Livermore £10m

Are you sure Poyet was the manager in question?

(I know it's hard to keep track of Sunderland managers, as they change so often)

 

It was Di Canio. I was actually thinking of Di Canio as well, I didn't get confused or forget, so I've absolutely no idea and no excuses as to why I wrote Poyet

 

It's OK I'm also at an age when I never get confused or forget anything!


I was watching the Sunderland/Southampton match yesterday and saw Pochettino having a nice chat with Poyet before the match. I was wondering where the interpreter was for just a moment

 

Thought we had first option? So it's irrelevant what another club would pay if we say "Yes please we'll take him".

 

You mean like Forest did with Hobbs?

Reading supposedly made a substantial offer and we were ready to recall him and sell him to Reading. Whether this was just to make Forest buy him there and then remains to be seen. Calling their bluff almost.

 

Again, that's because we recalled him. If Spurs don't recall him the original deal stands.

 

Depends if the fee is agreed and non negotiable?

It could be we get first option on he market price? Anyone know more about the 3.5 details?

 

So, on that basis can Spurs recall him then say £10m please.

 

What? That's the complete opposite of what I'm saying. If they recalled him in the next week or so they could very rightly demand 10m as he would no longer be on loan with us, cutting short the original deal.

 

He speaks good english dumbass.

 

Ooops sorry Sydney. I meant to say can and not cant.
Sorry for the confusion.

 

I believe that's the case, yes. The option to buy at a certain price only stands while the loan is still active so if the parent club recalls the player or the deal is not signed before the end date of the loan that price is no longer tied down.

I could be wrong, though. Contracts and clauses tend to be a legal minefield with loopholes all over the place.

 

What you said was fine. If you'd said "Spurs can't recall him..." then the confusion would've been there but you got it the right way round. Sydney is the one misreading it Though a question mark at the end of your quesion would've helped a little I guess!

 

Ah right, in that case yep you're spot on!

 

Nope not the case. If they don't recall him it's 3.5m, if they do recall him then they can charge 10m.

 

That's what I said.

 

But that's not what over18andlegal originally said, which is why this is now all very confusing.

 

It is though.

A) "If you cut me, do I bleed?"
- You're asking if you bleed if you get cut as you're unsure.
B) "If you cut me, do I not bleed?"
- You're fairly sure you bleed if you get cut and thus asking someone to prove otherwise.
C) "If you cut me, I do not bleed."
- You're claiming you don't bleed if you get cut.

over18 originally said "So, on that basis cant Spurs recall him then say £10m please."

You're reading that as C, when really it's B. Though he missed a question mark and apostrophe the order of things is still ok. He was fairly sure Spurs can recall him, then increase their price demand, and inviting someone to prove otherwise.

If he'd said "So, on that basis Spurs can't recall him then say £10m please." then it would've been C, the way you read it, but that wasn't the way he structured it.

Simples!

 

Considering he also admitted he meant to say can, I think you're making this way more complicated that it needs to be. He was asking if Spurs can recall him and charge us 10m and I said yes.

 

Ricardo will be proud of this post.