- Joined
- Aug 11, 2021
- Messages
- 1,609
Right. But he did bench him. Which is what I said.Conte benched him... until he didn't
Right. But he did bench him. Which is what I said.Conte benched him... until he didn't
For me, the moral point of view is not that easy. Football players or in general in every sport athletes getting payed with what fans and spectators are willing to spend on the sport in merchandise, tickets or tv. (We exclude oil money here)
Frenkie signed his contract, as every other player with the obvious knowledge people will pay money in the future to see them, but that wasn't possible for a year for the stadiums were closed during covid.
So why should the club be morally obligated to pay the full amount if a big part of the income wasn't there for a long time? I'm standing on moral grounds here, not legal. Covid wasn't the clubs fault.
Right. But he did bench him. Which is what I said.
He doesn't really need one. His guarantee he gets those wages is the fact he can just say to Barca "i'm not leaving unless you pay me". Hell, even if he put a clause in his contract it wouldn't stop him from refusing to leave.
It's so weird that the "negligence from his agent" gets repeated here like some sort of a gospel, despite the fact that he has all the power and can outright refuse any Barcelona attempts to move him or renegotiate terms if he wants to.
But ETH is a man possessed for some De Jong.
Covid also wasn't de Jong's fault and it's absolutely the club's responsibility to prepare for financially more difficult periods, which is why such wage deferrals were quite rare in other clubs.Frenkie signed his contract, as every other player with the obvious knowledge people will pay money in the future to see them, but that wasn't possible for a year for the stadiums were closed during covid.
So why should the club be morally obligated to pay the full amount if a big part of the income wasn't there for a long time? I'm standing on moral grounds here, not legal. Covid wasn't the clubs fault.
I must admit at first I thought his agent had been negligent but thinking about it the clause isn't necessary when the player wants to stay. If Barca want to get rid then that's the price of doing it. Fundamentally the transfer system hugely benefits the clubs most of the time so they can't just rip up contracts when the shoe is on the other foot.The post you quoted was addressing the "his agent was grossly negligent" point that repeatedly pops up in this thread without much deeper explanation and I don't see how it challenges that. That being said, yes, "all the power that a football contract can reasonably grant a player in a situation where a club is determined to get him out without his full agreement" would be a much more precise way to phrase it.
I thought it's well established that staying at Barcelona is not some sort of a nightmare scenario for de Jong and while it may not be the only acceptable option for him it definitely is one of them.The negligence of his agent/lawyer will come into play, if in fact FdJ wants to join another club before his deferred wages have been payed up.
I thought it's well established that staying at Barcelona is not some sort of a nightmare scenario for de Jong and while it may not be the only acceptable option for him it definitely is one of them.
Yea, if it wasn't for Barcelona's financial situation and efforts to push him out this transfer saga likely would have never gotten off the ground.Probably preferred as well considering he’s wanted to play for them since he was a small kid and Cruyff was his idol.
Yes this is an increasing perception which is worrying in terms of our new managers outlook... what if he doesn't get FDJ?
Does ETH go into a darkened room and lie down with a wet towel on his face and tell Steve McClaren its all yours Steve!
You don't know too much about finance if you think this is doping, selling future revenue is a pretty normal financial instrument
They won't get liquidated, actually if you check out swiss ramble, they have a good break down of the financial situation, they are more than likely to be fine in a few years.
I agree regarding paying what they owe, I believe players will get paid, I'm not sure they will pay Frenkie all of his bonuses etc though which is probably the contention at the moment.
Legally speaking though, we don't know what the contract was, and its likely money isn't legally owed at this point which is why this is taking so much time.
Exactly my point, if he had told us clearly no we wouldn’t be chasing still.Well we wouldn't be chasing if they have said 'no', would we ....the point with FDJ seems to be no one has said a definite 'yes' or 'no', we seem to just have to wait around until he has sorted things out with Barca, but with no public encouragement from Frenkie that he wants to come to United. We don't seem to be getting an answer either way and like 'groupies' we are hanging around the Camp Nu hoping we get a chance to meet our hero ... and get his autograph!
Of course negotiations take time, but there is clearly some sort of 'mexican standoff' between Frenkie and Barca and we are left dangling, unable it seems to do anything about it.
Just what are we waiting for?
If its just 'the money' then say we want you so much Frankie we will even pay you what Barca owes you... just sign the dammed contract and get into pre-season with us now!
So basically you are implying that we are wasting time on a player who genuinely loves Barca and wants to stay there. Which is clear from the fact that he is blocking the transfer though as you said, he will get the money "one way or another".
Fantastic post. I was going to add that i was extremely confused about how his new contract worked but it finally clicked. You're right. When he took wage reductions is was simply a new contract, nothing about wages owed or even being deferred. There was likely an "unspoken" and moral discussion had that if FDJ signed a reduction, the wages increasing over the life of the contract would essentially be a "repayment". But this would not have featured in any of the legal wording. It simply would have been an agreed waged structure that both parties agreed.
Now this is where we find ourselves. Barcelona know there is no language about "owed" money. They are legally paying him what is due. Barcelona have agreed a deal with us because they can then 1. get the enormous wages off the books (and unpaid upcoming wages) if he leaves (as it's simply ending a contract with a sale), 2. force him into ANOTHER new contract which will be ANOTHER wage reduction and likely a lowering of his year 3..4...5 wages. So FDJ not only sees this as "morally" owed wages not being paid, but also, they are trying to feck him on a new contract and pay him even less.
So FDJ is looking at either losing out on "morally owed" wages, or staying and taking a PERMANENT wage cut that he'll never recover. What a mess.
This is an odd statement. We’re talking about a sports franchise and what they’re doing is not normal. In fact I don’t recall this happening in any other sport.
There did seem to be a lot of peer pressure at the club whilst all this was happened. Barca leaned on the players to ‘do the right thing’ and should now reciprocate with Frenkie.Can't it be both? By all accounts Barca went to the players cap in hand begging for them to defer their wages. It was unprecedented and perhaps the likes of De Jong should have been more cynical (though players like Pique would have known they'd never leave and would therefore be paid eventually, years down the line). Barca were the ones that used COVID/their own financial incompetence to get out of paying the players when originally agreed and it is now Barca asking De Jong to leave the club. It's pathetic.
As long as you also remember that the song is about anal penetration.It wasn't a good sign when he got on the plane for the preseason tour of the US but we have to remember to relax, Frenkie goes to Hollywood, apparently.
If you're speaking about financing future revenues, it's entirely normal. Financing and structuring of financing happen in many ways the difference here is that we are getting inside details.
United took an upfront payment from Adidas for future merchandise sales for instance, not the same but just to give you a bit of context that some of the things happening here are not as wild as being made out.
Another normal thing that has happened in football is for a club to take out a loan based on future transfer revenue being paid in installments so they can spend it now, a lot of financial instruments are used in football
What is unprecedented here is that Barcelona due to poor managements and some silly mistakes in writing down assets (not understanding FFP) ending up with a 500m+ loss in one of its financial years, but its a crazy number because they didn't actually lose 500+m, it was just the way they chose to run their books for that season which has had negative consequences (they did lose a lot of money though, but not 500m+).
No it doesn'tExcept it's not that easy. Our season hinges on signing FDJ. And it will not look good losing FDJ after the whole summer being played like a schmuck.
If I'm Arnold I'd say feck it, here's 15M more and I become the hero. Rather than being pelted by eggs by the angry fans. Not my money anyway.
Realistically speaking, 15M is not much. Only our ego is hurt, money wise it really is peanuts.
But even with 15M it's only Par for FDJ. He'll need substantially more than that to lure him away from his preferred club.
That's the one.Update: no update
Will be the same for a while I think. Another couple of weeks with little to no movement I'd betUpdate: no update
My thinking exactly.There did seem to be a lot of peer pressure at the club whilst all this was happened. Barca leaned on the players to ‘do the right thing’ and should now reciprocate with Frenkie.
That's pretty much how journos think... anything for the traffic and clicks. Even if they're wrong they claim it as opinion"Nobody has tweeted about De Jong lately, this should generate some clicks"
But I think any sane player would not forgo millions when they have a contract. Even if Barca successfully force de Jong to accept their terms doesn't mean that others will accept itCould be because they don’t want to create a precedence where any player who wants to leave can get the deferred money Barca owe. Right now they have the line that if the contract is broken the money is gone which has probably worked so far.
Intent is to discredit the BS from Sport the last few days.
sums up the past 400 pages !Update: no update
I know, this just makes it even more relevant!As long as you also remember that the song is about anal penetration.
Watching the preseason only makes me want him more, we'd be a dominant possession team with him in midfield
Wouldn't be surprised if their economic levers enable them to buy Twitter at this pointI wonder if Barcas lever activation enables them to buy Silva on top of their other signings and register him whilst keeping de Jong?
I'd say it's unlikely to be fair, so I'm guessing Barca is against the clock now if they want Silva.
Did they? I thought we signed to a ten year deal and Adidas paid annually (from the start)?If you're speaking about financing future revenues, it's entirely normal. Financing and structuring of financing happen in many ways the difference here is that we are getting inside details.
United took an upfront payment from Adidas for future merchandise sales for instance, not the same but just to give you a bit of context that some of the things happening here are not as wild as being made out.
Another normal thing that has happened in football is for a club to take out a loan based on future transfer revenue being paid in installments so they can spend it now, a lot of financial instruments are used in football
What is unprecedented here is that Barcelona due to poor managements and some silly mistakes in writing down assets (not understanding FFP) ending up with a 500m+ loss in one of its financial years, but its a crazy number because they didn't actually lose 500+m, it was just the way they chose to run their books for that season which has had negative consequences (they did lose a lot of money though, but not 500m+).