Ander Herrera is a Manchester United Player!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Plugsy said:
I think it is that. But there's no "We can't wibble our tits about to get attention on protest" clause though, therein lies the problem.
Click to expand...
If it was that simple, they wouldn't have been able to reject an offer that matched the buy-out clause. Which is apparently what they have done.
 
what does the league have to do with this, are they third-party owners of the contract or just an independent verification who can confirm when terms have been met that release the player from his contract?
 
Stan Jefferson said:
Irrelevant, you have to make the bid because no matter what anyone says, they will. Your telling me if somebody bids 200m for some unknown player who never gets a game for the club they would reject it in favour of them getting a nominal amount for the players buy out? Like bollocks they would and you'd have to be pretty thick headed to think so. Its the same with every player for every club, there is always a point, always an amount that will be accepted, whether your talking to bilbao or real madrid or colchester.
Click to expand...

I don't understand how people still don't get this.

You could bid LITERALLY £1bn for the most horrible footballer ever and they still would have absolutely nothing to spend that money on. I don't understand how after 2 summers of fecking around with Bilbao people still can't get it into their heads.
 
Jev said:
If it was that simple, they wouldn't have been able to reject an offer that matched the buy-out clause. Which is apparently what they have done.
Click to expand...

Symbolic. If we meet the buy-out clause he's ours. They just want to be seen to say no.
 
Lane said:
Why? I's exactly the opposite, it's stupid not to have medical, because the time constraints. United need to close the deal as soon as lawyers will give them green light, so all personal details and medical should already be in the bag. It's like that for any type of these deals.
Click to expand...
it isnt the way of all deals,look at odemwingie, you are not allowed to have a player in your club house before an agreement with the club
 
Why has the thread been changed? There aren't any complications, it's a three day old story that they rejected a bid, since then it's all been happening
 
JPRouve said:
The complications are legals, the buy out clause is not a complicated thing in itself, the problem is that you have to deal with something unfamiliar. If the lawyers think that they can deal with the buy out clause and the LFP requirements quickly, than the 2nd option is not a problem. Therefore not stupid
Click to expand...

Listen, its getting harder and harder to understand what on earth your argument is at this point and quite frankly I'm disappointed in myself for getting so drawn in so this is my last reply to you*. If it can potentially save you time and money (which in this case making a bid could), you do it, if you don't then you are not doing you job properly. I don't know what on earth you brought lawyers into this for, I'm talking about business sense and the potential financial implications of not putting the bid in first. I never said its problem to go down the buy out clause route at all, i simply said its dumb to not put a bid in first.

* this may or may not be the case
 
Arruda said:
It is discriminatory no doubt, but how do you go and apply the law in the football business? Force them to have a quota of foreign players? Would you do that to every club? A company may be be sued if applying workers feel they've been discriminated on that basis, but in sports things don't work that way.

In regards to the "restricted trade" people aren't commodities, you probably mean freedom of movement, and in that regard the Bosman ruling applies - when his contract ends.
Click to expand...

The main difference is that clubs don't advertise a position and players apply.

Clubs can simply buy players they want and there's nothing the discrimination laws can do about it
 
Striker10 said:
exactly. Not sure why it's so hard to fathom?
Click to expand...

Maybe because not so long ago they were in debt and it's not that cheap to run a club? 36m now or the risk of losing him for free in 2 years time? Not going to happen probably but who knows if we pull back, it's not like there are a whole lot clubs in for him to drive the price up..
 
Bilbao have always been cnuts. I hope we wont pull our eggs in this Herrera-basket, and still focus on other subjects. Cba with another Cesc-saga.
 
By all accounts Herrera is meant to be a nice guy so it's a shame to see his club acting like this, it'll leave a bad feeling when thee really doesn't need to be.
 
I'm guessing the reason we saw the formal rejection from Athletic today is that some deadline (of ours) passed yesterday. We may well have offered (slightly) over the clause, or thrown in a friendly match of whatever to sweeten the deal.

However with July 1 approaching, we stopped negotiating and went to the LFP.

And then Athletic formally announced that they'd rejected our offer. Remember, Athletic are a members club. Not only can't you just get a handshake from the President and a deal's done, he needs to get the agreement of the board. He also needs to look tough when the next club election comes up.
 
Stretch said:
I think people are panicking for nothing and having a go at Woodward for something that's not his fault.

It seem Bilbao rejected a bid from us earlier this week and since then we've gone the player buy out way. So I expect a deal to be announced tomorrow most likely. I'd say we're probably not very impressed with Bilbao's public disclosure and behavior.
Click to expand...

Why would they announce that they rejected the bid if we have gone the player buy out way since? That would make no sense.
 
Berbaclass said:
Is far as I'm aware It goes from €36 Million to €40 Million. Anyone is welcome to correct me on this though.
Click to expand...

This is perhaps why I have made this mistake. Still I expect us to complete the deal earlier to avoid the Fellaini scenario where we paid £4.5m more than we had to.
 
Stan Jefferson said:
Listen, its getting harder and harder to understand what on earth your argument is at this point and quite frankly I'm disappointed in myself for getting so drawn in so this is my last reply to you*. If it can potentially save you time and money (which in this case making a bid could), you do it, if you don't then you are not doing you job properly. I don't know what on earth you brought lawyers into this for, I'm talking about business sense and the potential financial implications of not putting the bid in first. I never said its problem to go down the buy out clause route at all, i simply said its dumb to not put a bid in first.

* this may or may not be the case
Click to expand...

We are on the same page, stop wasting your time.
 
Name Changed said:
Why would they announce that they rejected the bid if we have gone the player buy out way since? That would make no sense.
Click to expand...

It would because they want it to be seen that they didn't want to and were unwilling to sell the player.
 
stu_1992 said:
By all accounts Herrera is meant to be a nice guy so it's a shame to see his club acting like this, it'll leave a bad feeling when thee really doesn't need to be.
Click to expand...
IMO Herrera is not worth the release clause hence the stall.
 
Berbaclass said:
I don't know much about tax and stuff but how can we just give him that amount of money without incurring any tax? Is it just some loophole?
Click to expand...
It's going through the lawyers, IINM. The lawyers pay the Spanish Federation on his behalf. There's some paperwork to go through to satisfy both the Spanish Federation and the local tax regulators.

And even that is not a guaranteed success. Just that historically, no one has challenged it. Everyone just keeps quiet and does what the authorities tell them to do. Jump the hoops, to avoid trouble.

Nytram Shakes said:
it dosnt matter if we have set the wheels in motion or not, thier is obviously no agreement in place as of yet. What ever way you look at it or spin it, having another player at your training ground without an agreement with the club(whether that be directly with the club or via the Spanish FA) is not a professional way to act.

compared to that a tweet is nothing.

i sincerely hope that herrera at carrigton was a media fabrication(in which case yes bilbao are acting unprofessionally) but if he was thier that is very unprofessional
Click to expand...
IINM, that only applies to normal transfers. Right now, the player is buying out his contract. Either

a) He has apparently already submitted the paperwork to buy out, so he is free to conduct the medical. Or
b) Buying out the contract is already breaching the contract by Spanish law, so going for medical earlier is not a problem.

That's the two prevailing theories right now that I can comprehend.
 
Berbaclass said:
I don't know much about tax and stuff but how can we just give him that amount of money without incurring any tax? Is it just some loophole?
Click to expand...

nope, when asked we just say "monies? what monies?" and everyone moves along.
 
Nytram Shakes said:
it isnt the way of all deals,look at odemwingie, you are not allowed to have a player in your club house before an agreement with the club
Click to expand...
If I remember rightly, Odemwingie was under the impression that a verbal agreement with QPR had been agreed and he was under the impression that he had permission to go to QPR to finalise a deal. When he got to QPR, he found out no deal had been agreed and he didn't have permission to be there, so he was denied access, and QPR didn't want to associate themselves in any way with him. They didn't have West Broms permission to talk to him, and doing so would have probably found them in deep trouble.

So United obviously have some sort of permission for Herrera to be at the clubs training ground etc (Assuming he was there in the first place)
 
stu_1992 said:
By all accounts Herrera is meant to be a nice guy so it's a shame to see his club acting like this, it'll leave a bad feeling when thee really doesn't need to be.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be surprised if this is why he's already in Manchester. United want him out of the way of the Basque press and the midnight visit from fans chanting on his doorstep.
 
So basically the rejected the bid by United, which would have been the easy way, and want the player to activate the buy out clause which he did by filing all the documents a couple of days ago. Nothing to be seen here
 
Athletic won't get a penny above €36m anyway, right?
 
Arruda said:
It is discriminatory no doubt, but how do you go and apply the law in the football business? Force them to have a quota of foreign players? Would you do that to every club? A company maybe be sued if applying workers feel they've been discriminated on that basis, but in sports things don't work that way.

In regards to the "restricted trade" people aren't commodities, you probably mean freedom of movement, and in that regard the Bosman ruling applies - when his contract ends.
Click to expand...

It doesn't apply to every club, because 99% of them don't have such a policy.

What I'm talking about is a club (still a business don't forget) having a public policy that is clearly discriminatory. And I'm surprised the EU are not applying the law to it. I know this is all caught up with politics. Maybe autonomous regions like the Basque country have certain EU exemptions or something.

By law a club should recruit on the basis of ability and the job requirement . Not on where someone comes from. It surprises me it's still possible to do that, that's all.

Fair point on freedom of movement.
 
tombombadil said:
It's going through the lawyers, IINM. The lawyers pay the Spanish Federation on his behalf. There's some paperwork to go through to satisfy both the Spanish Federation and the local tax regulators.

And even that is not a guaranteed success. Just that historically, no one has challenged it. Everyone just keeps quiet and does what the authorities tell them to do. Jump the hoops, to avoid trouble.
Click to expand...

Ahh right. I was under the assumption that the player himself had to deposit the money at the LFP headquarters.

rimaldo said:
nope, when asked we just say "monies? what monies?" and everyone moves along.
Click to expand...

:lol:
 
Miscemayl said:
The main difference is that clubs don't advertise a position and players apply.

Clubs can simply buy players they want and there's nothing the discrimination laws can do about it
Click to expand...

True, but there's a difference between doing that and actively stating it.
 
JPRouve said:
We are on the same page, stop wasting your time.
Click to expand...

You keep disagreeing with me, you must have a very odd definition of on the same page.

Im going to have to stop, i feel like I'm having a conversation with somebody who is having a completely different one with me.

We'll just have to agree to disagree, or agree to agree or agree to whatever it is were doing.
 
Plugsy said:
It would because they want it to be seen that they didn't want to and were unwilling to sell the player.
Click to expand...

Yeah but you don't announce a bid has been rejected and make it sound like you are keeping him, when in fact you are selling him anyway.
 
Nytram Shakes said:
it nothing to do with meeting us halfway he is thier player.

we have to meet thier terms before we can buy him, once we have met those terms, if via lawyers or an agreement with bilbao, then we take him to carrington, not before
Click to expand...

He is not their player when we have gone to the Spanish FA - which I assume we have done already. Doesn't really matter too much if he was there at Carrington or not.
 
NinjaFletch said:
I don't understand how people still don't get this.

You could bid LITERALLY £1bn for the most horrible footballer ever and they still would have absolutely nothing to spend that money on. I don't understand how after 2 summers of fecking around with Bilbao people still can't get it into their heads.
Click to expand...

Infrastructure, better wages, cheaper tickets for the fans? If they deem the money more important to the club's future I'd guess they will probably accept the money. It's just that they have a much higher ceiling for that than the average club. Have they never willingly sold a player before (honest question)?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.