Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Broxi

Matt Gilks

33 posts in this topic

Sun saying he's set to leave before the window closes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shame.

Good keeper and seems like a well liked guy in the dressing room, unfortunately for him Wes is a really good keeper. 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, PRW. said:

Shame.

Good keeper and seems like a well liked guy in the dressing room, unfortunately for him Wes is a really good keeper. 

Not according to some on here he's not :lol:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Difficult to keep two good goalies happy at a club,if he leaves then he'll my best wishes and thanks for saving us from another mauling at Hampden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like him but Wes would be my first choice. Glad he joined though as I think Foderingham's upped his game since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good back up be a shame to see him go but don't blame him 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck to him if he does move on, but I hope we don't let him go for nothing or worse still offer him a payoff then go and spend money on his replacement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck to him. Hopefully decided he doesn't want to be a back up keeper anymore as he's too good to spend the rest of his career sitting on the bench and being fed scraps. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many saying it's a shame he's leaving and I agree. But more shame on those who read The Sun. :depressed:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shame to see him go, seemed like a big character in the squad. 

Read somewhere he became quite close with McKay and he's been training with him in the gym to bulk him up a bit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bid accepted for the port vale keeper we have triggered his release clause so looks like Gilks is gone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Pearson83 said:

Bid accepted for the port vale keeper we have triggered his release clause so looks like Gilks is gone. 

Wit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, pcbear said:

Wit?

#Rangers have had a £250,000 bid for Port Vale keeper Jak Alnwick accepted, thus triggering his release clause ( that's from Stewart weir on twitter he's a jurno but he's ok and one of us ) 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where's he going?

Tell me we're not just letting him go for free to find a club while we spend money bringing in a replacement sub keeper?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Pearson83 said:

#Rangers have had a £250,000 bid for Port Vale keeper Jak Alnwick accepted, thus triggering his release clause ( that's from Stewart weir on twitter he's a jurno but he's ok and one of us ) 

Ah gotcha, ex Newcastle kid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wish Gilks all the best and will keep an eye out for him in the future a model pro and seems a good character 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MasterD said:

Where's he going?

Tell me we're not just letting him go for free to find a club while we spend money bringing in a replacement sub keeper?

Wigan, haven't seen any mention of a fee either which is shite. Is it right to say we've yet to receive a fee for any of the players we've allowed to leave the club?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Pearson83 said:

#Rangers have had a £250,000 bid for Port Vale keeper Jak Alnwick accepted, thus triggering his release clause ( that's from Stewart weir on twitter he's a jurno but he's ok and one of us ) 

Wasn't that boy tipped to be NUFC #1?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Gilks is under contract then surely we'll be due some sort of fee?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gaz52 said:

If Gilks is under contract then surely we'll be due some sort of fee?

£3m from Chelsea, you heard it here first :lol:

I hope we get enough to cover the signing of the new lad.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Gaz52 said:

If Gilks is under contract then surely we'll be due some sort of fee?

I would hope so, good goalie and model pro.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BlueThunder said:

£3m from Chelsea, you heard it here first :lol:

I hope we get enough to cover the signing of the new lad.

Well I don't think we'd be spending money unless we were 100% we can afford to do it, well you'd hope so anyway :lol: 

I'm going to wait and see what happens from now until the end of the window before I moan again but I'm hoping there's another 1 or 2 still to come and at least one of them being a striker!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, MasterD said:

Where's he going?

Tell me we're not just letting him go for free to find a club while we spend money bringing in a replacement sub keeper?

Hope you're right much as I got pissed off with McGregor, Bell etc going for free to 'better their careers' bollocks to that! Wigan aren't shy of a few bob so would want a fee or at the very very least the 250k to cover signing alnwick 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Lloyd72 said:

Wigan, haven't seen any mention of a fee either which is shite. Is it right to say we've yet to receive a fee for any of the players we've allowed to leave the club?

Lewis McLeod to Brentford.

The players that leave for free may not have found teams, if we held onto them to get a transfer fee. Clubs just signed them because they were costing them nothing. I'd also bet that most of them didn't get a 'Signing On Fee' either, or just a few grand at the most. 

Do you reckon we would've got a fee for Barton, if we'd held onto him? If we did, him and his agent would probably want most of the fee anyway, plus he'd be still getting paid while he was here, meaning that it would've cost us more holding onto him, for a fee, than just letting him go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0