Maguire | he stays!

FriedClams said:
Least favourite player in my time supporting United.
Click to expand...
Can't say the least, but in the pot with Di Maria and Sanchez.
Hopefully he goes to West Ham even if we have to pay 15 mil., just get rid of him at all cost!
 
Zora said:
Ah - so Neil Custis is right on this bit of news about Harry demanding 15m but he's not right when it comes to his story about the club being sold in November?

You can't be selective with news. You're either all in on the Custard Man or not at all.
Click to expand...
I guess you can - he might be right sometimes and wrong sometimes. Not saying either o the subjects you mention or either of these.
 
If it's true about the £15m, let him rot in the reserves, as some people use to say about Rooney and Ronaldo
 
Nogho said:
According to Andy Mitten United haven’t allowed West Ham to talk to Maguire yet, they, EtH, want a replacement first.

Source: The Athletic Podcast
Click to expand...
Taking their sweet time
 
justsomebloke said:
Of course it's not irrelevant. You're getting compensation to persuade you to accept a lower salary. It's not like you're being kicked out of a job.
Click to expand...

A player is well within their rights to demand compensation for break of contract if they're being paid the same or more at their new club. They'd be a bit daft in the case of the latter as it could cause the deal to fall through, but that's why it's irrelevant.

It is a bit like getting kicked out of a job though, isn't it? It's literally an employer attempting to break their contract with an employee.
 
How dare he ask for what he was promised in his contract before agreeing to switch jobs and take a massive pay cut..

And that’s taking the Custis article at face value, which isn’t wise.
 
Some rumours this morning that West Ham are now considering pulling out of the deal because of the time it’s taking. And the Hammers have identified 2 defenders in Johnathan Tah or Kossounou. It’s time to get this move wrapped up or move on.
 
mitchmouse said:
If it's true about the £15m, let him rot in the reserves, as some people use to say about Rooney and Ronaldo
Click to expand...

I wouldn't let him rot in the reserves but yeah it's not worth selliing him for 15m.

Cost more to replace him, even with someone of the same quality. If he wants the money then let him stay on the bench and play an odd game.
 
Imagine being so mediocre as a player and then having the audacity to negotiate your pay-off. Surely he has a bit of self-respect to salvage.
 
I am always saying that we must be more ruthless towards players. His right is to demand money. Our right is to put him in reserves.
Lets see who will blink first. Is he prepared to lose whole season (and miss Euro)? I bet not.
 
Alex99 said:
A player is well within their rights to demand compensation for break of contract if they're being paid the same or more at their new club. They'd be a bit daft in the case of the latter as it could cause the deal to fall through, but that's why it's irrelevant.

It is a bit like getting kicked out of a job though, isn't it? It's literally an employer attempting to break their contract with an employee.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. And how on earth is being transferred out a breach of contract? It happens all the time, everyone who signs for a club does so on the understanding they might be sold to another club before the contract is up - indeed that is what everyone expects to happen, unless they sign a new one. That's why most transfers aren't free agent signings. What is more, they can refuse to go if they want to.
 
Andycoleno9 said:
I am always saying that we must be more ruthless towards players. His right is to demand money. Our right is to put him in reserves.
Lets see who will blink first. Is he prepared to lose whole season (and miss Euro)? I bet not.
Click to expand...
This, we are too nice we even put him on the bench. Should feck him off to the reserves, take away his parking privileges and make him eat with the kids. He is shit yet he still wants to cling to a salary his talents aren't worth.
 
I am between two minds on this.

One part of me understands that this is his career and he doesn't want to leave any money on the table.

The other part says that he's already been made extremely rich by this club, been given the biggest opportunity of his life here and let us down again and again with his own performances. He now has a chance to do something that would benifit the club where he will still be extremely highly paid and the fact he is holding us to ransom is quite classless.

Either way if we pay, it reminds me of a quote from the movie Moneyball.

Something along the lines of "The Yankees are paying half your contract. They are paying you millions of dollars to play AGAINST them this season. That's how much they think of you."

That's how much we think of you Harry.
 
justsomebloke said:
No, it isn't. And how on earth is being transferred out a breach of contract? It happens all the time, everyone who signs for a club does so on the understanding they might be sold to another club before the contract is up - indeed that is what everyone expects to happen, unless they sign a new one. That's why most transfers aren't free agent signings. What is more, they can refuse to go if they want to.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was a breach of contract, I said it was breaking their contract. They are different things. What do you think a transfer is? It's one club essentially buying out the contract of a player from another club, or in other terms, paying for that contract to be broken.

Players obviously understand that they may be transferred, but literally the entire purpose of the contracts is to protect both player and club.

I'm not even sure what you're arguing anymore. I said the wages at a new club were irrelevant to compensation, precisely because, as you've just stated, a player can refuse to move while under contract. If the club wants him to move when he isn't overly keen, as is the case with Maguire, they're probably going to have to stump up for compensation. This would be true even if West Ham had a quarter of a million a week to give him and he still didn't want to leave, hence the wages being irrelevant.

What exactly is your point here?
 
Alex99 said:
I didn't say it was a breach of contract, I said it was breaking their contract. They are different things. What do you think a transfer is? It's one club essentially buying out the contract of a player from another club, or in other terms, paying for that contract to be broken.

Players obviously understand that they may be transferred, but literally the entire purpose of the contracts is to protect both player and club.

I'm not even sure what you're arguing anymore. I said the wages at a new club were irrelevant to compensation, precisely because, as you've just stated, a player can refuse to move while under contract. If the club wants him to move when he isn't overly keen, as is the case with Maguire, they're probably going to have to stump up for compensation. This would be true even if West Ham had a quarter of a million a week to give him and he still didn't want to leave, hence the wages being irrelevant.

What exactly is your point here?
Click to expand...

Er, no, it is not. It is one club essentially buying the right to sign a player from another club, and then negotiating a contract with that player - which then supersedes and nullifies the previously existing contract. They do not usually buy out the contract, which would imply compensating the player for the remainder of his existing contract before he is signed to a new one. This does happen, mainly when players need to be persuaded to move from big and rich clubs to smaller and less affluent clubs, but it is the exception, not the rule.

What I'm arguing is that this cannot be reasonably compared to being kicked out of a job, and nor does it constitute breaking a contract. Most obviously because it can only happen with the players consent. Hence, there is in principle no reason whatsoever why the selling club should be considered to have any obligation to pay out the remainder of the contract - the contract is in effect discontinued by mutual consent.

The issue only arises at all in cases where both player and club essentially want to make the transfer, but where the terms available at the new club is so much worse that this in itself becomes an obstacle to the transfer taking place. Then it's simply a matter of negotiation - it depends on how keen the club is to move the player out, and how motivated the player is to go to the new club. That's not a matter of obligation, on either side. And in this picture, of course it matters what the wages at the new club is. That's what defines the gap the negotiation is over. In effect, that's negotiating over a pay cut.
 
I don't get why players are so desperate to keep their wages if the next move offers less.

- Is there really that much difference between earning £190k a week and £100k a week?
- You got a move to one of the world's best, hence the wage, but you have failed there. Therefore you don't deserve those wages.
 
And ladies and gentlemen, as wrong as you may think booing our own player is, this is why he got boo’d.
 
Sums him up tbh. Remember guys, his family started sliding into media people's inboxes having a go at them for criticising their cash cow, sorry, relative.

He won the lottery getting to play for us and he turned out disgraceful, conference level performances and didn't have the common decency to admit we are far above his level and that he's failed. Instead he hangs around like a fart on a lift, stinking up the place and now wants a pay off.

Just unreal, have some self respect you brick headed moron.
 
Custis is a known shot-stirrer. Don't believe a word he says.

Also - get rid.
 
I've had a message this morning saying that West Ham are extremely annoyed at how this has gone, and we can't take a chance on this deal not happening so have basically given up and are looking elsewhere to ensure we have a defensive player in place for certain.

I do wonder if this maybe some brinkmanship still to get a move on, but the threat is absolutely genuine from what I've been told.
 
It will happen. This is just negotiation strategy.
 
Koldbeer2021 said:
I've had a message this morning saying that West Ham are extremely annoyed at how this has gone, and we can't take a chance on this deal not happening so have basically given up and are looking elsewhere to ensure we have a defensive player in place for certain.

I do wonder if this maybe some brinkmanship still to get a move on, but the threat is absolutely genuine from what I've been told.
Click to expand...
You're better off without him. He hasn't put in a good performance since mid 2021.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.