Phil Jones to United | Transfer to Champions complete

Status
Not open for further replies.
jeston said:
Dear RHD.. I need your advice. My girlfriend recently stated I could do her anally for £16. This was agreed in a contract. I paid her the £16 expecting to see her bend over before my eyes. In fact, she claims the £16 was to pay to have a discussion with her regarding the doing her anally. She has since explained she wants a further £9, bringing the overall total to £25 to have anal sex with her. What do I do?
Click to expand...

204Red said:
Clearly in this case you pay her the £9, and then shag her rotten....

But this has nothing to do with United.
Click to expand...

Well... did you pay her the add'l £9, and complete the transaction???

The suspense is killing me.

Also... we all know this an attempt by Blackburn to test United's resolve. Any increase in the offer for Jones is a slight victory for them.
 
when will the deal be sorted out, bloody blackburn leechers...
 
RonaldoVII said:
Now Rovers want to know how United knew about the £16m get-out and may complain, according to ESPN.

Pathetic :lol:
Click to expand...

They haven't a leg to stand on...We could claim that anyone from Kermit the Frog to Phil Jones' auntie's parrot told us, and unless Rovers can find evidence to the contrary, nobody can prove otherwise. Fact is, we coughed up the due amount stated in his contract, how we got to know about that clause is irrelevant and smacks of bitterness and desperation on Rovers part.
 
RonaldoVII said:
Now Rovers want to know how United knew about the £16m get-out and may complain, according to ESPN.

Pathetic :lol:
Click to expand...

The transfer market according to Blackburn Rovers owners

Gill: So we agree 21m for Phil Jones right?

Venky: Yeah Yeah, sign the papers pls

Gill signs

Gill: The fee was on the steep side but SAF think that its a bargain so

Venky: Nah Nah

Gill: Nah Nah what?

Venky grins Nop

Gill: What?

Venky: It wasn't a bargain

Gill: Why?

Venky: He had a minimum release clause of 16m nutter. We win, you lose and we're going to use those extra 5m to build a side capable of dominating the EPL hahahaha

Gill: Damn!
 
Bryan_Munich said:
So Venky's want £25m.

Given that they paid circa £23m for the club, maybe they are looking to recover their investment in one go.
Click to expand...

We should have bought Blackburn instead and let one of the Glazers act as a manager there.
 
Are release clauses supposed to be secret? The Venkys are idiots. Fit and proper my ass.
 
They should just realise they're a bunch of tools and let it go. I mean, it's not as if £16m is a poultry fee.
 
RonaldoVII said:
Now Rovers want to know how United knew about the £16m get-out and may complain, according to ESPN.

Pathetic :lol:
Click to expand...

Now i don't know a lot about about the inside world of football, but surely after Blackburn gave us permission to speak to Jones we'd ask him or his agent if there was anything like that in the contract.
 
What's the fuss. If Jones puts in a transfer request, this deal could be concluded with no more spanner thrown into this transfer since it meets the transfer clause. wouldn't it?

can't believe we get drawn out because Blackburn suddenly got greedy. we might as well pull out completely and let them know we wouldn't deal with them on a fair level in any future loan/transfer deals.
 
Xander45 said:
Now i don't know a lot about about the inside world of football, but surely after Blackburn gave us permission to speak to Jones we'd ask him or his agent if there was anything like that in the contract.
Click to expand...
But we had to pay the £16m release clause in order to get their permission to talk to him. Oh, this is all so confusing.
 
Blackburn Rovers are conducting an internal investigation into how Manchester United became aware of Phil Jones' £16 million so-called 'get-out clause' to leave the club.

ESPNsoccernet have been told by Rovers sources of a belief that Manchester United must have had sight of the contract, or indeed been told of the contract, to be so specific about what is contained it in the contract.

Rovers' advisers believe the clause is open to interpretation and the club's Indian owners do not wish to sell the player, and will not sell at the price being offered.

Venky's accept that Jones was entitled to inform the club that he wished to talk to Manchester United, or any club, who are prepared to evoke the clause, but Blackburn's lawyers dispute that the clause means that legally the club are obliged to sell their player for the set price.

Blackburn are contesting whether the clause that triggers the ability for Jones to talk to a club that offers £16 million also means that they are must accept the fee, or that they are entitled to ask for more money if other clubs are prepared to pay more. Blackburn want more for Jones and if United don't offer more, will refuse to sell.

As Jones has rejected overtures from Arsenal, Liverpool and Spurs, Blackburn know they will struggle to provoke an auction as rival bidders believe they are wasting their time on a players whose heart is set on a move to Old Trafford.

That has left United and Rovers in a stand-off position, which insiders inform ESPNsoccernet could be resolved on Monday with some kind of compromise offer from Manchester United.

If United continue to refuse to up their price then the issue might even result in Blackburn asking the Premier League how private and confidential contractual details were obtained by Manchester United. ESPNsoccernet believes that if United increased their offer to £20 million with some bolt-on additions then Blackburn will relinquish their legal arguments and avoid a Premier League complaint.

The Jones transfer has become one of the most messy deals of this summer as Blackburn contest the validity of get-out clauses in players' contracts.

It will also mean that the football authorities will need to look closely at the strength of get-out clauses and how confidential they can remain, or whether they have outlasted their usefulness, if they can produce disputes such as that has mushroomed between United and Blackburn.

ESPNsoccernet broke the story on Thursday that the Jones move to Manchester United was halted over over a dispute about the players' valuation.

Yet, for 24 hours the media continued to report that the deal was going through without any hitch as both clubs kept the dispute firmly under wraps. The player has already passed his medical and agreed personal terms with United, which normally happens after the clubs have agreed a fee. Premier League rules state that a player can only talk to a club and go through with the transfer procedures once a fee is agreed.

Manchester United would argue the fee was already set, but Blackburn are vehemently contesting that interpretation's validity.
Click to expand...

Jones transfer to Manchester United dispute ramped by Rovers - ESPN Soccernet

So these morons put a get out clause into his contract yet get pissed off when clubs find out about it? i mean what the feckety feck is this shit? if you dont like the clause why put it into his contract in the first place for christ sake!? surely the players agent is well within his rights to inform bidding/interested clubs of his clients own contractual position???
 
Sir Matt said:
Are release clauses supposed to be secret? The Venkys are idiots. Fit and proper my ass.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Surely in order for a release clause to actually work it HAS to be known about, or it defeats the point.
Anyway, one would assume jones' agent would have let us know. And any agent worth his salt would make sure such a release clause isn't so poorly worded so as to allow for loopholes.
 
Allforone said:
Jones transfer to Manchester United dispute ramped by Rovers - ESPN Soccernet

So these morons put a get out clause into his contract yet get pissed off when clubs find out about it? i mean what the feckety feck is this shit? if you dont like the clause why put it into his contract in the first place for christ sake!? surely the players agent is well within his rights to inform bidding/interested clubs of his clients own contractual position???
Click to expand...
That means we're almost there, then. They are investigating how we know exactly what is in the contract. If that is the case, there's no way we'd make as big an error as they are claiming with regard to what the clause actually is.
 
If Blackburn decided to entertain offers for the lad. I'm sure his agents would have been straight on the phone to all the top clubs to let them know he was available and they would have told the clubs of the £16m release clause.

I'm sure that as soon as we accepted offers for Gibson, Brown and O'Shea that their agents would have contacted other clubs to tell them that United had accepted a bid. So they can get the best deal for themselves and the player.
 
Walrus said:
Indeed. Surely in order for a release clause to actually work it HAS to be known about, or it defeats the point.
Click to expand...
Was just about to post that.

If nobody is allowed to know that the get-out clause exists, how can one activate it? The only ones who could activate a get-out clause in that case would be the club that he's currently playing for, which is just plain retarded. The whole point of them is that the parts who could potentially know about it are entitled to learn about it.

Every player in Spain has a release clause, I bet it wouldn't be that hard to find out how much it is for each player.
 
The whole point of a release clause is to inform interested clubs what they have to offer, just as Atletico Madrid have done with Sergio Aguero and David De Gea and their "if you want them refer to their release clause" mantra.

I beginning to think we should never have gone near blackburn with these buffoons in charge.
 
It's funny that they are having a go at us for knowing what is in his contract when we arrived at the table quite late after Jones had already spoken to, or had bids from, Liverpool, Arsenal and Spurs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.