An advanced publication of Rovers' Chairman Lorraine Rogers' programme notes for tomorrow's home game against Northampton Town sees criticism directed at Steve Davies, his family and his representatives over their handling of the matter both before and since his departure from the Club.

Rogers tells supporters in the match programme...........

"You may have heard or read in the week that we attended the Tribunal to decide the compensation that Derby County should pay us for the transfer of Steve Davies on Tuesday."

"Derby had made just one offer.  We had rejected it and so an independent panel decided what the compensation to Tranmere should be.  We had been offered £100,000 rising to a maximum of £300,000 from Derby County but the Tribunal decided that we should be paid £275,000 rising to a maximum of £725,000 depending on appearances and promotion."

"The maximum of £725,000 is far higher than the offers we had received from Leeds United and is not unreasonable taking into account his appearances, etc. but whether we receive the full amount won't be known for a few years."

"The initial guaranteed payment of £275,000 is similar to the cost (net of grants) of running our youth set up for one year. As we don't have enough income from first team football to pay for our youth set up (which covers under-8s to 18s), we have to pay for it out of player transfer income. We need to receive player transfer income of at least the guaranteed element of the Steve Davies payment each year just to keep the youth set up going."

"Is an initial payment equivalent to one year's cost of our youth set up fair compensation for a young player who was with us for 6 years? "

"After a recent Tribunal hearing Simon Jordan, the Chairman of Crystal Palace, said the Panel were ‘halfwits' and their decision was ‘scandalous'. In this case, I don't agree with every aspect of the decision but it's certainly not scandalous for either Club - and the Panel are very experienced people - but the process could be improved."

Davies: "Rovers Did Nothing For Me"

"It's flawed in many respects. It's a legal process because the decision is legally binding and there's no right to appeal but, as a retired lawyer, I felt uncomfortable that such a significant decision could be taken so quickly and that anything seemed to be admissible as evidence - even a note from Steve's mum essentially saying that the Club hadn't done anything for her son over the last 6 years!"

"Overall the decision wasn't too bad but the process could be much better.  For example, the person who could provide the most valuable evidence (ie the player) doesn't have to attend.  In this case, Steve submitted a written note. Basically he said that the Club hadn't done much for him and he didn't rate the Club."  

"I find it hard to believe that Steve would have said that if he had been present and had to look Les, Ronnie, Mick Horton, Dave Philpotts and me in the eye.  But he could say what he wanted in writing and we couldn't challenge him."

"My main issue with the whole episode isn't the fee (the maximum is very good); it isn't with Derby County and it isn't with the Tribunal itself but it's the fact that over 6 years the Club helped Steve to become the player he is today and he didn't say goodbye to staff at the Club, directors or fans and shows no appreciation."

"Without explanation he didn't turn up for the final day before the close season; he didn't encourage Derby to negotiate a fair value, as he could have done, and he put forward a submission criticising the Club to help his new employers try to get him on the cheap."

"When he joined us as a 14 year old boy, lacking in confidence having been let go of by Liverpool Football Club, he and his family were extremely critical of his former club. As he has explained in interviews, he was playing for Garston Woodcutters and had given up on his dream of becoming a professional player."

Rogers Pulled No Punches in her View on the Davies Saga!

"He was spotted and helped by our coaches - Glyn Salmon, Warwick Rimmer, John McMahon and by Brian Little and Ronnie Moore. We gave him a second chance."

"When he had problems off the pitch, which he did a number of times, we supported him. Much of Derby's argument for a lower valuation was based on his allegation that the Club had done very little for him; that he hadn't made a proper recovery from his injury and that the rehabilitation was suspect.  Thankfully Les was at the Tribunal and set the record straight on medical matters.

"If we don't get fair compensation for players, then we can't invest in a full youth set up as we do; and if we didn't have a youth set a player like Steve Davies wouldn't have been given a second chance to make his dream come true.  He has bitten the hand that was feeding him and shown he doesn't care about those who have helped him get a chance and the fans who've supported him."

"We can help a young player with his fitness and help him develop his football skills but other influences determine whether he becomes a decent, straightforward and honest person."

"There are now seven players in the Premiership and Championship who are products of our youth set up. I love to see them do well and I really hope Steve is successful. It reflects well on the Club and the coaching staff and it's a great feeling to see a player do well when you've known him since he was child or teenager."

"Ryan Taylor is a perfect example of a player who has done well and is still clearly a fan of the Club and has appreciated the part Tranmere played in his career.  Steve on the other hand has demonstrated that he doesn't care about the Club or the fans and hasn't the good manners to show any thanks or respect to those who've helped him along the way."

View a Printer Friendly version of this Story.

Bookmark or share this story with:

• Digg
• Delicious
• Facebook
• Reddit
• Stumbleupon

Related Articles:

• Pre-Match Moore: Ronnie's Thoughts Pre-Northampton

SPORTNETWORK SPECIALS

Tranmere Rovers Poll