Transfer Rumours January 2022 Transfer Window

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
SaintsFan86 said:
You must log in or register to see media
Click to expand...
I’d like to think Chelsea wouldn’t recall him to sell him. I don’t think there is a registration issue but clubs might not go to them for loans in the future if they operate that way

Hopefully loan recalls are conditional on not getting enough minutes but I don’t know if that is a thing
 
tomw24 said:
TBH it would be far less hassle for Chelsea to sell to us. They've dealt with us before, I assume negotiations with Tino went smoothly and we'd be willing to include a buy back clause.
Click to expand...

Yes, 1st refusal with a buy back and a percentage of next sale if he went somewhere else too.
 
I’d imagine if someone else came in and bid enough Chelsea would accept and maybe pay us a fee to terminate the loan early.

I dont think they will be desperate to sell this window though so only if they receive some crazy offer
 
Saintmagic said:
I’d imagine if someone else came in and bid enough Chelsea would accept and maybe pay us a fee to terminate the loan early.

I dont think they will be desperate to sell this window though so only if they receive some crazy offer
Click to expand...
I doubt there is any mechanism where they can pay us a fee to terminate early. I’d be stunned if something like that was in the loan agreement. How would that be written? Mutual agreement of termination or settlement fee is one party doesn’t agree? Sounds like nonsense

And I don’t think premier league clubs can just cut a cheque to another without it being for player trading

So I’d expect the only way they could “pay us a fee” would be something Wolves like - a discount on selling us another player or them overpaying signing a player from us
 
It's Only A Game said:
If it wasn't to us I would imagine we would fight hard not to let that happen mid-season.
Click to expand...
Yeah there is absolutely no benefit for us in agreeing to this if indeed the termination has to be mutual

Short of them also calling Gallagher back from Palace and sending him to us for 6 months instead or something like that

But it sounded like our working relationship was them is positive given they loan us him after the Tino deal so they don’t seem annoyed about that one. I don’t think you just tear up arrangements like that even if you are run by a ruthless oligarch

Indeed selling to us might be a good thing for them as we will agree to clauses and it will open up another loan slot from them to develop another player …

Consider how they ended up bringing Lukaku back for something like 70m more than they sold him for. A fixed buy back removes that. Similar to selling De Bruyne and Salah and not really having the chance to get them back

But perhaps all this sounds far too sensible for football
 
  • Like
Reactions: It'sOnlyAGame and OddRiverOakWizards
Gregm1988 said:
I doubt there is any mechanism where they can pay us a fee to terminate early. I’d be stunned if something like that was in the loan agreement. How would that be written? Mutual agreement of termination or settlement fee is one party doesn’t agree? Sounds like nonsense

And I don’t think premier league clubs can just cut a cheque to another without it being for player trading

So I’d expect the only way they could “pay us a fee” would be something Wolves like - a discount on selling us another player or them overpaying signing a player from us
Click to expand...
It would be considered a contract breach or a contract termination, under which both parties could reach a mutually agreed settlement.. i.e. money... Any contract can be terminated early just a matter of how much it costs.. (think phone contracts, car leases etc)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saintmagic
whatsheblownthewhistleforthistime said:
It would be considered a contract breach or a contract termination, under which both parties could reach a mutually agreed settlement.. i.e. money... Any contract can be terminated early just a matter of how much it costs.. (think phone contracts, car leases etc)
Click to expand...
In which case I would expect penalty clauses are already written in. And given his value at the time of the loan they probably aren’t that high

So it goes back to reputation and relationship management. Perhaps Chelsea’s young players are so good clubs will always want to loan them. But I’m not sure establishing a precedent of calling them back if they impress is what they want. Otherwise surely Gallagher would have been called back? Although they are more stocked in that position
 
You must log in or register to see media

If we can get anything for Valery then it might be a good option as he is way behind KWP and Tino. Obviously it would depend on how serious Tino's knee injury is.
 
Ronnie Hotdog (MLsfc) said:
You must log in or register to see media

If we can get anything for Valery then it might be a good option as he is way behind KWP and Tino. Obviously it would depend on how serious Tino's knee injury is.
Click to expand...
I wonder what the level of interest in Bednarek is? He has a long contract but if it is a bid that allows for an upgrade it could be interesting. Doesn’t make sense for mid season though

Same for Valery - we should probably consider reasonable money. Safe to say we won’t consider a loan otherwise he would already be out on loan
 
Gregm1988 said:
I wonder what the level of interest in Bednarek is? He has a long contract but if it is a bid that allows for an upgrade it could be interesting. Doesn’t make sense for mid season though

Same for Valery - we should probably consider reasonable money. Safe to say we won’t consider a loan otherwise he would already be out on loan
Click to expand...
Yeah Bednarek is a funny one. He hasn't played well enough to attract interest from bigger clubs that could offer serious money, but he has been stable enough that we would only sell if we got a very strong big. Can't see who would want to spend what we would surely want for him.
 
Ronnie Hotdog (MLsfc) said:
Yeah Bednarek is a funny one. He hasn't played well enough to attract interest from bigger clubs that could offer serious money, but he has been stable enough that we would only sell if we got a very strong big. Can't see who would want to spend what we would surely want for him.
Click to expand...
Newcastle. <whistle>
 
Ronnie Hotdog (MLsfc) said:
Yeah Bednarek is a funny one. He hasn't played well enough to attract interest from bigger clubs that could offer serious money, but he has been stable enough that we would only sell if we got a very strong big. Can't see who would want to spend what we would surely want for him.
Click to expand...
Transfermarkt value him at pretty much 20m. Would we take that for him? I think they take contract lengthy into account

Incidentally they value Broja at 8m even with the 5 year contract that Chelsea fans insist mean he is worth north of 50m

Now players that clubs don’t want to sell tend to go for higher than the value on that site. But not 5+ times higher
 
Gregm1988 said:
Transfermarkt value him at pretty much 20m. Would we take that for him? I think they take contract lengthy into account

Incidentally they value Broja at 8m even with the 5 year contract that Chelsea fans insist mean he is worth north of 50m

Now players that clubs don’t want to sell tend to go for higher than the value on that site. But not 5+ times higher
Click to expand...

For us to Sell Bednerak I would imagine it would cost the team £30Million and then If it is newcastle.. We should just chuck on a extra £20Million for good measure.
 
We surely can’t sell any players to Newcastle this window after their nonsense with the rearranged game. They’d have to offer us well over the odds. As in more over the odds than what they paid for Chris Wood

Incidentally - they paid 5 times his transfermarkt value . I don’t know how that site works out values but I suspect it isn’t off by a factor of 5
 
  • Like
Reactions: Osvaldorama
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back