Eckersley

[Forza Fred]

The original deal with Eckersley was that his contract finished on 8th January, so unless it has been extended and I have missed it, then he will depart without having appeared for us.

While I have faith in Alan Stubbs, and consider Eckersley to have been a decent player, if he does leave in the next couple of days then surely it can only be classed as a strange signing from Hibs point of view.

We signed him reportedly on a 'short term deal' knowing he would be off in a few months, but fully knowledgeable that he was injured at the time.

He has appeared on the bench very occasionally, and I a unable to ascertain how any games he played in the development team.

A strange signing.

[Andy74]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The original deal with Eckersley was that his contract finished on 8th January, so unless it has been extended and I have missed it, then he will depart without having appeared for us.

While I have faith in Alan Stubbs, and consider Eckersley to have been a decent player, if he does leave in the next couple of days then surely it can only be classed as a strange signing from Hibs point of view.

We signed him reportedly on a 'short term deal' knowing he would be off in a few months, but fully knowledgeable that he was injured at the time.

He has appeared on the bench very occasionally, and I a unable to ascertain how any games he played in the development team.

A strange signing.

Maybe but I think it was just opportune and not a priority at the time. He was local and knew the league. I wouldn't be surprised if we kept him until the end of the season.

[Forza Fred]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Maybe but I think it was just opportune and not a priority at the time. He was local and knew the league. I wouldn't be surprised if we kept him until the end of the season.

Do we know how many times he appeared for the development team?

Can I find it anywhere?

[Jack]

Yes, very odd. One day we'll find out what was behind it.

[Gordy M]

I think he was signed as cover for left back. It was outwith the transfer window, he didnt have a club and agreed to go to the MLS in january i think? He prob didnt cost us very much, but as lewis has been playing well and not injured then eckersly hasnt played. I look on it as the same as signing a reserve goalie, there in case of emergency.

[JT Fae The Toon]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yes, very odd. One day we'll find out what was behind it.

Championship winner in & around the dressing room?

[heretoday]

Eckersley - the wilderness years. Or should that be wilderness - the Eckersley years?

[Saturday Boy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think he was signed as cover for left back. It was outwith the transfer window, he didnt have a club and agreed to go to the MLS in january i think? He prob didnt cost us very much, but as lewis has been playing well and not injured then eckersly hasnt played. I look on it as the same as signing a reserve goalie, there in case of emergency.

I'm the same. I cant understand why so many posters don't understand the concept of cover. Maybe they are just too young and have never bought insurance .

I've had home contents insurance for 30 years and only made one claim: that Eckersly is just an amateur if he's only been here six months without an appearance.

[Forza Fred]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm the same. I cant understand why so many posters don't understand the concept of cover. Maybe they are just too young and have never bought insurance .

I've had home contents insurance for 30 years and only made one claim: that Eckersly is just an amateur if he's only been here six months without an appearance.

Maybe it IS as you say ny tender years that make me not understand the concept of cover, but the premium paid for an insurance policy, doesn't equate to 3 months wages.

Especially as when signed he could not kick a ball because he was injured.

If I take out a short term insurance policy, I want to know I am covered from day 1.

This clearly wasn't the case here.

[Brightside]

I assume people know how much he has earned in wages from Hibs in that time? I expect him to stay, and continue to provide cover for Lewis.

[Forza Fred]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I assume people know how much he has earned in wages from Hibs in that time? I expect him to stay, and continue to provide cover for Lewis.

Some no doubt will, I don't

I can't even find how many times he played for the development squad.

[Forza Fred]

I mistakenly said in my original post that Eckersley's original contract expired on January 8.

For the record, it actually expires on January 10.

[lord bunberry]

It's not that strange really, he was signed as cover for Stevenson and Stevenson hasn't missed a game, so he hasn't been needed.

[silverhibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's not that strange really, he was signed as cover for Stevenson and Stevenson hasn't missed a game, so he hasn't been needed.

Just as well, Ecks has been injured most of the time he has been here, still a bit baffling that we signed a player who had only a few days before he was signed had just had surgery.

[ozhibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I mistakenly said in my original post that Eckersley's original contract expired on January 8.

For the record, it actually expires on January 10.

Speaking to my Jambo brother in law's brother he reckons if we DO get the chance to extend his contract we should, He said he would take him back min a "hert" beat as he is far better than the Nigerian they have at the moment.

[Forza Fred]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's not that strange really, he was signed as cover for Stevenson and Stevenson hasn't missed a game, so he hasn't been needed.

He may have played more, but I can only find reference to a 53 minute 'return' in October in a development match against Rangers at Murray Park.

Even if he played the odd other youth game, then concerns about match fitness would not be unfounded.

I am also surprised that he hasn't even been named on the bench recently.

[Forza Fred]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Speaking to my Jambo brother in law's brother he reckons if we DO get the chance to extend his contract we should, He said he would take him back min a "hert" beat as he is far better than the Nigerian they have at the moment.

That's the feedback I'm getting from the only half sensible jambo I know.

Not questioning, Eckersley's ability, just the principle of signing players on short term deals when injured.

Not related in any way, but his release without having played for us, brought back memories of Dave Beaumont collecting a League Cup Winners medal without having played for us in the League Cup!

[ozhibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's the feedback I'm getting from the only half sensible jambo I know.

Not questioning, Eckersley's ability, just the principle of signing players on short term deals when injured.

Not related in any way, but his release without having played for us, brought back memories of Dave Beaumont collecting a League Cup Winners medal without having played for us in the League Cup!

That's seem to be the way this season, I did think it strange when we signed him.

[SonOfDavidFrancey]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I mistakenly said in my original post that Eckersley's original contract expired on January 8.

For the record, it actually expires on January 10.

That changes everything. Petrie!

[Ronniekirk]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's not that strange really, he was signed as cover for Stevenson and Stevenson hasn't missed a game, so he hasn't been needed.

But if he had been needed he wouldn't of been available most of the time as was out injured or recovering from injury .Am sure Silver a Posted that he hasn't been on the bench recently has picked up a knock in training .So if we do extend his contractt he Backroom staff need to be sure he is back fit and isn't going to continually on the treatment table

[MB62]

Is he definitely away?
The last I heard was the American league was only one possible option for him and that he was talking about staying on with us until the end of the season.

[Arch Stanton]

It's not clear what's been argued here - should we have opted not to have cover for Stevenson?

Or should we have paid the extra and brought in a fully fit player from day 1? Since it follows that less money would be available for other players wouldn't we be going down the Jim Duffy path of having plenty of cover but all second rate?

[Forza Fred]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's not clear what's been argued here - should we have opted not to have cover for Stevenson?

Or should we have paid the extra and brought in a fully fit player from day 1? Since it follows that less money would be available for other players wouldn't we be going down the Jim Duffy path of having plenty of cover but all second rate?

I wasn't arguing anything other than to me at least, it is strange when a club sign a player on a very short term contract, when he is injured, and his contract expires without him having kicked a ball for the club.

I'm not sure many clubs in Scotland can afford such luxuries to be honest.

Also, I have searched but been unable to find any report of when he actually DID kick a ball for us, ....in a part appearance in a development squad game in October, so if he WAS signed as cover, he would be toiling when it came to match fitness.

Again I simply make the point that it has turned out to be strange signing.

[Dalianwanda]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's not clear what's been argued here - should we have opted not to have cover for Stevenson?

Or should we have paid the extra and brought in a fully fit player from day 1? Since it follows that less money would be available for other players wouldn't we be going down the Jim Duffy path of having plenty of cover but all second rate?

Surely it only counts as cover if he was available...maybe we have this the wrong way round and Lewis is cover for Eckersley

[Arch Stanton]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Surely it only counts as cover if he was available...maybe we have this the wrong way round and Lewis is cover for Eckersley

The logic seems to be that if a player is not fit at the start of the season he won't be fit and available when required for cover.

Equally, if a player is fit at the start of the season he will be fit and available when required for cover.

Actually, neither of these is true.

[easty]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's not clear what's been argued here - should we have opted not to have cover for Stevenson?

Or should we have paid the extra and brought in a fully fit player from day 1? Since it follows that less money would be available for other players wouldn't we be going down the Jim Duffy path of having plenty of cover but all second rate?

Are you saying the options available to us were,

get no cover for Lewis Stevenson

get an injured Eckersley as cover

pay the extra to bring in a fully fit player as cover


Because I would have preferred the obvious other option of, bring someone in as cover, who could play if we needed him, who would be paid the wages Eckersley has been paid.

[easty]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's not that strange really, he was signed as cover for Stevenson and Stevenson hasn't missed a game, so he hasn't been needed.

But he was injured when he signed, so wasn't really cover for anyone. He's also been injured the majority of his short contract.

[Mcpakeisgod]

Talk about a rehash; like Groundhog Day this thread

[Brightside]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I wasn't arguing anything other than to me at least, it is strange when a club sign a player on a very short term contract, when he is injured, and his contract expires without him having kicked a ball for the club.

I'm not sure many clubs in Scotland can afford such luxuries to be honest.

Also, I have searched but been unable to find any report of when he actually DID kick a ball for us, ....in a part appearance in a development squad game in October, so if he WAS signed as cover, he would be toiling when it came to match fitness.

Again I simply make the point that it has turned out to be strange signing.

Afford? Again - how much has he been paid per his short term contract.

[Brightside]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Are you saying the options available to us were,

get no cover for Lewis Stevenson

get an injured Eckersley as cover

pay the extra to bring in a fully fit player as cover


Because I would have preferred the obvious other option of, bring someone in as cover, who could play if we needed him, who would be paid the wages Eckersley has been paid.

What wages has he been paid? We really are arguing over nothing here - its cost Hibs almost nothing. He potentially will stay longer and is thought to be a good player in the dressing room.