Says someone who's team hasnt ever been relegated. Before Quinn started insisting on having a relegation clause in every players contract (yes a wage cut), we got screwed big time when we were relegated. Players who dont want to move on because they know they couldnt get a better offer else were and are happy to sit out their contracts. Ask Blackburn and QPR. It sucks to have players on the books who have no interest in playing for you but are happy to get their wages and sit the games out. we already have a few dickheads like that Graham), and we dont want to have anymore in case we are relegated. Btw, 15 players in a squad. each player gets a 50% pay cut if relegated. average saving per player = 15k a week x 15 players = 225k a week savings = 11million a year. It also works the other way, the ****ing agent might have been insisting on a clause saying that if we were relegated, the player is free to leave and we would have refused to be strong armed by a greedy **** agent.
Did you even read what I wrote? It's ok if you don't understand it, but don't try to imply I've said something else.
I did read it, thats why I quoted you... smart ass what did you mean to imply ? You said it wouldnt be due to relegation clause, I was countering that with an argument. Every player we buy must have a relegation clause in their contracts. If Kone (or his agent) refused that, then we would have ended negotiation and pulled out of the deal. its just an safc policy.
How's it being a smart ass? You never read it, you skimmed it and made comment on it. I said... "They said Sunderland changed something that was 'pre agreed' so it can't have been a wage cut, unless he'd already had it in writing and agreed to it". If he'd agreed to it then it was him who reneged on the deal. Lorient are saying Sunderland changed the deal. I'm using my intuition here and assuming you're back in for him because you've landed yourselves in some potential hot water. Everything is done in writing, by lawyers, there's no handshakes and verbal ****e anymore, the money's too big.
Your 1st paragraph is all about how you think the relegation clause is bullshit, as we wouldnt pull out of a deal just to save us half a million a year in wages ("So you scrap the entire transfer, risk losing £130m of TV rights, for what? Half a million quid per year in salaries? It's bollocks, that's not the reason"). I was arguing that we would pull out of a deal just to save us a few hundred thousand a year, and it is a policy to for every one of our players to have that in the contract. as for your second argument (2nd paragraph) I dont believe personal details would have been agreed with the player until he passed his medical and met with Cognerton (who is still working for us), Sam or whoever face to face and had a proper discussion. A framework might have been in place, but not a full agreement.
Your first paragraph is your opinion, mine is different. £500k a year to a Championship club on parachute payments, considering you're gonna probably rid yourself of a few high earners in the summer anyway, it's nothing. If you got rid then you'd be paying some other player similar money to do the same job. Your second paragraph is what you believe, fair enough, it's all based on how you assume a transfer happens.
Think is Tel, you have to concider Sunderland changing the whole peramature of the contract offer if he rejected the clauses(there's enough to assume that clasuse was the problem) For example, he could have come over expecting a 20kpw contract, spotted the clauses and rejected. So we've offered one without clauses but reflected that in reducing the basic wage to compensate, like a 10k pw basic. Something which we'd be entitled to do but could be construed by the selling club as changing a pre agreement. There's absolutely nothing anywhere to suggest it was a legal agreement. Read all the quotes involved. Players agent, the player, our end. There's only the selling club with a bee in their bonnet. Nee idea how you two got personal by the way
If you had the choice of working for 2 companies, would you choose the one that would cut your wages 50% if profits fell Kone might if 50% less is more then he's earning now, but others would not take a pay drop of what their already earning
It's not personal, he just barged in with an assumption that I'd know nowt about a release clause because I'm a United fan, when the truth is, I've sat with my good mate on holiday for two weeks and watched him discuss a move with his agent thousands of miles away, there were three separate deals emailed to him from 3 clubs, two in France, one in England, which he printed out and showed me, we both sat reading them on our sun loungers, sipping Mojitos... I mean pints. To assume the deal is hazy before he tips up for a medical is ridiculous, imagine how many transfers would fall though if you just verbally agreed stuff or worked with ballpark figures... the deals are done by solicitors, every time, even emails go through solicitors. The fact that Sunderland have gone back in after a potential threat from Lorient, it hardly makes Sunderland look innocent. It just looks like some proper amateur deal going on, Congerton's on gardening leave and having nowt to do with things in January is he not? That's what I read. Maybe there's your answer, who's doing the deals?
So what have we done wrong Tel? If you're going to tell me we don't look good here you need to back it up. But you've got nowt. Other than a quote from a team firing an empty accusation. Not personal Tel, you're a one of few casting aspersions of bad light on Sunderland with **** all to back it up. I mean, there's our own fans doing it which annoys me most. There's plenty we know about my club to say it ran ****, that's fair play. But if people are going put my club in a bad light with nowt backing it up I'm going to defend my club.
I agree with everything there, apart from that bit... I don't think we would jump in and spend 5 million on a player for fear of legal action...
Just going off what is out there, putting 2 & 2 together, possibly getting 5. You're doing the same, basing your club's innocence on assumptions. I'm just causing trouble anyway, you weren't supposed to get involved... **** off!
I've not said anywhere we're innocent, just offered counter arguments. Of the four parties only Lorient seem bothered. Personally I think that tells it's own story but eager for Lorient to actually complete their accusation so actually makes ****ing sense I need more than an empty accusation that makes no sense due to it's lack of vital detail to cast my own club in a bad light. I'll **** off. I'll give you a quick kiss and run away. please log in to view this image
You've spoiled it! I was brewing a royal rumble. Don't actually care about the deal. One thing I did find out was Johnsons contract is up in a few months, where do you stand on renewing that?
I'd offer a contract with a significant pay cut if he gets off. If he gets off I don't see why he should get the same wage in his next contract given as he's proved he's not worth his pay. Nobody else will match his present contract that's for sure. But on the right wage he becomes a salable asset. I don't think we should just let players with value walk for nowt if we can recoup money. All dependent on the outcome of the case. It's due to start next month. Juicy times.
With Shelvey, Tiote, Mitrovic & the ginger cnut the mags have a high propensity for yellow/red cards, thats before you factor in the Clown and Janmatt.
