http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Hull...nce-integral/story-26761428-detail/story.html Hull City: Steve Bruce says Tom Ince 'integral part' of promotion bid By Hull Daily Mail | Posted: June 25, 2015 By Philip Buckingham FAN: Hull City manager Steve Bruce, right, says Tom Ince, left, will play a key role in his plans for next season VIEW GALLERY Comments (2) STEVE Bruce says he will do his utmost to keep Tom Ince at Hull City amid the ongoing interest from Championship rivals Derby County. Ince's future hangs delicately in the balance this summer as the Rams attempt to turn last season's superb loan spell into a big money signing. A £5m release clause inserted in the deal that originally took Ince to the iPro Stadium leaves City vulnerable to Derby's advances but Bruce has stressed his desire to keep the winger. "We don't want to lose Tom," said Bruce. "He's an integral player in our plans for next season and not someone we want to sell. RELATED CONTENT Hull City: No Abel Hernandez loan move despite Italian interest Liam Rosenior joins Brighton & Hove Albion after Hull City exit "There is a release clause there but until someone is willing to meet that he will stay as a Hull City player. "I can understand the interest after he did so well at Derby last season but I'm doing everything in my power to keep him with us. "I've spoken with Tom and made it clear we want him to stay. We want a young, driven team in the Championship and he certainly fits that bill." As revealed by the Mail earlier this month, City are attempting to stave off Derby's interest by asking for the £5m fee be paid up front in cash. The Rams have indicated they are keen to trigger the clause to land Ince this summer but have so far given no indication they will meet City's demands. Ince's potential exit would see City make a healthy profit on the £2.3m they paid Blackpool last summer but there is an obvious reluctance to let a star of the Championship join a likely promotion rival. Although the 23-year-old started just three Premier League games in his debut season at the KC Stadium, a reminder of his talents came when scoring 11 goals in 18 appearances during his three-month stay with Derby. Derby are hoping to lure Ince with the promise of a lucrative long-term deal but City could yet counter that with an extension of their own. Ince only signed a two-year contract when joining the Tigers last summer and would listen to offers over a fresh deal as he enters the final 12 months. City's vulnerability ensures there can be no guarantees that Ince will be around for the new season but there are still hopes Stephen Quinn can be persuaded to stay at the KC Stadium. Quinn sees his current contract expire at the end of the month but negotiations are continuing with the Republic of Ireland midfielder. Championship club Reading have tabled an offer to sign Quinn on a free transfer to muddy the waters over the last week, while several other clubs have been in touch with the player's representatives. Bruce is aware of the competition but is optimistic the 29-year-old will extend his stay with City. "We're still talking with Stephen after he was away on internationals and hopefully we can get something done soon," said the City boss. "Stephen is another player we want to keep. We've made an offer." Read more: http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Hull...tory-26761428-detail/story.html#ixzz3e3N1YoGu Follow us: @hulldailymail on Twitter | HullDailyMail on Facebook
Ince holds all the cards now...get a better deal from us or Derby. I'd give him what he wants and let's see what he can do...
Derby fans are getting over excited about signing Ince on a permanent deal, they're getting rather arrogant with all their signings and think they have already won the league, would love it if he stayed with us. Why didn't we put a clause in like "If we stay up you can have him for £5m, if we go down its £10m"?
Best study how Derby utilised him if we're keeping him, Bruce can be too rigid with his systems. Which players brought Ince into the game where he can be effective at this level and do we have those players at City?
Reading that, looks like Ince just has a normal release clause, not some Derby exclusive special price. Which means anyone can trigger it.
Every goal is from the right...couple of good free kicks as well, be good to have Snodgrass, Brady and Ince knocking a few in from free kicks.
That's not what it says - 'A £5m release clause inserted in the deal that originally took Ince to the iPro Stadium leaves City vulnerable to Derby's advances but Bruce has stressed his desire to keep the winger.'
"There is a release clause there but until someone is willing to meet that he will stay as a Hull City player." That bit from someone who would actually know reads a bit differently. And it would make a lot more sense.
Why would it make more sense? Just means that's what we value him at so if a PL club meets that price we'd be happy to sell.
So you think the club would just throw a release clause in a contract? (Well, if it is a derby exclusive special price that question is answered) Considering how highly Thomas rates himself, and the fact he'd only sign a two year contract, you don't think he might have insisted on having a release clause in his contract and refused to sign without? It would make a lot more sense as to why there's a release clause at all.
Most of us are annoyed about it, but for 5m, it seems pretty logical. "Here, have this guy on loan. You're paying us a loan fee to get him, but you get the added bonus of being able to buy him if you pay this agreed upon sum of money if he plays well." He was more keen on game time than a release clause that at the end of the day would earn us money. He was valued at 2.5m, why would he want us to set his value at 5m, potentially scaring off suitors?
He might have an agreement with us on an offer amount we're obliged to accept, he might not, but you certainly can't tell from this article.
Not surprised this has come about, signing a player on a 2 year contract, with his father's history of touting him around club's looking for the highest bidder was stupid, now it's come back to bite SB on the arse, he's been poorly managed in my opinion, loaning a player out to a half decent club you were always going to run the risk that he would like it there more than city. That then lead's on to the buy out clause, why did city allow it, reading into it I can only assume that if we stayed up in the PL, that young Ince was to be off loaded as SB didn't fancy him at that level, and now we've ended up back in the championship with a cluster ****, what is going on SB.
You can't, the media are reporting it as a buy it clause in the loan deal, but no one anywhere has actually confirmed that to be the case. The way Bruce talks about it leads me to the suspicion that it's actually just a release clause in his contract with City that anyone can meet, with him saying until someone is willing to meet it, when surely if it was exclusive to Derby he would say Derby/they.
Brucey isn't big on detail, you're reading far too much into it, every article so far has mentioned the clause being part of the loan deal.
What a bl**dy mess, all of our own making! Would Derby still have taken him if no such agreement existed, I suspect the answer would be yes! Give them the option to buy should we agree to sell, then fine, but to apparently stipulate a figure seems crass and naive! It will all come down to Tom himself now, if he wants to stay then do doubt it will be related to a contract extension and improved terms (to offset Derby's offer); if he doesn't want it then he'll move on and it will be our loss.
