Thats the second time you have posted that Matth, your batteries running out? Need someone to wind you?
That may be the case but I can't see that standing up if challenged legally. At the end of the day if we have met his release clause then then we are within our legal rights to sign him for that fee, if they delay until July then we still wouldn't legally have to increase our office since it had already been made before then. This is all assuming that we have actually met his release clause though. Personally I think it's just Bilbao making a public display of not selling him easily, if the deal was unlikely Herrara wouldn't have been at Carrington yesterday.
To be perfectly honest I don't know enough about him to say if he's worth the fee or not. Most of what I've read is very positive and there are no shortage of good clips of him on YouTube (though YouTube could probably make Luke Chadwick look brilliant). I guess time will tell if he's the answer or at least part of the answer to our midfield problems.
Surely if he was at Carrington yesterday, then United will be disciplined for tapping him up, since you can only talk to a player once the selling club gives you permission, and they only do that once they have accepted the buying clubs offer.
Not if he has a release clause. A player with a clause like that can enter into negotiations with any club, as the clause is technically between the player and the club. Herrera has the right to buy his own contract out for £28.4m, so he can negotiate with anyone who is willing to pay that fee on his behalf.
Ahhh makes sense Didnt realise that the player can do that if he has a release clause. So my original question still stands....if United have met that clause, how can Bilbao challenge it or deny his transfer?
Cos the clause is between the club and the player. If Utd give Bilbao £28.4m that is technically a separate transaction that doesn't involve the release clause. Only Herrera can invoke the clause, by paying the money himself. Utd will have to give him the money on the proviso that he transfers it to Bilbao to break his contract. Bilbao are essentially trying to make Utd and Herrera jump through all the hoops to make it look like they are trying to keep the player. He's a Basque, most of their supporters are Basque, the club only signs Basque players, so they want to keep face as much as possible. Looks much better for them if he pays the clause and they can turn around and say 'we wanted to keep him but he forced us to release him' rather than 'we agreed to sell him'. They may also be hoping they can delay proceedings until the value rises to 40m euros. Or hoping there's a chance that he won't force the issue by activating the clause. That's pretty much what Liverpool did with Suarez last summer - they gambled that he wouldn't jump through all the hoops of forcing a move, and trying to enforce a poorly written clause in court, just to join Arsenal.
Of course, a club refusing access to a player after a clause as been met is breach of contract too so technically speaking, the player could argue the case in court and become a free agent as a result too.
