HDMsport ‏@HDMsport Seems #hcafc were willing to pay £5.5m with £1m potential add-ons for Shane Long, West Brom wanted straight £6.5m.
Think people may be missing one important part of the West Brom statement. We accepted Hull's offer in principle and gave them permission to speak to Shane, but the deal depended on many other factors - including a real reluctance to sell. "In a phone conversation with Shane's representative, I informed him that Shane was under no pressure to leave. We were definitely not trying to force him out. I have to say "then why would you?" If you have a real reluctance to sell, then don't! We were in no position to force the issue. Do you think we were ringing every club in the country on Monday afternoon saying "have you got any players you are really reluctant to sell but will?" This is nonsense. Someone must have alerted us to his availability. It wasn't the agent. See the next line of the West Brom statement. In a phone conversation with Shane's representative, I informed him that Shane was under no pressure to leave. We were definitely not trying to force him out What would you think if your boss called you out of the blue and said "we're not trying to force you out"...........................? Yeah, exactly. This is all about West Brom trying to now tell Shane Long "we love you really" it was those big boys from Hull who made us do it. They know that unless he signs a contract extension Long is now virtually worthless to them unless he plays. And he's 5th in line to do that.....or they've spent a lot of money buying back up strikers. If you look at the Odemwingie situation last year you will see that West Brom directly contradicted themselves in their statements about him, first saying there was no deal with QPR then saying there was but it wasn't completed. Whatever you may think of the Allams, or NT, I trust Steve Bruce and he must have known what was going on. For me, I think Clarke panicked when he thought he wasn't going to get Anichebe, and prematurely pulled the Long deal. My guess is we'll quietly get Long in January if we still want him. I don't think he'll sign a new deal at WBA unless they really cross his palm with silver. At this point, if he wasn't before, he must be thinking what's in it for me. And WBA have to get a contract extension or he has no re-sale value to them.
The media had it pretty well nailed on as a 5 million bid. Maybe it wasn't a case of City not having the funds but a case of them not willing to play along with WBA putting the price up at the 11th hour. Dirty tricks? Bring forth the Allam's lawyers.
Other than a desire to believe the Allams are perfect, what is there to suggest it was them who changed the price? Why would they be accusing us of the same thing?
Other than a desire to disbelieve everything the Allam regime says what is there to suggest it was us that changed the price? Why would we go to the bother of flying the player over and carrying out a medical if we were going to renege on the deal?
1) West Bromwich Albion's statement saying we changed the deal. 2) HDM tweet saying we changed the deal. There is literally nothing suggesting that WBA changed the price. John just suggested that because he, like many people on here, would prefer to believe the Allams never do anything wrong.
I find it hard to believe we missed out on a deal in the dying minutes over 1 million. The Allams have some questions to answer if this is indeed true.
And still people are deluded enough to think the owners have to answer to us and explain themselves like school kids caught red handed. They can do what that want. They don't have to answer any questions. Get real.
They would. Trying to dig themselves out of a hole. If what Wba say is true then why allow it to happen in the first place.? SSN have mentioned it a few times yesterday.
Utter drivel this, even for you. The Allams offered £6.5m and nothing sensible anyone says will change my view on that. The phones ringing in the Baggies pot kettle black department. We can get him on a FAT next summer anyway. As always TWT.
Very true. I really hope that the Allams go out and prove Wba are lying even though they dont have to. This smacks of the WBA/DQPR Odemwingie deal last January. Payback for Hull City would be to get Long cheaper in jan or on a Fat next summer. Why should they ? They dont have to but in saying that i dont think the Allams will let it go. Lawyers4U have been called. Lol. Spot on John. Totally agree ^^^^ this. Dont waste your wonga. Donate your money to a local charity instead. OLM's best post for yonks. Well done and did you need help with it ?
Barmby sacked, all on here, "Allams have some answers," SB hired, all well. Name change, a few on here, "Allams,answers," Hudds signs, some ok. Long not signed because of money from our end, "Allams, answers," THEY DON'T ANSWER! Zzzzzzzzz they'll only answer if they want to, if not it'll just be one more thing, nothing's going to change, yes we'd all like to know how much was offered & details etc etc, but in a few weeks it'll be forgotten & we won't know jack **** about anything!
The Allams still have to answer to me, for sacking Nick Barmby and replacing him with Steve ****ing Bruce. And Huddlestone can **** off if it means we can be called Hull City A.F.C. That is all.
Out of interest, does anyone believe we paid up front for Huddlestone? Payments over a certain period of time were already common but I reckon even more so due to financial fair play. I doubt Spurs shelled out 100m up front but more likely over 3/4 years.
