Shankland - wins Cinch Premiership player of the season (updated)

[Sooks]

3 hours ago, davemclaren said:

The couple of million ( if offered ) is guaranteed, the prize money not. 

You have to back yourself in a situation like that though eh 

[Go for it 1308]

5 minutes ago, mellors1874 said:

Oh no insults behind a keyboard how will I ever get over your harsh words.

🤔

If shanks was my son wtf are you on about.

He's on several thousand a week at the moment he's been offered the best contract of any hearts player that would probably still set him up for life.

Unreal some of the absolute roasters u get on here.

 

 

You having a bad night on here hun? Settle petal😘

[Newton51]

1 minute ago, kingantti1874 said:

We did it with Souttar.  Becuase the board were clever enough to realise he was worth more to us on the pitch.  And it worked perfectly, because we secured the European prize money which vastly outweighed the £800k which rangers offered for only 5 months of his time. 

Was the bid not around half that 

[Selkirkhmfc1874]

1 minute ago, Newton51 said:

Was the bid not around half that 

Quarter 

[spirt of 98]

3 hours ago, luckydug said:

There's much less effective strikers hanging around in English Championship and League One valued around 10 million and more.

Shankland has not proved himself out with the Scottish leagues. He’s nowhere near a 10 mil player. No one came in in January when 5 mil was the rough price. 
 

I love him but 10 mil. Stay of the crack pipe. 

[mellors1874]

3 minutes ago, Go for it 1308 said:

You having a bad night on here hun? Settle petal😘

I'm having an opinion on funnily enough a forum.

If we all agreed with each other it would be pretty boring.

 

[mellors1874]

4 minutes ago, FarmerTweedy said:

Romanov was a fecking idiot.

He was off his trolly but he took no shit of agents or players who didn't want to commit to hearts.

 

[spirt of 98]

3 hours ago, Polonia Gorgie said:

His goals this season have guaranteed us Group Stage football for next season, that's at least 5 million!! 

When I went to school 5 mil was half of 10 mil. My school was pretty gash but think they got this right. 
 

No one bid for Shanks love the boy but ten mil. No chance. 

[Go for it 1308]

2 minutes ago, mellors1874 said:

I'm having an opinion on funnily enough a forum.

If we all agreed with each other it would be pretty boring.

 

Very true 👍 

[kingantti1874]

6 minutes ago, Selkirkhmfc1874 said:

Was £200k rangers offered 

a quick google tell me we are both wrong.  Point stands.  Board recognise what value a player can deliver on the pitch.  
 

hearts have a better chance of doing well with shanks than without and the board will recognise that and have a suitable fee in mind. 
 

IMO. Higher than £2m but who knows 

[johnking123]

We are not selling shanks for any less than 3 million. Anything less and we keep him. We will let him move. But only if it works for all parties. 

[kingantti1874]

7 minutes ago, Newton51 said:

Was the bid not around half that 

👍🏻 yes. Memory failing me.  Confused with sibbick 🤣

[Polonia Gorgie]

1 minute ago, spirt of 98 said:

When I went to school 5 mil was half of 10 mil. My school was pretty gash but think they got this right. 
 

No one bid for Shanks love the boy but ten mil. No chance. 

What would be your valuation of him? 

[Selkirkhmfc1874]

1 minute ago, kingantti1874 said:

a quick google tell me we are both wrong.  Point stands.  Board recognise what value a player can deliver on the pitch.  
 

hearts have a better chance of doing well with shanks than without and the board will recognise that and have a suitable fee in mind. 
 

IMO. Higher than £2m but who knows 

I'm with you in that I'd keep him if was upto me unless somebody crazy money but all I'm saying is I don't see the board allowing him to run down his contract and leave for nothing 

[Bazzas right boot]

26 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

The reality is, better players give us a better chance and shanks, as you’ve already pointedout is a great player.  the best perm player in that position for an extremely long time and we couldn’t replace directly for anything like £2m.
 

yes we scored more goals the season before, massively helped out by Ellis Simms.  Who’d probably cost £20m now.  
 

I’m not saying you are being unrealistic Baz - that may be the max bid but we shouldn’t accept it imo. Politely decline. 
 

It’s as simple as this.  Some think it’s an amount we should sell at, I don’t, I don’t think it makes financial sense and makes us appear weak and easily bullied out of our star player which will not help us in future.
 

Factually, in football terms for an international striker, who scored 30 goals domestically, in Europe and for his national team it is a tiny fee.  There wouldn’t be another forward in Europe who ticks those boxes you’d be able to pick up for anything close to that number.  
 

 

 

 

I can see both sides.

 

I think we'll sell if we get bid of around £2.5m and he wants to go. I Can see why we'd do that.

 

I can also get behind keeping him no matter what for a season and him leaving  for nothing at the end.

 

I can see the reasons for both.

Tbh, It makes great financial sense (£2.5m or £0 a year later), but less sense on the football side.

 

We won't be replacing Shankland like for like, we'd be changing our style and have to get goals from other areas.

It's a problem we'll need to plan and deal with either next season or the season after as  it looks we have no choice and he'll leave.

 A couple of million extra would likley help us solve the problem.

 

 

Factually it's not a tiny fee either, it's not a big fee, but anything between £2-£3m is not tiny.

 

Edited May 7 by Bazzas right boot

[jamboinglasgow]

To be honest, I think we are in a good position this summer with Shankland. He would like to go to a higher level but is not desperate to get out the door.

 

So either he goes in the summer for a good amount for us allow us plenty of funds to find a replacement or he stays for another season (yes it means no money next season as I cant see him signing a new contract but it allows us plenty time to source a replacement.)

[kingantti1874]

2 minutes ago, Selkirkhmfc1874 said:

I'm with you in that I'd keep him if was upto me unless somebody crazy money but all I'm saying is I don't see the board allowing him to run down his contract and leave for nothing 

i also think they would prefer to get an acceptable offer,  but i hope an expect they won’t let anyone take the piss. 

[jr ewing]

5 minutes ago, Polonia Gorgie said:

What would be your valuation of him? 

Priceless 

[spirt of 98]

1 minute ago, Polonia Gorgie said:

What would be your valuation of him? 

In January I thought we held all the cards and 5 mil was a good value on him. I know think he still is a 5 mil player but doubt that anyone will stump that up as he can be picked up free soon enough. 
 

 Think in the summer his value at his age and length of contact left will be around 2 mil.

 

Clubs take into account, ability age and length of contract players are on. Can’t see anyone spunking 5 mil at his age he’s not got the ability to justify it. 
 

As I say I love him. For the sake of 2 mil I’d keep him till the bitter end of his contract and hope no bids come in and he signs for us again. 
 

I’d also offers him. 20k a week to stay for another 3 years with a release clause of 4 mil to chase the Huns off. 

[kingantti1874]

1 minute ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

 

I can see both sides.

 

I think we'll sell if we get bid of around £2.5m and he wants to go. I Can see why we'd do that.

 

I can also get behind keeping him no matter what for a season and him leaving  for nothing at the end.

 

I can see the reasons for both.

Tbh, It makes great financial sense (£2.5m or £0 a year later), but less sense on the football side.

 

We won't be replacing Shankland like for like, we'd be changing our style and have to get goals from other areas.

It's a problem we'll needtoi plan and deal with either next season or the season after as  it looks we have no choice and he'll leave.

 A couple of million extra would likley help us solve it easier.

 

 

Factually it's not a tiny fee either,It's not a big fee, but anything between £2-£3m is not tiny.

 

I think we agree on a lot bar the fee.  Happy to be corrected but if you were to plot a price of every striker at the euros who delivers comparable numbers.  £2m would be miles below the average.  Especially ones who carry similar importance and deliver such number for their club. 
 

I admire spurs, €60m for Kane no, €70m for Kane, no €107millio. eur after add ons they received 

 

now is before anyone calls me out  you all know I’m not making a player comparison.  I’m making a point around how spurs do business.  No reason we shouldn’t be clear on the fee and stick to it, and if it’s not met then no sale. No negotiation and no compromise. 
 

ps £6m qualifying for Europe again would make it easier still to solve the problem.  Who knows maybe at the age of 30 he’d be more inclined to stay.  

[Boyces beard]

Dont know what Shanks value is but if he had played the last two seasons at either of the cheeks with the same return as he has had for us he would be worth a lot more than £5 million. Oli McBurnie moved from Swansea to Sheff Utd for £17.5 mill, has played 17 times for Scotland and never even scored.

[Papa]

If Shanks leaves this summer we need to bring in 2 quality strikers and we’re not getting that for £2M. I still favour keeping him until the end of his contract and hope that interest in him will wane and he views our contract offer as the best available. I am confident that if we have Shanks next summer and we recruit a quality backup then we will secure another 3rd place finish and another tilt at Europe.

[gregzy2k7]

We need to get north of 4 million minimum for Shankland imo, if we sell him for any less than that then the club are shooting themselves in the foot and we would be better off keeping him for his final year, even if he wants to go, he is under contract and can't complain if we decide not to let him go, he is not the type to chuck the toys out or down tools so I think this is a win win situation, either we get heavily compensated or he stays for his final year imo.

[FarmerTweedy]

2 hours ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 3 months from August, as the post states.

It's 4 months!

 

January. It's January. 

[luckydug]

2 hours ago, spirt of 98 said:

Shankland has not proved himself out with the Scottish leagues. He’s nowhere near a 10 mil player. No one came in in January when 5 mil was the rough price. 
 

I love him but 10 mil. Stay of the crack pipe. 

I'm happy if we just let him run out his contract.

The 10 million comment was more a criticism of the over priced English transfer market.

We have signed three promising out of contract players ourselves so cant complain too much as we have had good value and service from LS. 

[Taffin]

Someone like Shankland gives us a punchers chance in Europe. Worth every penny keeping him for that alone, never mind next season domestically.

[Tiro]

His recent interview means it's time for him to move on. He has done well for the club but he has made his decision. It is important that we do all we can to facilitate this and this includes setting a reasonable price. The longer he stays the more likely that the relationship between himself and the club will deteriorate and this will be a reference for other prospective signings who have ambitions of playing at a higher level. It is also well documented that an unsettled player, creates am unsettled dressing room and ultimately poor results. Lets get the money in, invest it and move on.

[OTT]

16 minutes ago, Tiro said:

His recent interview means it's time for him to move on. He has done well for the club but he has made his decision. It is important that we do all we can to facilitate this and this includes setting a reasonable price. The longer he stays the more likely that the relationship between himself and the club will deteriorate and this will be a reference for other prospective signings who have ambitions of playing at a higher level. It is also well documented that an unsettled player, creates am unsettled dressing room and ultimately poor results. Lets get the money in, invest it and move on.

 

I think you're right. Whatever we put in front of him, his agent is going to tell him to reject/ wait until after the Euros. 

 

I don't like it, it sucks and I hate modern football but, the benefit of the summer is that Naismith can make the changes he wants to make. He doesn't have to settle on a January window where we get in who we can rather than who we want. 

 

I really, really wanted Shanks to stay and become a club legend, but if he's got a chance to go and earn megabucks then he's earned it. Hopefully the club keep a keen eye on his career at whereever he goes next and are ready to swoop in if the opportunity arises. 

[Ricardo Quaresma]

30 minutes ago, Tiro said:

His recent interview means it's time for him to move on. He has done well for the club but he has made his decision. It is important that we do all we can to facilitate this and this includes setting a reasonable price. The longer he stays the more likely that the relationship between himself and the club will deteriorate and this will be a reference for other prospective signings who have ambitions of playing at a higher level. It is also well documented that an unsettled player, creates am unsettled dressing room and ultimately poor results. Lets get the money in, invest it and move on.

 

[Kennyfragg13]

Have heard that we have made a new offer of 14k a week

[trotter]

10 hours ago, mellors1874 said:

Still didn't play players who didn't commit though did he.

If a player is not committed to being here next season why the **** should we play them regardless of who it is.

If that player is contracted with you for the next 12 months. If that player will get goals to help your position in the following season? If that player could potentially help you get silverware? 

 

Honestly, Jesus wept. You're making it out like he's either killed someone, or taken a dump on the centre circle. Grow up

[pettigrewsstylist]

Player of the year backed up with international  tournament experience will add a few ££, especially if he performs.

[Jim Panzee]

10 hours ago, Jambo dans les Pyrenees said:

 

I’ve lived near 3 of those.  They really are shit-holes in shitsville.  Yes, you can find a bit but not better and you still have to live in and around those places.  I don’t think people understand how utter rubbish living in the English north west and midlands is these days.

agree the centres are crap and immediate areas around the grounds, but agents will be highlighting the below to players (more perhaps for renting than buying but still...)

 

Birmingham - Edgbaston - 8 miles
Sunderland - Chester le street / Durham  - 11- 15 miles
Bolton - turton / egerton 11-15 miles
west brom - Edgbaston - 6 miles
Sheffield - fullwood - 5 miles

 

Look at old trafford / manchester - the delightful area of moss side is 2.5 miles from old trafford - but top players live 15-20 miles away in places like Alderley edge and Wilmslow. 

[JFK-1]

If Shankland were to wait out his contract either willingly or unwillingly I would see no problem at all in playing him. If he's going to see out the contract he obviously wants the best possible move at the end of it, what but impressive form could facilitate that? Could even enhance a contract.

[soonbe110]

11 hours ago, kingantti1874 said:

I think we agree on a lot bar the fee.  Happy to be corrected but if you were to plot a price of every striker at the euros who delivers comparable numbers.  £2m would be miles below the average.  Especially ones who carry similar importance and deliver such number for their club. 
 

I admire spurs, €60m for Kane no, €70m for Kane, no €107millio. eur after add ons they received 

 

now is before anyone calls me out  you all know I’m not making a player comparison.  I’m making a point around how spurs do business.  No reason we shouldn’t be clear on the fee and stick to it, and if it’s not met then no sale. No negotiation and no compromise. 
 

ps £6m qualifying for Europe again would make it easier still to solve the problem.  Who knows maybe at the age of 30 he’d be more inclined to stay.  

You make a good point however atm he is second or possibly third choice striker for one of the weaker teams going to the euros. Given recent results and the growing injury list I think it’s going to be hard for him to impress at the euros. He might not even get game time until game 3. Until the recent Scotland games he wasn’t even sure of being on the plane for Germany. A better comparison would be looking at transfer activity involving second or third choice strikers playing for the pot3/4 countries and who don’t play for a club in any of the big leagues in Europe. 

[Bazzas right boot]

11 hours ago, kingantti1874 said:

We did it with Souttar.  Becuase the board were clever enough to realise he was worth more to us on the pitch.  And it worked perfectly, because we secured the European prize money which vastly outweighed the £800k which rangers offered for only 5 months of his time. 

 

 

The season after, with Halkett Injured and no Souttar- £800k might have helped us get a CH and secure 3rd again.

It wasn't perfect , it just delayed the issue a year and we had less money to solve the problem. 

 

Same with Shankland,  we'll have to replace him, more money will help us do that.(£2-£3m is not insignificant)

 

There is logic to selling him and keeping him.

One strategy is more short term, other a bit more long term.

 

Edited May 8 by Bazzas right boot

[Bad Religion]

11 hours ago, kingantti1874 said:

I think we agree on a lot bar the fee.  Happy to be corrected but if you were to plot a price of every striker at the euros who delivers comparable numbers.  £2m would be miles below the average.  Especially ones who carry similar importance and deliver such number for their club. 
 

I admire spurs, €60m for Kane no, €70m for Kane, no €107millio. eur after add ons they received 

 

now is before anyone calls me out  you all know I’m not making a player comparison.  I’m making a point around how spurs do business.  No reason we shouldn’t be clear on the fee and stick to it, and if it’s not met then no sale. No negotiation and no compromise. 
 

ps £6m qualifying for Europe again would make it easier still to solve the problem.  Who knows maybe at the age of 30 he’d be more inclined to stay.  

 

We don't operate like Spurs though.

 

I would think its highly probable that there's already a deal in place for Shankland to leave, agreed by all parties.

[Bazzas right boot]

11 hours ago, Papa said:

If Shanks leaves this summer we need to bring in 2 quality strikers and we’re not getting that for £2M. I still favour keeping him until the end of his contract and hope that interest in him will wane and he views our contract offer as the best available. I am confident that if we have Shanks next summer and we recruit a quality backup then we will secure another 3rd place finish and another tilt at Europe.

 

We'll still need to  do that 12 months later without that £2m tho, so surely if replacing him his the issue , we should be cashing in as more money will help us get better players?

 

We can finish 3rd without him, we have in the past and again just a season later- we will have to.

Do we want an extra £2-£3m to help us do that or try and solve the issues you highlight with less cash?

 

All the issues folk are highlighting are going to be a problem just 12 months later, even less if he agitates a move in January.

 

We have to prepare for post Shanks, the question is do we do it with extra money this summer, or with less next summer.

 

Assuming clubs bid £2-£3m , I see no benefit in selling to a paltry £500-£1m bid.

I'm also  assuming around £2.5m is a bid that will create a problem if Shanks is keen.

 

 

[Bazzas right boot]

13 minutes ago, soonbe110 said:

You make a good point however atm he is second or possibly third choice striker for one of the weaker teams going to the euros. Given recent results and the growing injury list I think it’s going to be hard for him to impress at the euros. He might not even get game time until game 3. Until the recent Scotland games he wasn’t even sure of being on the plane for Germany. A better comparison would be looking at transfer activity involving second or third choice strikers playing for the pot3/4 countries and who don’t play for a club in any of the big leagues in Europe. 

 

Not far of Boyce at Ross county conparison when he played for NI.

 

 

[Jambo dans les Pyrenees]

If he wants to go, and we get 4 million plus for him, and identify a replacement or two in time, then I can see why we would do that.

 

I also think he is not the kind of character to down tools if we tell him he isn’t for sale in the summer.  He knows another successful season at Hearts then sets himself up for the best possible deal when he leaves us in summer 2025, aged 30…..

[kingantti1874]

Just now, Bazzas right boot said:

 

We'll still need to  do that 12 months later without that £2m tho, so surely if replacing him his the issue , we should be cashing in as more money will help us get better players?

 

We can finish 3rd without him, we have in the past and again just a season later- we will have to.

Do we want an extra £2-£3m to help us do that or try and solve the issues you highlight with less cash?

 

All the issues folk are highlighting are going to be a problem just 12 months later, even less if he agitates a move in January.

 

We have to prepare for post Shanks, the question is do we do it with extra money this summer, or with less next summer.

 

Assuming clubs bid £2-£3m , I see no benefit in selling to a paltry £500-£1m bid.

I'm also  assuming around £2.5m is a bid that will create a problem if Shanks is keen.

 

 

what if we don’t replace him adequate and finish 5th next season, and what if we would have finished 3rd.
 

Then your assumption about having more this season and less next lesson is false. 

 

You can’t present your assumptions as fact. It’s all about probability and the probability of finishing 3 rd is higher with than without.

 

and it’s insulting to the lad to suggest he’d down tools or go in a huff. 

[jock _turd]

All of the " sell him, keep him" debate is entirely dependent on only one thing... will we get any bids for him. If we get no bids we cannot sell him. On the other hand if a decent bid comes in it will have to be considered. What is a decent bid for him? I think if a bid of somewhere between 2 and 5 million and he will be sold but honestly I do not think we will get those sort bids coming for him.

[Bazzas right boot]

15 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

what if we don’t replace him adequate and finish 5th next season, and what if we would have finished 3rd.
 

Then your assumption about having more this season and less next lesson is false. 

 

You can’t present your assumptions as fact. It’s all about probability and the probability of finishing 3 rd is higher with than without.

 

and it’s insulting to the lad to suggest he’d down tools or go in a huff. 

 

 

Assuming we'll finish 3rd with him is the same as assuming finishing  3rd without him.

 

I expect Hearts with or without Shankland to finish 3rd next season and the season after, I think an extra £2-£3m helps that.

 

Same with new players , you are assuming they'll be poorer, I'm assuming with more money spent  the players will be better than if we had less money- it's a fair assumption. 

Either way, we will have to do it anyway-  we will have to do it this season or next season. We'll be kicking the can down the road if he stays,we'll have the same problem but with £2-£3m less to solve it.

 

I never said he'd down tools either.

 

I don't think a year of uncertainty and transfer speculation will be good for him or Hearts tho, especially if it's rangers he ends uo going to on a free.

 

As I said, it's not black and white, there are benefits to him staying and leaving for free at the end of the season- we should have a better team with him in it next season. 

There is also benefits to taking a £2-£3m fee and investing that money in players v him leaving for nothing and us having  the same problem to solve but with less money. 

 

We need to put faith in our recruitment to replace him either way.

 

Edited May 8 by Bazzas right boot

[Rods]

4 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

 

Assuming we'll finish 3rd with him is the same as assuming finishing  3rd without him.

 

I expect Hearts with or without Shankland to finish 3rd next season and the season after, I think an extra £2-£3m helps that.

 

Same with new players , you are assuming they'll be poorer, I'm assuming with more money spent  the players will be better than if we had less money- it's a fair assumption. 

Either way, we will have to do it anyway-  we will have to do it this season or next season. We'll be kicking the can down the road if he stays,we'll have the same problem but with £2-£3m less to solve it.

 

I never said he'd down tools either.

 

I don't think a year of uncertainty and transfer speculation will be good for him or Hearts tho, especially if it's rangers he ends uo going to on a free.

 

As I said, it's not black and white, there are benefits to him staying and leaving for free at the end of the season- we should have a better team with him in it next season. 

There is also benefits to taking a £2-£3m fee and investing that money in players v him leaving for nothing and us having  the same problem to solve but with less money. 

 

We need to put faith in our recruitment to replace him either way.

 

Agreed on the 2-3 million price tag. Hopefully have a decent euros and drum up further interest.

 

Either way I think he is away and we need to move on quickly. 
 

The club goes on and the season ahead is big for the club. 

[Valois No1]

If we sell him for anything less that 2.5m then it’s terrible business for Hearts especially if it’s to the Old Firm. Personally I would sell him and would be touting him about as I think we could do more with say 3m plus the Europe money and bring in more players of genuine quality. I’m talking players that the old firm wouldn’t mind having there or there abouts. If we don’t sell then no problem we still have a class act. 

[soonbe110]

1 hour ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

We'll still need to  do that 12 months later without that £2m tho, so surely if replacing him his the issue , we should be cashing in as more money will help us get better players?

 

We can finish 3rd without him, we have in the past and again just a season later- we will have to.

Do we want an extra £2-£3m to help us do that or try and solve the issues you highlight with less cash?

 

All the issues folk are highlighting are going to be a problem just 12 months later, even less if he agitates a move in January.

 

We have to prepare for post Shanks, the question is do we do it with extra money this summer, or with less next summer.

 

Assuming clubs bid £2-£3m , I see no benefit in selling to a paltry £500-£1m bid.

I'm also  assuming around £2.5m is a bid that will create a problem if Shanks is keen.

 

 

Common-sense post

[soonbe110]

1 hour ago, kingantti1874 said:

what if we don’t replace him adequate and finish 5th next season, and what if we would have finished 3rd.
 

Then your assumption about having more this season and less next lesson is false. 

 

You can’t present your assumptions as fact. It’s all about probability and the probability of finishing 3 rd is higher with than without.

 

and it’s insulting to the lad to suggest he’d down tools or go in a huff. 

What if Aberdeen had won the cup this season? What if they win it next season? The future is all about what ifs. One thing to remember though is that third place isn’t guaranteed group/league stage football in any season after this current one, as it stands. 
Re going in the huff, he would need to be an extraordinary type of guy to not be upset by the opportunity to set himself and family up for life being knocked back.  And if we do that this summer against his wishes he would clearly be signing a pre-contract on Jan 1 and we would get a token fee for him at that time. Potentially passing up on a couple of million for five months football from Shanks - not a good business decision in anyone’s book. 

[N Lincs Jambo]

1 hour ago, soonbe110 said:

What if Aberdeen had won the cup this season? What if they win it next season? The future is all about what ifs. One thing to remember though is that third place isn’t guaranteed group/league stage football in any season after this current one, as it stands. 
Re going in the huff, he would need to be an extraordinary type of guy to not be upset by the opportunity to set himself and family up for life being knocked back.  And if we do that this summer against his wishes he would clearly be signing a pre-contract on Jan 1 and we would get a token fee for him at that time. Potentially passing up on a couple of million for five months football from Shanks - not a good business decision in anyone’s book. 

 

You're spot on about what ifs. If Shankland starts all three games in the Euros and gets the goals which help Scotland qualify out of the group stages for the first time ever then it's conceivable that we could get offers in excess of £10 Million from clubs either down south or abroad who hadn't even considered him before.

 

Then again, he could get no game time (which I think is a far more likely scenario) and everyone outside the Scottish football goldfish bowl shows no interest in him at all. This would ostensibly leave the OF. He's not going to Celtic, Rangers aren't going to pony up £5 Million or so, especially if Clement is still manager, so he stays at Hearts and possibly moves to Ibrox on a free next summer.

 

I would also add that given his current form, it's not 100% guaranteed he makes the squad. I have a feeling that Clarke just doesn't trust him for whatever reason. I hope I'm wrong.

[martoon]

The thread title is awfy misleading.

 

I keep thinking Shanks has signed up again.

[Sooks]

Not read back so may have been discussed but Mark Donaldson on SATF podcast says our latest offer to Shanks is £ 15 k per week including add ons . From what he describes as a very reliable source