John Mousinho
- Thread starter The Walrus
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 123
- Views 9K
- Status
rebus
On my final warning
John Mousinho
http://und.collegesports.com/sports/m-soccer/mtt/mousinho_john00.html
Now we have the correct spelling of his surname (!), a google search reveals he's played for England Schoolboys and Chesham United with a year at Notre Dame in the States...
Now we have the correct spelling of his surname (!), a google search reveals he's played for England Schoolboys and Chesham United with a year at Notre Dame in the States...
Last edited:
Bigbee
Well-known member
John Mousinho
Any one know any thing about this guy ? All I can find is that he is the only registered player who hops on his left leg due to the growth on the right knee which makes the leg unusable .
NorthamptonBee
Yes Boss
John Mousinho
He looked moderate to sh!t in the Charlton friendly. 
Not negative just my observation.
Not negative just my observation.
Ace Face
Well-known member
hanworthbee
Well-known member
Bigbee
Well-known member
John Mousinho
NorthamptonBee said:He looked moderate to sh!t in the Charlton friendly.
Not negative just my observation.
he only has one leg ffs !
Mr Cynical
Moderator
John Mousinho
Centre back, I think.. Looked ok in a couple of pre-seasons....mate of MA's son isn't he?
rebus
On my final warning
Les Beeavinu
Administrator
John Mousinho
Well the link below says
I have no idea what half of that means, but Im pleased to see he got a monogram. Hope he makes it a duo soon. :shrug:
Some Septic said:
I have no idea what half of that means, but Im pleased to see he got a monogram. Hope he makes it a duo soon. :shrug:
West Ealing Bee
Only Reading
The Walrus
Active member
John Mousinho
West Ealing Bee said:
i thought it meant that we payed him based on appearances, may be wrong though
Mr Tree
bigger than massive
John Mousinho
does the fact he can't sign as a professional not mean he can't play for us :scratch:
Les Beeavinu
Administrator
John Mousinho
If I were A 19 year old trying to make it as a professional, I'd play for the best part of **** all and I imagine he is too.
Edmundo
Whinging pom
Edmundo
Whinging pom
John Mousinho
Why? If Junior Lewis plays and picks up appearance money, somebody else doesn't. Mind you, I don't think there's going to be much sympathy for Callen if he is suffering nightmares. Is he still in charge?
IsleofWight_Bee
Don't ya just hate Division 4
John Mousinho
Can we not use the money from the huge players fund? 
It's be worth a few extra quid in the bucket to sing that song though...classic!!
It's be worth a few extra quid in the bucket to sing that song though...classic!!
rebus
On my final warning
John Mousinho
Non contract is simply that - a paper registration that allows him to play and can be terminated by giving seven days notice by club or player. Players that do this are free agents. Other clubs can come in for them and get the player effectively on a free transfer if they offer full contract terms and the current club would not be entitled to compensation unless they had made a prior offer of the same terms.West Ealing Bee said:
Millwall did this with Sonko when he was first at Brentford but they pulled out of the deal after Sonko's agents - yes agents - made things very difficult.
Therefore he can be paid weekly, match-by-match or how both parties see fit.
Being non contract allows him to play Sunday football (!) and be registered to play for teams outside of the Football/Premier League as well as Brentford, so this might suit if John needs to go and get some experience with a non league club. As it looks, he might be warming the bench pretty soon.
Lewis might be on a monthly contract? We weren't given the full details but I can find out.
Claire
Miss GPG 2004
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2002
- Messages
- 9,524
- Reaction score
- 5
B2B
Active member
John Mousinho
Claire said:how the **** can we afford to get anyone else in as MA is over budget already.
keefor
Not an Uber fan
John Mousinho
The only way that I could see this being justified is if Mousinho takes the place of another contacted player in the team, or if his wages are to be paid by another revenue source such as 'lifeline' or a wealthy benefactor.
If the latter is the case then it is should be announced.
Is it any wonder that people don't seem to have cottoned on to the fact that we were nearly placed in administration a couple of weeks ago when we go and get another player less than a week after the 'bombshell' was dropped last week?
This really is 'head in the sand' stuff isn't it?
If the latter is the case then it is should be announced.
Is it any wonder that people don't seem to have cottoned on to the fact that we were nearly placed in administration a couple of weeks ago when we go and get another player less than a week after the 'bombshell' was dropped last week?
This really is 'head in the sand' stuff isn't it?
blunstone
Active member
John Mousinho
ma is certainly being given far greater license to bring in players than our previous manager who had to make do with a squad of youngsters and literally two experienced campaigners in the entire squad.
i do hope this won't end in tears --- ma leaves, a huge squad to pay and the club is broke.
i do hope this won't end in tears --- ma leaves, a huge squad to pay and the club is broke.
hanworthbee
Well-known member
John Mousinho
this has bad news written all over it, too many players, too many wages and not enough money.
Bush Tuckerman
Tactical Genius
John Mousinho
hanworthbee said:
what on earth are you taking about - he will be being paid peanuts...and we'll probably have Fitz jnr off our books soon
further I'd imagine that Oli Skulassons playing bonuses are far more than this fellas money - and he ain't gonna bea earning those for a while...I sure its all perfectly balanced!
jlove
Well-known member
John Mousinho
"Between now and the end of January there is a clampdown on any discresionary expenditure..." JB 6th Oct 2005.
If we take Joe at his word, then John Mousinho must be costing nothing!
If we take Joe at his word, then John Mousinho must be costing nothing!
homerbees
Formerly known as.
West Ealing Bee
Only Reading
John Mousinho
Bush Tuckerman said:
I think you are misjudging the situation.
Fitz probably WON'T be off our books soon, for that to happen someon ehas to want him, and be willing to pay him. With finances throughout the football league I'd be surprised if too many clubs that would want a league 1 reserve striker who hasn't scored many goals can afford to add to their squad at this stage.
Skulason's bonuses are irrelevant. I would be surprised (and a bit horrified) if most of the players aren't on the same bonuses, and if last year is anything to go by bonuses don't get paid until (and unless) we rech the play-offs.
As for perfectly balanced, do me a favour. We were on the verge of administration last Saturday, the only thing that has changed since then is an extra player added, how is that going to come close to balancing a budget we already can't afford :scratch:
Bush Tuckerman
Tactical Genius
John Mousinho
West Ealing Bee said:
You are kinda talking about two different things her though - no?
I would have thought that the current deal is balanced within the playing budget that has been agreed this season.
The loans etc are an entirely different budget in terms of the accounts...
and players appearance bonuses etc are almost certainly all different....in the same way that their basic salaries are different also!!
If you want to look at it in the simplistic way that you are detailing we cannot strictly afford to pay any players...and we should really be employing the same wage strategy as we did under Wally Downes...however this ultimately caused us to further increase losses....
whilst last year we actually made a profit...
it is the debt which is causing the problem towards administration...not a 19 year old kid who is not really being paid
Last edited:
West Ealing Bee
Only Reading
John Mousinho
Bush Tuckerman said:You are kinda talking about two different things her though - no?
I would have thought that the current deal is balanced within the playing budget that has been agreed this season.
The loans etc are an entirely different budget in terms of the accounts...
and players appearance bonuses etc are almost certainly all different....in the same way that their basic salaries are different also!!
I don't think I am.
Player's wages come out of one big football club budget which is being continually added to because Allen keeps adding players to the squad. We could not afford to pay the wages in September because of the costs incurred by the football club, we needed loans from Bees United to do it. How are we going to pay October's wages when they will be higher because we have an extra player :scratch:
Allen has ripped up the playing budget this year, we set it too high and we have continually added to it, if you think we are within the budget set I think you should take a read of some threads in GBD and change your mind.
I simply don't know about bonuses but if all 11 players have contributed to the victory shouldn't they all recieve the same win bonus :scratch:
West Ealing Bee
Only Reading
John Mousinho
Bush Tuckerman said:You are kinda talking about two different things her though - no?
I would have thought that the current deal is balanced within the playing budget that has been agreed this season.
The loans etc are an entirely different budget in terms of the accounts...
and players appearance bonuses etc are almost certainly all different....in the same way that their basic salaries are different also!!
If you want to look at it in the simplistic way that you are detailing we cannot strictly afford to pay any players...and we should really be employing the same wage strategy as we did under Wally Downes...however this ultimately caused us to further increase losses....
whilst last year we actually made a profit...
it is the debt which is causing the problem towards administration...not a 19 year old kid who is not really being paid
You added to you post while I was quoting it first time
Made a profit last year lol lol lol lol lol lol lol
We can afford to pay players, within the amount of cash we get in through sponsorship, ticket sales, merchandising. I'm not suggesting we don't pay anybody.
What I see is a club which has a playing budget well above it's means, the club should not be paying out more than we get in, we alreayd are, hence the flirtation with administartion, and now we have increased it, albeit very slightly.
Whilst I agree the debt is out main problem and intrest costs are a major factor, our wage bill being far too high compared to our income pushed us closer to administration than we ever needed to go IMHO.
Bush Tuckerman
Tactical Genius
John Mousinho
West Ealing Bee said:You added to you post while I was quoting it first time
Made a profit last year lol lol lol lol lol lol lol
We can afford to pay players, within the amount of cash we get in through sponsorship, ticket sales, merchandising. I'm not suggesting we don't pay anybody.
What I see is a club which has a playing budget well above it's means, the club should not be paying out more than we get in, we alreayd are, hence the flirtation with administartion, and now we have increased it, albeit very slightly.
Whilst I agree the debt is out main problem and intrest costs are a major factor, our wage bill being far too high compared to our income pushed us closer to administration than we ever needed to go IMHO.
I agree with much of that - however I was led to believe that we made a £50k profit last year on the back of the cup run....is that not correct?
I also would have thought that the playing budget was agreed at the beginning of the season...and being adhered to...most of what I have seen and heard suggests that MA is doing this - letting go of Burton etc, signing non contract players etc...
I was also of the impression that players do have actual appearance bonuses etc..and that the likes of Skulason would have a certain percentage of his wage dependent on actually playing week in week out...otherwise where is the incentive to train hard etc
Bush Tuckerman
Tactical Genius
West Ealing Bee
Only Reading
John Mousinho
Bush Tuckerman said:
If we did make a profit, I'm not sure it covered our interest costs. Someone might advise.
Allen's budget has increased since it was first set, and IMHO it was already too high, we couldn't really afford it and set it on teh basis of what we made last year from the cup run and having a number of games on tv, plus the Bronco's playing at GP. I cam't imagine we will be as successful again in the cup so we are in trouble on that score.
In terms of appearance money you might be right but I would suspect the difference is negligable. And I'm sure Mr Allen gives the players incentive enough on the training ground
Bush Tuckerman
Tactical Genius
John Mousinho
West Ealing Bee said:If we did make a profit, I'm not sure it covered our interest costs. Someone might advise.
Allen's budget has increased since it was first set, and IMHO it was already too high, we couldn't really afford it and set it on teh basis of what we made last year from the cup run and having a number of games on tv, plus the Bronco's playing at GP. I cam't imagine we will be as successful again in the cup so we are in trouble on that score.
In terms of appearance money you might be right but I would suspect the difference is negligable. And I'm sure Mr Allen gives the players incentive enough on the training ground
Yeah - i would be interested in having someone at the club explain all this in figures - they possibly already have...probably not in detail down to individuals wages...if anyone has a link to it please post it up
West Ealing Bee
Only Reading
John Mousinho
Bush Tuckerman said:
I'm basing it on what I see and information I get, some of it is from here and seems to be factual, some of it comes from elsewhere.
We started with a small squad and it has grown, Pratley might be paid for by lifeline but Keenan wasn't (although I don't think we paid anything in wages for him, but appearance fees might be a factor), Lewis isn't and neither is Mesinho. Where is the money coming from for these players?
Don't be surprised about Allen, he wants to win football matches, he wants better players, and I'm not convinced he's too worried about the bottom line as long as we win games.
It's up to the board to point the bottom line out to him.
West Ealing Bee
Only Reading
John Mousinho
Bush Tuckerman said:
The club will not put it down on paper as it makes the people at the top seem like fools (if the cap fits............)
It basically says that we have sanctioned outgoings higher than our income, no way to run a business.
JANORAK
Well-known member
- Joined
- 14 Nov 2003
- Messages
- 20,072
- Reaction score
- 12,160
- Location
- A goal kick from Harrow Borough FC
John Mousinho
Do Amateur registrations still exist? Just wondered whether MA might be mixing his phrases up? Yes, he said 'signed non-contract terms', but also further on that he couldn't be signed as a 'Professional'....
Les Beeavinu
Administrator
John Mousinho
West Ealing Bee said:
Of course, in the 2nd Division they have a rule (that I think operates by general agreement) that wages cannot be more than 60% of turnover. In the bad old days of Ron Noades. we were running at something like 165%. I wonder what the figure is now and what sort of team we'd have if we had such a cap?
jlove
Well-known member
blunstone
Active member
John Mousinho
whilst i am sure that john mousinho is probably only on expenses, it doesn't alter the situation that we have more than eighteen players and that most of the new players have joined from other clubs and will be on half decent money. players like newman, brooker, lloyd, and gayle.
a mix of experience and raw talent is essential if we are to progress as a club and half of me applauds the club for backing our excellent young manager. but half of me is concerned that our wage bill is far, far greater than a couple of years ago. we also have a professional ceo again who will be on a decent salary. and a loan player too.
if we had progressed in the league cup - rather than turn out our fringe players - we would have had an extra 'gate' or two. it wasn't to be. that was down to inexperience by the manager. aresenal and chelski and man u can afford to turn out a weak team, we couldn't. hey ho.
lastly, in the old days (the 1970s and 1980s) when the going got tough the manager of the day would sell our star player to bail us out for a few weeks or months. often to slightly larger clubs like reading for £80,000+ which was worth £150,000 + in today's money. and once in a while to a big club for big money. today little money drips down to the lower leagues as most of the premiership and now championship buy abroad. it used to be that west ham would buy from charlton who would buy from reading who would buy from us who would buy from colchester. (examples only!) but the money staid in the league.
it is very, very difficult to make ends meet these days....... and it is a near-miracle that small clubs like bournemouth, wycombe, gillingham, bristol rovers and ourselves are still trading.
a mix of experience and raw talent is essential if we are to progress as a club and half of me applauds the club for backing our excellent young manager. but half of me is concerned that our wage bill is far, far greater than a couple of years ago. we also have a professional ceo again who will be on a decent salary. and a loan player too.
if we had progressed in the league cup - rather than turn out our fringe players - we would have had an extra 'gate' or two. it wasn't to be. that was down to inexperience by the manager. aresenal and chelski and man u can afford to turn out a weak team, we couldn't. hey ho.
lastly, in the old days (the 1970s and 1980s) when the going got tough the manager of the day would sell our star player to bail us out for a few weeks or months. often to slightly larger clubs like reading for £80,000+ which was worth £150,000 + in today's money. and once in a while to a big club for big money. today little money drips down to the lower leagues as most of the premiership and now championship buy abroad. it used to be that west ham would buy from charlton who would buy from reading who would buy from us who would buy from colchester. (examples only!) but the money staid in the league.
it is very, very difficult to make ends meet these days....... and it is a near-miracle that small clubs like bournemouth, wycombe, gillingham, bristol rovers and ourselves are still trading.
Leonardo
Mad blogger
brighton bee
Active member
brighton bee
Active member
Idaho Bee
Well-known member
John Mousinho
brighton bee said:
This is pretty impressive actually. Means he got mostly A's with a couple of B's throughout his college years. Not your typical dumb footballer!!
rebus
On my final warning
John Mousinho
JANORAK said:
The non contract registration was introduced by the Football League in 1974 when the term amateur was abolished by the F.A. It's not a direct replacement however. When MA means "professional", he means full contract terms.
- Status