pedantic but the statement said league appearances, his overall appearances included 2 league cup games which is why I think it was triggered by playing him in the Coventry game and would explain why Gallen said Feb rather than Dec.
Looking at the teams for the games end of January early February, I don't think dropping him was an option as we were short of fit centre backs, especially when you had Dunne at RB with no decent cover and I think Edwards moving into CM on occasions to cover there as well. |
Actually it's an important distinction because if you are correct then QPR could have avoided triggering an extension by not selecting Cook after he picked up the injury against Preston. Edwards mainly featured at CB (I think he only played CM once) and both Fox and Field have covered there. Whether the club would have had the balls to leave Cook out with the threat of relegation is another matter. | | | |
| cook extension official ✅ on 16:14 - May 15 with 672 views | ed_83 |
| cook extension official ✅ on 00:53 - May 15 by QPR_Jim |
I appreciate this is being pedantic but the statement said league appearances, his overall appearances included 2 league cup games which is why I think it was triggered by playing him in the Coventry game and would explain why Gallen said Feb rather than Dec.
Looking at the teams for the games end of January early February, I don't think dropping him was an option as we were short of fit centre backs, especially when you had Dunne at RB with no decent cover and I think Edwards moving into CM on occasions to cover there as well. |
Very fair point, happy to be corrected on that!
Agree with your second paragraph: it's entirely possible the club decided in Feb that it was worth triggering the extension in order to keep playing him and make sure we stayed up, but have rowed back a bit from that since. | | | |
| cook extension official ✅ on 16:31 - May 15 with 638 views | Rsole |
| cook extension official ✅ on 14:56 - May 14 by Benny_the_Ball |
I understand and share your concerns about going into the new season with 2 fragile centre backs. However, as I stated moments ago if the club didn't want to do this deal then it could have achieved it by simply not allowing Steve to pass 60 games.
That all being said, Steve's a tough cookie and I expect him to make some contribution. I'm more concerned about JCS. He's barely featured since announcing a contract extension at Nourry's stage managed Fans Forum. [Post edited 15 May 0:36]
|
I would probably add Morrison to the injury prone list of three centre backs, hence my earlier comments on cover.
Someone like Dunne (no, not you, Fox) would provide said cover but Jimmy probably won’t be staying now Cook’s been ‘baked in.’
So, to accommodate the inevitable injuries, we’ll need more defenders than we probably have budget for.
That means we won’t spend on other much needed upgrades - such as a tall, athletic, box to box, championship experienced, non injury prone midfielder that can chip in 10 goals a season.
I know…it’s just a dream isn’t it….pass the Port and Stilton whilst the gout is under control. |  |
| Those possessed by devils, try and keep them under control a bit, can't you ?
|
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
