David Wheater confirms Bolton approached Oldham to re-sign him

David Wheater says he will be staying with Oldham Athletic until told otherwise.

The Latics defender has confirmed an approach was made earlier this month from his former club Bolton Wanderers – but rejected by the club’s owners.

Wheater played for eight years at Bolton and made 236 appearances, moving to Boundary Park last summer on a free transfer with the Whites still in administration.

The terms of his contract triggered a one-year extension option in Oldham’s favour if he played 20 games, something he achieved shortly after Christmas.

Bolton cannot pay transfer fees, as per the terms of their embargo, which leaves the League Two club in a strong position.

Wheater says he is enjoying his time with Oldham and is relaxed about the situation.

"Keith Hill rang our manager and our manager told me," Wheater told BBC Radio Manchester.

"He said: 'I don't want you to go but I want to tell you because I'd like that as a player'.

"I then bumped into one of the owners and they said I wasn't going, basically. I told them I was happy here (Oldham) anyway.

"I never asked for a transfer request from Middlesbrough or Bolton and I'd never do that to disrupt anything.

"If they wanted to sell me it'd be a different matter but they've told me I'm not going anywhere so I'm happy.

"I think they'd want money if I was going to sign. I don't know if Bolton are allowed to spend money yet or not, but I'm happy here."

Source

He'll never do that but he will go on strike, will take millions from us with barely anything in return, he will bat his eyelashes at coming back via the local press but he WON'T put in a transfer request (because he'll lose his loyalty bonus). Absolute clown

— Chris (@CManny99) January 23, 2020

Not often do I agree with Manning.

I also wonder if this was originally a done deal at the start of the window, with Hill thinking it was in the bag and thus sending back the on loan centre back players we had only to be over-ruled by Kenyon and thus leading to his bizarre rant - not on the same page and all that?

Sluffy wrote:

He'll never do that but he will go on strike, will take millions from us with barely anything in return, he will bat his eyelashes at coming back via the local press but he WON'T put in a transfer request (because he'll lose his loyalty bonus). Absolute clown

— Chris (@CManny99) January 23, 2020

Not often do I agree with Manning.

I also wonder if this was originally a done deal at the start of the window, with Hill thinking it was in the bag and thus sending back the on loan centre back players we had only to be over-ruled by Kenyon and thus leading to his bizarre rant - not on the same page and all that?

I expect you'll remember, Sluffy, all that daft publicity about Wheats personally delivering a season ticket to the Honorary Treasurer of the ST who later re-emerged as the ST's 'Independent Examiner'.
I couldn't help wondering who set that up and how KA reacted after he'd exploded.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:
I expect you'll remember, Sluffy, all that daft publicity about Wheats personally delivering a season ticket to the Honorary Treasurer of the ST who later re-emerged as the ST's 'Independent Examiner'.
I couldn't help wondering who set that up and how KA reacted after he'd exploded.

I do indeed.

Bit of a coincidence that of all the approximately 10,000 Season Ticket holders we have the only one delivered by hand was to the then Supporters Trust Board Member Mike Egan  - still shown on their official website as still being one...

https://www.bwfcst.co.uk/about-us/board-members/

...(although I believe he stood down some time back).

Not sure however, how you can independently examine the books if you are the one who compiled them in the first place!!!

Surely that is a clear and obvious conflict of interest???

(For the record, I don't doubt the blokes integrity, it is the procedure I find unusual)

For what it is worth the ST are currently in default of submitting their accounts, the last being for the year ending 31st July, 2018...

https://mutuals.fca.org.uk/Search/Society/23715

...where they declared at total turnover of just £10,555 with a membership of just 3,006 people.

They've been awfully quiet too about enquiries into accounting for the £20k raised in public donations for their so called 'fighting fund'.

Anyway Iles article at the time -

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/15438366.fans-delight-as-whites-star-david-wheater-hand-delivers-his-season-ticket/

Sluffy wrote:

Ten Bobsworth wrote:
I expect you'll remember, Sluffy, all that daft publicity about Wheats personally delivering a season ticket to the Honorary Treasurer of the ST who later re-emerged as the ST's 'Independent Examiner'.
I couldn't help wondering who set that up and how KA reacted after he'd exploded.

I do indeed.

Bit of a coincidence that of all the approximately 10,000 Season Ticket holders we have the only one delivered by hand was to the then Supporters Trust Board Member Mike Egan  - still shown on their official website as still being one...

https://www.bwfcst.co.uk/about-us/board-members/

...(although I believe he stood down some time back).

Not sure however, how you can independently examine the books if you are the one who compiled them in the first place!!!

Surely their is a clear and obvious conflict of interest there???

Anyway Iles article at the time -

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/15438366.fans-delight-as-whites-star-david-wheater-hand-delivers-his-season-ticket/

Its fairly normal for an Independent Examiner to also prepare the accounts but they should be independent of the running or management of the organisation at the time or in the recent past.

The season ticket business was all very odd though having regard to KA's views on the ST.

Mike seems to be a bit wrong on his dates too. We didn't beat anyone 6-1 in 1956 but we beat Wolves 6-1 in 1955. Wolves were the bees knees in those days but we had an annoying habit of  beating them time and again.

I remember Wolves beating us 7-1 in 1950. I hadn't been born then of course.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:
Its fairly normal for an Independent Examiner to also prepare the accounts but they should be independent of the running or management of the organisation at the time or in the recent past.

The season ticket business was all very odd though having regard to KA's views on the ST.

Mike seems to be a bit wrong on his dates too. We didn't beat anyone 6-1 in 1956 but we beat Wolves 6-1 in 1955. Wolves were the bees knees in those days but we had an annoying habit of  beating them time and again.

Thanks Ten Bob.

I actually amended my post above adding a number of things, one of which was to make it clear that I didn't doubt Mr Egan's honesty in the least.

Our posts must have crossed at the same time.

You may find some of my other amendments of interest, although I think you are aware of most if not all of them anyway.

Sluffy wrote:

Ten Bobsworth wrote:
Its fairly normal for an Independent Examiner to also prepare the accounts but they should be independent of the running or management of the organisation at the time or in the recent past.

The season ticket business was all very odd though having regard to KA's views on the ST.

Mike seems to be a bit wrong on his dates too. We didn't beat anyone 6-1 in 1956 but we beat Wolves 6-1 in 1955. Wolves were the bees knees in those days but we had an annoying habit of  beating them time and again.

Thanks Ten Bob.

I actually amended my post above adding a number of things, one of which was to make it clear that I didn't doubt Mr Egan's honesty in the least.

Our posts must have crossed at the same time.

You may find some of my other amendments of interest, although I think you are aware of most if not all of them anyway.

I did notice, Sluffy. I also noticed that the balance carried forward on the 2017 balance sheet didn't equal the balance brought forward on the 2018 balance sheet - which, of course, it should.

Its not that anythings gone missing; just an indication that the accounts could have been looked at a bit more carefully before they were approved, published and filed.

Most folk never bother to read accounts anyway which means when there is summat wrong or missed out not many folk spot it and many of those that do prefer to say nowt for different reasons.

There seem to be quite a few accountants that comment on BWFC on social media but how many noticed that the debts according to the administrators were less than the debts according to the auditors two years previously? Only one that I know of but it was significant in more ways than one.