Adam Eckersley

[DAVE1875]

What's happened with him? Literally heard nothing since he signed and he doesn't even have a profile on the updated first team page

(apologies if this has already been discussed and dissected)

[Hamish]

Think it was yesterday that it was posted that he would be in full training week after next.

[GlasgowHibee]

Seems like a bit of a pointless signing considering he's only contracted until January.

[.Sean.]

I'd completely forgotten we'd signed him.

[Billy Whizz]

Seems like a bit of a pointless signing considering he's only contracted until January.

Think we looked for left back coverage, once Calum Crane got injured. Meant we didn't have another natural left back on our books

[sambajustice]

Think we looked for left back coverage, once Calum Crane got injured. Meant we didn't have another natural left back on our books

So we signed an injured one to cover the injury??

Hibs class!! :-D

[Big_Franck]

Seems like a bit of a pointless signing considering he's only contracted until January.

It's definitely a strange one. We need cover at left back until January so we sign someone in August knowing he was unlikely to play until November. That's presuming we knew the situation with our new signings' fitness/injury, which I am starting to doubt.

Anier situation is similar. Why sign someone else on loan knowing it's going to take them a good while to get fit :confused:

[Beefster]

I'd completely forgotten we'd signed him.

I've been trying to forget without success so far.

[Mibbes Aye]

It's definitely a strange one. We need cover at left back until January so we sign someone in August knowing he was unlikely to play until November. That's presuming we knew the situation with our new signings' fitness/injury, which I am starting to doubt.

Anier situation is similar. Why sign someone else on loan knowing it's going to take them a good while to get fit :confused:

Devious plot by STF and Petrie.

They're only giving the injured boys half-pay for being sick and pocketing the rest.

Money-laundering folk ken whit's goan oan :agree:

[HappyHanlon]

Sure I read he was wanting to move to America and using us to get himself fit and get some game time.

[Forza Fred]

So we signed an injured one to cover the injury??

Hibs class!! :-D

I have raised this signing several times, as it made little sense to me to sign a player, who was already injured on a SHORT term deal, knowing he is leaving in January supposedly for the USA

Stubbs has my confidence, but this was completely puzzling, and perhaps points to a bigger problem when it comes to signings.

[Andy74]

I have raised this signing several times, as it made little sense to me to sign a player, who was already injured on a SHORT term deal, knowing he is leaving in January supposedly for the USA

Stubbs has my confidence, but this was completely puzzling, and perhaps points to a bigger problem when it comes to signings.

We had no pressing need and it was opportune. No big deal at low cost I'd imagine.

[J-C]

Sure I read he was wanting to move to America and using us to get himself fit and get some game time.


He'll be as fit as a double bass by the time he gets on the pitch.

[Forza Fred]

We had no pressing need and it was opportune. No big deal at low cost I'd imagine.

I don't know how much it costs for Eckersley, but I do know there is at least one post on this forum pitching for us to donate to the club.

I'm not sure it is best business practice to spend money on players who may never kick a ball in earnest for us.

Luxuries we can't afford and all that possibly.:confused:

[Brightside]

Im impressed that we are really having to dig deep to find ways to knock the club. All very positive.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Im impressed that we are really having to dig deep to find ways to knock the club. All very positive.

Any chance of explaining the positives of this signing to us mere mortals with less understanding of football than yourself?

[Brightside]

Any chance of explaining the positives of this signing to us mere mortals with less understanding of football than yourself?

Hopefully he will be available if and when required. At the moment even if fit it is doubtful he would get on the bench.
The understanding of football has little to do with it.
The need to always look for the negative in the club is much more disturbing though.

[JimBHibees]

I have raised this signing several times, as it made little sense to me to sign a player, who was already injured on a SHORT term deal, knowing he is leaving in January supposedly for the USA

Stubbs has my confidence, but this was completely puzzling, and perhaps points to a bigger problem when it comes to signings.

I am assuming the club thought he would be fit before he has done however who knows if he is fit in a couple of weeks he could still be back up or play if needed during November / December when quite a few games in a short period. Is it clear he is going to US as we may also get him for all of January also.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

The need to always look for the negative in the club is much more disturbing though.

Not sure why its a negative when people are questioning the wisdom of signing injured players on short term deals/loan but, I'm sure we'll cope.

[FranckSuzy]

Hopefully he will be available if and when required. At the moment even if fit it is doubtful he would get on the bench.
The understanding of football has little to do with it.
The need to always look for the negative in the club is much more disturbing though.

TBF, I don't think it's folk looking for negatives, they're/we're just trying to make sense of it. I'm struggling, if I'm honest, especially given the part in bold...

[Brightside]

TBF, I don't think it's folk looking for negatives, they're/we're just trying to make sense of it. I'm struggling, if I'm honest, especially given the part in bold...

An experienced backup if and when required and little or no cost. I honestly dont see the big deal.

[FranckSuzy]

An experienced backup if and when required and little or no cost. I honestly dont see the big deal.

As far as I can see, no-one's making a big deal out of it, just merely querying the wisdom of signing a player who is on a short-term deal and is injured. He'll not be any sort of back-up if he's not fit! :greengrin

[J-C]

An experienced backup if and when required and little or no cost. I honestly dont see the big deal.

I don't think he's here at no cost, even on a short term deal.

The only negative is having a so called cover player only here till January and as yet he'll not be fit to play till November, hardly cover. Would it not be better to offer him a pay per play deal, which allows his to keep his fitness up and also gives him money if he makes an appearance, at the moment money wasted.

[easty]

An experienced backup if and when required and little or no cost. I honestly dont see the big deal.

Except he's not been available if required, that's entirely the point.

It might not be a big deal, but it is a pertinent question, why did we sign some guy (an ex-Hearts prick to boot) to come in as cover on a short term deal even though he's not fit to play.

[Brightside]

I don't think he's here at no cost, even on a short term deal.

The only negative is having a so called cover player only here till January and as yet he'll not be fit to play till November, hardly cover. Would it not be better to offer him a pay per play deal, which allows his to keep his fitness up and also gives him money if he makes an appearance, at the moment money wasted.

How much is he gettgin paid?

[Brightside]

Except he's not been available if required, that's entirely the point.

It might not be a big deal, but it is a pertinent question, why did we sign some guy (an ex-Hearts prick to boot) to come in as cover on a short term deal even though he's not fit to play.

When has he been required?

[easty]

How much is he gettgin paid?

Does it matter?

[J-C]

How much is he gettgin paid?


You tell me, you seem to be the one bigging this up and saying it's not costing a lot, give us an idea instead of putting it straight back to us.

[easty]

When has he been required?

That can't possibly be your argument for this? He's part of the squad so technically he's required all the time.

[J-C]

When has he been required?


Surely that's not the point, if he's here as cover, then being injured since he arrived isn't cover is it, thankfully wee Lewis is very fit and gets very few injuries.

[Brightside]

You tell me, you seem to be the one bigging this up and saying it's not costing a lot, give us an idea instead of putting it straight back to us.

Im not bigging anything up...It's really not an issue, its costing buttons. he is not part of the squad at the moment, he may actually never play a single game for Hibs.

[J-C]

Im not bigging anything up...It's really not an issue, its costing buttons. he is not part of the squad at the moment, he may actually never play a single game for Hibs.

Buttons or not it's still money that could and should be spent elsewhere, he should be nowhere near our club on a deal like this especially when AS said we have cover in Hanlon and Fontaine if we needed it. If he was not here to give Lewis competition for his place then an unfit Eckersley was not the correct option.

[Brightside]

Buttons or not it's still money that could and should be spent elsewhere, he should be nowhere near our club on a deal like this especially when AS said we have cover in Hanlon and Fontaine if we needed it. If he was not here to give Lewis competition for his place then an unfit Eckersley was not the correct option.

I'll leave that up to Stubbs.

[Andy74]

Buttons or not it's still money that could and should be spent elsewhere, he should be nowhere near our club on a deal like this especially when AS said we have cover in Hanlon and Fontaine if we needed it. If he was not here to give Lewis competition for his place then an unfit Eckersley was not the correct option.

Where else in the team was it needed?

I think this is being overthought a bit, whilst we didn't have a pressing need we've had the opportunity to add a player that will be able to provide some back up for a good 3 months or so.

If its having him available for a while or just having what we had surely the additional cover is better?

[FranckSuzy]

Im not bigging anything up...It's really not an issue, its costing buttons. he is not part of the squad at the moment, he may actually never play a single game for Hibs.

Surely that is the point some of us are making/querying? :confused: Anyway I'm out, as they say, as this thread is going round in circles :greengrin

[Smartie]

I don't think any of us have enough information to make a decision here tbh.

If he's been signed on top whack wages because we were panicking at the end of the window - dreadful signing, but not a disastrous one because he's away in a few months.

He was out of contract and injured when we signed him so he was probably not in the strongest bargaining position. We may have him in on a pay as you play deal or even minimal wages - either way a decent punt even if he only provides cover for a couple of months.

Certainly nothing worth twisting knickers over.

I'm largely in agreement with the poster who mentioned that it is probably a good thing that this is one of the worst things we have to moan about.

5-1 to Hearts in a cup final, 7-0 to Malmo, "Butcherball", I've seen 2 relegations, 22 in a row, knocked out of the cup by Stirling Albion, punting Sauzee after 67 days, the Mercer takeover………. now we have a short-term signing that may or may not represent value for money? Whatever next?

[lyonhibs]

He'll be back in a couple of weeks or a "Farid" as it's alternatively known

[Peevemor]

Buttons or not it's still money that could and should be spent elsewhere, he should be nowhere near our club on a deal like this especially when AS said we have cover in Hanlon and Fontaine if we needed it. If he was not here to give Lewis competition for his place then an unfit Eckersley was not the correct option.

:confused: We have no idea of the deal he's on. Maybe he hasn't been paid anything yet?

[NAE NOOKIE]

Im impressed that we are really having to dig deep to find ways to knock the club. All very positive.

I get as peed off as anyone when folk are negative for the sake of it, but I wouldn't say that's the case here. Its pretty legitimate to question the short term signing of an injured player I would have thought .... we aint Real Madrid and don't have much capacity for carrying passengers. I don't include long term injuries to players on 2 and 3 year contracts in that statement, unless it becomes clear they are never going to be first team regulars ..... unfortunately a player with otherwise real promise in Jordan Forster is beginning to fall into that category.

[Scouse Hibee]

Hopefully he will be available if and when required. At the moment even if fit it is doubtful he would get on the bench.
The understanding of football has little to do with it.
The need to always look for the negative in the club is much more disturbing though.

Your first line explains exactly what is wrong with the signing, he is not fit and if called on tommorrow he wont be available. Nothing negative about that, just a fact.

[Andy74]

Your first line explains exactly what is wrong with the signing, he is not fit and if called on tommorrow he wont be available. Nothing negative about that, just a fact.

If we didn't sign him he would equally have been unavailable. When we reach the next few weeks onwards, however, he will be.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

This is getting silly now.

[weecounty hibby]

Maybe he is on a pay per play deal. Therefore no money paid out. No losers there as far as I can see if that is the case. Can't see us paying him when he can't play to be honest

[Scouse Hibee]

If we didn't sign him he would equally have been unavailable. When we reach the next few weeks onwards, however, he will be.

Hahahahaha yer havin a laugh with that ridiculous response surely :-) Was he on the bus that never went to the MK Dons game.

[Scouse Hibee]

This is getting silly now.

Isn't it just!

[Smartie]

If we didn't sign him he would equally have been unavailable. When we reach the next few weeks onwards, however, he will be.

There's a wee whiff of the MK Dons/ Wimbledon about this logic.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

We never signed Ronaldo so he's unavailable too, nightmare! (Sorry) I was gonna say Messi originally but, he is injured.

[Andy74]

Hahahahaha yer havin a laugh with that ridiculous response surely :-) Was he on the bus that never went to the MK Dons game.

I thought it was quite straight forward.

We didn't have that extra cover anyway. He was signed as a bonus outwith window. We still don't have use of that extra cover but will when he is fit.

If we hadn't signed him we would still have no extra cover.

[silverhibee]

An experienced backup if and when required and little or no cost. I honestly dont see the big deal.

When/where did he pick up his injury.

And he really can't be back up if he is not fit to play football.

[Scouse Hibee]

I thought it was quite straight forward.

We didn't have that extra cover anyway. He was signed as a bonus outwith window. We still don't have use of that extra cover but will when he is fit.

If we hadn't signed him we would still have no extra cover.

Now you're on the wind up but I'll humour you with your if,but and maybe theme.

If we didn't sign him because he was injured but instead signed a fully fit left back we would have extra cover from the off! That's my last word as you've reeled me in enough.

[emerald green]

I'm all in favour of having back up and more competition for places, but by the time Eckersley is match fit it will be nearly January anyway when his short term contract expires.

Presumably though, Hibs would be able to sign him in the January transfer window if Hibs, and Eckersley, wished to do so?

[Thecat23]

I'm all in favour of having back up and more competition for places, but by the time Eckersley is match fit it will be nearly January anyway when his short term contract expires.

Presumably though, Hibs would be able to sign him in the January transfer window if Hibs, and Eckersley, wished to do so?

Wasn't he wanting a move to the States in Jan and this was a stop gap so to speak? Either way I'm sure he won't be on much since he wasn't fit.

[emerald green]

Wasn't he wanting a move to the States in Jan and this was a stop gap so to speak? Either way I'm sure he won't be on much since he wasn't fit.

Yep, now you mention it that rings a bell. :agree:

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Yep, now you mention it that rings a bell. :agree:

If only someone had mentioned that before all this could've been avoided. ;-)

[emerald green]

If only someone had mentioned that before all this could've been avoided. ;-)

True. :greengrin

[Andy74]

Now you're on the wind up but I'll humour you with your if,but and maybe theme.

If we didn't sign him because he was injured but instead signed a fully fit left back we would have extra cover from the off! That's my last word as you've reeled me in enough.

I'm not sure what you are talking about in terms of wind up.

You are now bringing another side of the discussion into it which is comparing it to signing a left back who was fit.

That's a different point and perhaps none that fitted the bill were available in the window. This opportunity appeared outwith it which is the whole point.

Can no one follow simple points without thinking they are being wound up anymore?

[Brightside]

When/where did he pick up his injury.

And he really can't be back up if he is not fit to play football.

He was injured when signed. And booked in for this op he has had. Stubbs knew this and signed him. I honestly don't see the issue.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

He was injured when signed. And booked in for this op he has had. Stubbs knew this and signed him. I honestly don't see the issue.

The issue stands out more than Catherine Zeta Jones at an Edinburgh Derby IMHO!

[Don Giovanni]

FFS! This thread is a great example why we shouldn't have international breaks disrupting the league season.

Bring back the real fitba'!

[Dashing Bob S]

-You reckon t'new lad'll get his game at left back?
-Will eh eckersley
-That's what I just asked you bloody great barm cake
-Quit mitherin

[Gmack7]

i notice newco are about to sign John Eustace on a playing contract now that he's fit,maybe that's something we should have done with Eckersly:confused::confused:

[Brightside]

FFS!!!!! HE IS TRAINING NOW! "These are not the droids you are looking for"

[Wilson]

i notice newco are about to sign John Eustace on a playing contract now that he's fit,maybe that's something we should have done with Eckersly:confused::confused:

Maybe it isn't? Who are we to say? If Eckersley is the right man for Stubbs at the right time then so be it. I'd wager that the injury has taken longer to shift than anticipated. That is the gamble. I'd rather Stubbs took the gamble on a player he wants than sign a journeyman huddy to keep the natives on here quiet.

[CockneyRebel]

i notice newco are about to sign John Eustace on a playing contract now that he's fit,maybe that's something we should have done with Eckersly:confused::confused:

Maybe we did.

[Gmack7]

Maybe we did.
He was signed on a playing contract a few months ago on a short term deal,what he's being paid if anything i've no idea,

[HappyHanlon]

Wasn't he wanting a move to the States in Jan and this was a stop gap so to speak? Either way I'm sure he won't be on much since he wasn't fit.

In that case, sod him. Gorgie creep can bolt