Accrington break gentlemans agreement

[WAP]

Orient and Cambridge fans will know what I'm on about but last night Accrington named Rommy Boco on their bench and then subbed him on in the second half in replace of Mingola.

We signed Boco earlier in the season as cover for Ben Davies, he made a few appearances but not enough to get a feel for how good he was, a few months later we mutually agreed a deal where we would let him out of his contract and sign for Accrington with a gentlemans agreement he wouldn't play against us.

We had similar agreements with Orient and Cambridge in which Atangana and Dunne would not feature and they showed the class and respect to follow that agreement. Accrington have really shown how tinpot they really are with this.

Paul Cook was furious before the game and reckons his friendship with Coleman will be affected by this.

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/f...ses-accrington-s-rommy-boco-actions-1-7262756

 

[Flaxman's Alibi]

So what you're saying is that we have a good ole' fashioned 'scouse off'?

"Hey! Hey! Hey! Hey! La!''

 

[Murphy]

Bollocks to it, if you don't want him to play against you don't let him go in the first place.

 

[WAP]

Bollocks to it, if you don't want him to play against you don't let him go in the first place.

We did Accrington a favour in the first place by allowing them to sign him without paying a fee. Both clubs come to an agreement and they break it.

 

[Cheese & Biscuits]

Didn't you win? What's the fuss about? Accrington have a small squad and a fixture backlog, I'm not surprised they broke an agreement.

 

[Murphy]

We did Accrington a favour in the first place by allowing them to sign him without paying a fee. Both clubs come to an agreement and they break it.

Do you expect a club chasing promotion to give a toss over that? Unless there's a stipulation in the deal that's written and binding you have no right to complain if you ask me.

 

[BeesKnees]

Accrington should put out their best team regardless of how bitter the opposition. Can't stand these deals done by big clubs that are effectively a way of harming your opposition when they play each other but allowing you to play against a weaker side.

 

[WAP]

Actually shocked at the response to this, going against a gentlemans agreement is no different to not following up on a bet or promise. If they can't keep an agreement they shouldn't be agreeing to one in the first place. I hope other clubs now see that John Coleman cannot be trusted.

Really hope Accrington come off the rails now.

 

[antn1.b]

I disagree. The other option would have been to have kept him and not played him all season to avoid having the potential of coming up against him. The way it was done enabled Accrington a free addition to thier fairly small squad, without the gentleman's agreement I'm sure we would have either kept him here or put him out on loan terms so we didn't have to face him. 9 times out of ten playing vs an ex player is fine but it's not worth the risk for a low wage player being allowed to leave on a free deal.
Simple solution to the lack of class shown by Accrington is to no longer deal with them.
Could have been a decent connection for them in years to come if we end up progressing through the leagues.

 

[ThisTinpotLeague]

I
Simple solution to the lack of class shown by Accrington is to no longer deal with them.
Could have been a decent connection for them in years to come if we end up progressing through the leagues.

Given that I spend most of my time here trying to look as arrogant as possible, I am astounded at how arrogant you manage to be here. You're an inspiration.

I must side with everyone else - you're being cry babies. You won and no one cares. Move on.

 

[hellogregory]

Bollocks to it, if you don't want him to play against you don't let him go in the first place.

This.

 

[antn1.b]

Thought I was being quite humble for a change.........

 

[George Reilly's Hairpiece]

We did Accrington a favour in the first place by allowing them to sign him without paying a fee. Both clubs come to an agreement and they break it.

Out of interest, what kind of fee would you have expected for him? Has he ever commanded a fee before?

 

[Grecian O'Grecian]

Actually shocked at the response to this, going against a gentlemans agreement is no different to not following up on a bet or promise. If they can't keep an agreement they shouldn't be agreeing to one in the first place. I hope other clubs now see that John Coleman cannot be trusted.

Really hope Accrington come off the rails now.

Get a bloody grip of yourself.

 

[antn1.b]

Out of interest, what kind of fee would you have expect for him? Has he ever commanded a fee before?

I think it's got more to do with not shooting ourselves In the foot this season than the money. The amount of supposedly bad players we have let go in the past that come back to play like messi for 90 minutes is quite high. As I've said above it probably would have been a case of looking for loan deals for all three players involved had it not been for the agreements to not face them this season.

 

[George Reilly's Hairpiece]

I think it's got more to do with not shooting ourselves In the foot this season than the money. The amount of supposedly bad players we have let go in the past that come back to play like messi for 90 minutes is quite high. As I've said above it probably would have been a case of looking for loan deals for all three players involved had it not been for the agreements to not face them this season.

Then how are you doing them a favour? They sign a player that is clearly surplus to requirement, saving you the wages and the hassle of trying to find a loan move ,which might never materialise. Win/win and you won when you played them.

 

[hellogregory]

If he wasn't good enough for your first team, and your management know first hand that the player isn't as good as his players, why wouldn't he want him to play against you?

In Spain, clubs allow their own loaned out players to play against them. For example the other day Atletico allowed Siqueira to play against them for Valencia. Barcelona also allowed Halilovic to play against them for Sporting. These are just 2 examples.

 

[shoddycollins]

This has been said anyway bit since you won, why does it really matter?

Football isn't played by men with handlebar moustaches, pantaloons and old school ties anymore, it's dog eat dog. Accrington broke no contract, and knowing Coleman he probably intended to play him all along to irritate Pompey... Which didn't work out for him, what's done is done.

 

[Cheese & Biscuits]

This has been said anyway bit since you won, why does it really matter?

Football isn't played by men with handlebar moustaches, pantaloons and old school ties anymore, it's dog eat dog. Accrington broke no contract, and knowing Coleman he probably intended to play him all along to irritate Pompey... Which didn't work out for him, what's done is done.

But, but, but, Portsmouth are massive and Accrington would have benefited from the future England internationals they would have loaned them in season's to come. They've well and truly shot themselves in their imaginary foot.

 

[That Fat Centre Half]

There is a reason it's a "gentlemens agreement" rather than a formalised one. And that's because such an agreement for a player you don't own is actually a pretty shady way of doing business.

Personally think it's pretty good Accrington haven't gone along with such dubious practices.

 

[jacobncfc]

An agreement like that shouldn't even be allowed when it's a permanent transfer, gentlemanly or not.

 

[jacobncfc]

This has been said anyway bit since you won, why does it really matter?

Football isn't played by men with handlebar moustaches, pantaloons and old school ties anymore, it's dog eat dog. Accrington broke no contract, and knowing Coleman he probably intended to play him all along to irritate Pompey... Which didn't work out for him, what's done is done.

It's not an option to stop a loan player appearing against you anywhere else in Europe as far as I know.

 

[Brox]

If he wasn't good enough for your first team, and your management know first hand that the player isn't as good as his players, why wouldn't he want him to play against you?

In Spain, clubs allow their own loaned out players to play against them. For example the other day Atletico allowed Siqueira to play against them for Valencia. Barcelona also allowed Halilovic to play against them for Sporting. These are just 2 examples.

I know 99% of the time nothing dodgy takes place but did you see that Ajax keeper on loan at another Dutch side fuck up in the 90th minute gifting Ajax the win sometime last year?

As for this Accrington/Portsmouth issue, I think it shows Accrington lack class, not surprised as Coleman's always been a c***, imagine if it was the other way round, he'd be crying like a bitch. Regardless of whether they've "done wrong" they should have stuck to their word.

 

[jacobncfc]

As for this Accrington/Portsmouth issue, I think it shows Accrington lack class, not surprised as Coleman's always been a c***, imagine if it was the other way round, he'd be crying like a bitch. Regardless of whether they've "done wrong" they should have stuck to their word.

They probably should having given their word, but breaking such a stupid agreement is no worse than Cook/Portsmouth taking the piss and making it in the first place. Two wrongs and all that.

 

[Ban Fat Stan]

Imagine if Pompey were ever in a position where they contractually owed people money but broke that. Not that has happened I don't think.

So going back over a handshake who really cares, judging by the responses fair play Accrington

 

[ThisTinpotLeague]

I think it's got more to do with not shooting ourselves In the foot this season than the money.

Good to see the club learning lessons from the past then.

 

[TommoCUFC]

I think us and Orient are the ones that should be most annoyed really (especially us, as we lost the game we weren't allowed our ex-Pompey player)

 

[Deepcut Cobbler]

You don't have a gentlemen's agreement for Rickaaaaay Holmes do you?
No? Happy with that...

 

[AboveWater]

surprised at a few of the comments on here, i dunno if people have missed the point or if i feel different to the OP, but i just thought it lacked class thats it, end of. oh well. Don't really care bocco aint all that anyway, and not bothered about him playing against us, just gamesmanship.

Any of you lot talking about our former financial problems can jog on anyway, the fans have put this right as best as possible and shouldn't be the ones facing flak for that.

 

[EricSabin]

The only mistake here is thinking John Coleman was a gentleman.