I don't believe a club could be that stupid. However, nothing suprises me with Blackburn. Blackburn don't have a leg to stand on. Why they create this drama only God knows? What we have here are people who don't know what they're doing. If they think there's such thing as a clause that lets you talk to players..then they're out of their mind. They should go back to doing what they were doing before because they know nothing about football or business it seems. Trying to make out we tapped him up. Jokers. 99% of clubs tap up and the other 1% just wait for the agent to open his fat mouth.
Phil Jones to United | Transfer to Champions complete
- Thread starter mubarak
- Start date
- Status
I don't believe a club could be that stupid. However, nothing suprises me with Blackburn. Blackburn don't have a leg to stand on. Why they create this drama only God knows? What we have here are people who don't know what they're doing. If they think there's such thing as a clause that lets you talk to players..then they're out of their mind. They should go back to doing what they were doing before because they know nothing about football or business it seems. Trying to make out we tapped him up. Jokers. 99% of clubs tap up and the other 1% just wait for the agent to open his fat mouth.
Everything has to be complicated nowadays, right? Anything that makes even remotely sense, is a conspiracy.The only reason I have some belief in these stories is how utterly thick the owners seem to be regarding running a football club. It's completely fathomable that all of this, if it is something, is down to a lack of understanding as to how things work.
Anyways this is the important one. Couldn't care less about ashley young really. From everything ivr hear Jones seems to be the real deal.
I believe this is all but a storm in a tea cup. Rovers wouldnt let Jones to undergo a medical if they weren't prepared to sell for the previously agreed price.
If someone offers us £18m for Resario, Fergie should snatch their arm off. He's done feck all since he's been here.
Heh. Good find.
Of course the agent will spread the word about the value of his client's release clause. That's just doing his job. There's no point negotiating one if it's supposed to be some kind of state secret.
This is right up there in the Venky's epic brainfart compilation. Someone better buy them a blackboard and a piece of chalk at this rate.
You can't write a release clause figure into a contract and then cry foul when someone catches wind of it and decides to activate it with the due amount, it's breach of contract to delay the situation as they seem to be doing.
You can't write a release clause figure into a contract and then cry foul when someone catches wind of it and decides to activate it with the due amount, it's breach of contract to delay the situation as they seem to be doing.
Been listening to talksport this morning and they are under the impression that the release clause is now being questioned, because it states he can be sold for at least £16m. (indicating they can ask for more)!
Utd activated that release clause by bidding the said amount, but once the owners became aware of a potential bidding war between Utd, Dippers and Arsenal that is when they have tried to question the specifics of the original clause, and now having done so, they are after an additional £8m.
I emphasise none of this is official, only what i heard on Talksport an hour or so ago. Tbh i don't think anyone knows for sure yet, but that seems to be the general gist of it.
We agreed to pay the release clause before Blackburn allow him to go for the medical, no? How is there a bidding war now when he has already chosen United as his destination?
Been listening to talksport this morning and they are under the impression that the release clause is now being questioned, because it states he can be sold for at least £16m. (indicating they can ask for more)!
Utd activated that release clause by bidding the said amount, but once the owners became aware of a potential bidding war between Utd, Dippers and Arsenal that is when they have tried to question the specifics of the original clause, and now having done so, they are after an additional £8m.
I emphasise none of this is official, only what i heard on Talksport an hour or so ago. Tbh i don't think anyone knows for sure yet, but that seems to be the general gist of it.
Phil Jones, Phil Jones' agent, and Manchester United would not all between them confuse a release clause with a minimum requirement. I'd back those three parties in this saga to know the ins and outs more than a bunch of chicken tenders who have time and again lived up to their clueless reputation. I feel sorry for Rovers in this, they don't deserve to be dragged through the circus their owners seem intent on dragging them through.
Been listening to talksport this morning and they are under the impression that the release clause is now being questioned, because it states he can be sold for at least £16m. (indicating they can ask for more)!
Utd activated that release clause by bidding the said amount, but once the owners became aware of a potential bidding war between Utd, Dippers and Arsenal that is when they have tried to question the specifics of the original clause, and now having done so, they are after an additional £8m.
I emphasise none of this is official, only what i heard on Talksport an hour or so ago. Tbh i don't think anyone knows for sure yet, but that seems to be the general gist of it.
Then what's the point of having a release clause in the first place? Idiots running a circus.
Been listening to talksport this morning and they are under the impression that the release clause is now being questioned, because it states he can be sold for at least £16m. (indicating they can ask for more)!
Utd activated that release clause by bidding the said amount, but once the owners became aware of a potential bidding war between Utd, Dippers and Arsenal that is when they have tried to question the specifics of the original clause, and now having done so, they are after an additional £8m.
I emphasise none of this is official, only what i heard on Talksport an hour or so ago. Tbh i don't think anyone knows for sure yet, but that seems to be the general gist of it.
I've seen release clauses in Hungarian football and they always say "if a bid comes that at least amounts to ...", but this is a legal protection of the player: this way the club couldnt refuse a higher bid than the release clause.
I can see Blackburn trying to milk United but if Jones' agent and lawyers have at least some common sense than this won't be an issue.
Indeed. Why are they not bending over and letting you have their most promising player as cheaply as you can get him?
idiots. One might even think it wasn't under the current owners this clause was even written into the contract.
Well, if what is reported is true they can reject your 16m offer even though it meets the clause if we have bid 19m.
If Jones doesn't want to sign for us then that is just tough shit. He can stay at Rovers then as they are not obligated to accept the lower offer.
The original fee have already been agreed between 2 clubs which is meeting the release clause before Blackburn allowed the player to travel over for the medical
All media sources indicate that United are not the least bit concerned about this transfer. Probably because Gill and co. actually have a clue about transfers. And legal documents. And football.
Wouldn't that be illegal? IIRC we had to pay compensation to Boro over the transfer of Ziege for this very reason.
Where is that written though? AFAIK it was a straightforward simple procedure when it comes to release clauses, whether you bid 19m or 350m doesn't make any difference, it's accepted alongside our 16m bid as it's the release clause and both meet the release clause and the player gets to make the decision as to where he wants to go. The club can't play any part in it after accepting any bids that meet or exceed the release clause.
You could bid 900,000,000 and it would only be accepted alongside our 16,000,000, that's the clubs stupid fault for including such a low minimum release clause. If you want to accept only the highest bid you don't put a mandatory legal agreement into the contract saying you have to sell him at 16.
Well, Rovers don't seem to agree a fee has been agreed.
well it ususally is, but we don't know the wording in Jones' contract.
And maybe they think this analoguous to the Ziege case. IIRC, we had to pay the difference between our 5.5m bid which met the clause and the 8m that Valencia had offered.
If they don't in the first place, why did they allow Jones to take a medical?
Where is this being reported?
Here comes a £40m bid from Liverpool then
If they weren't happy with any of the contracts of their playing staff, the time to pick up on this was as part of due diligence when they bought the club. At that point they could have attempted to renegotiate.
Seeing as they obviously did neither of the above they have nobody to blame but themselves.
feck knows. But I do know if I were the owner of BRFC and had my most promising player's clause triggered so that I had to accept him getting a medical and my lawyer subsequently looked it over and said 'you know, I think we can contest this' I would contest this all the way.
or alternatively, exploit your available options in the current situation.
I don't think they are under any moral obligation to 'do the honourable thing' and let him leave for 16m if they think they have a good chance of getting more.
I fecking hope so. And I am smirking at the rumour that we have in fact already upped our bid to 19m this morning.
Accept its a "release clause," not a "He can have a medical but i want some more money for him clause."
The whole point of a release clause is that, when a bidding club activates the clause, the host club can do nothing but release him.
Chicken farmers eh.
Hes already turnt you down though. What makes you think hes going to suddenly accept you now after turning you down and agreeing a 5 year contract with united?
And lawyers. I am quite certain they are doing this with the guidance of their lawyers.
What's morals or honour got to do with any of this? It's a business transaction.
B9 talking shite as per usual.
Have a word with yourself.
Have a word with yourself.
thats embarrassing then, considering he has chosen to join United, regardless of what the final price may be
Moral obligation? I think the contractual, legal obligation of the release clause trumps that. They've not got a leg to stand on and are breaching the terms of the contract in holding the move up.
Except it doesn't seem to be that simple, does it?
Everyone but Blackburn allegedly believe the clause allows him away for £16m-ish, but it seems they may believe that the wording is ambiguous enough to allow them to refuse the bid. They don't think it's a simple release clause, and if the wording is incorrect, or been poorly drafted, then they may decide to go the legal route to protect themselves.
Then you and Rovers have a feck all case to argue about really
I don't expect him to and I am not sure I'd care for your sloppy seconds at this point anyway.
But if the clause can be legally interpreted as is being reported that is not relevant. Rovers could argue that they have a higher bid and therefore can turn down your bid.
- Status