He’s on loan, so United will ultimately still be obliged to meet his contractual salary. He may sign a temp contract with Villa but begins the scenes the club would work out the mechanisms of how he gets paid
Rashford | Villa | Loan with option to buy
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
In this sense you are both correct, the club saying, Marcus you need to reduce your wages, is exactly what @golden_blunder is saying, as that would mean mutually agreeing a change to the contract.
I hope he does well for his own sake (cos he's clearly not in a good place) and ours (so we can sell him) but the signs so far aren't great
Maybe he will surprise us, but the evidence suggests probably not.
- Turns up to the photo shoot looking like a hobo
- Talks about only being there for the short term in his first interview
- Decides renting a house/apartment closer to Birmingham for a few months is too much effort
Maybe he will surprise us, but the evidence suggests probably not.
It was someone else talking about salary.
My point is that the usual employer/employee contract doesn't seem to apply in football.
For example, Ronaldo's interview might be considered gross misconduct, but, there was a mutual agreement to terminate his contract, rather than formal disciplinary action.
Oh no, Andy Burnham heard all of the juicy goss from Sir Kier during a fox hunt.
And, presumably, he has an obligation to act professionally whilst on loan, apply himself in training etc. If he doesn't and Villa don't want to buy him because of it, would that be gross misconduct?
What would you prefer Amorim to say if he is constantly asked about where Marcus is or why isn’t in the matchday squad? Would you prefer he lies or covers up the real reason, in which case why should he to save face for Rashford?
Yes his comments could devalue the player but if he isn’t in the squad for weeks on end and there is no injury then it’s easy for everyone to put 2 and 2 together anyway
Yes but that wouldn’t mean sack him, it would probably mean transfer list him
Edit: re financial aspect I was just addressing the point that seems to be flying round the thread that we can just force him to accept less money. We obviously can’t under his current contract just as we couldn’t force Maguire to take less money at West Ham last summer
Last edited:
Keep it in house, always, keep it in house.....
Absolutely.
But, if he doesn't put in a shift at Villa, such that they don't want to buy him and his value slips further, it will affect our ability to find a buyer at the £40M valuation.
We will have to hang on to him, pay his wages until the end of his contract and struggle to loan him out again.
In that scenario, is there still no grounds for gross misconduct?
Unfortunately football barely exists in the real world.
This thread is going to be even more insufferable than the Danny Welbeck one when he went to Arsenal.
I wasn't saying that they should force him to take less money. And I'm not suggesting you were referring to me above.
What my point/issue was that he, Marcus is the one who wants to leave.
With Harry it was us saying you can go
Now I understand a player needs to be protected. So if he signs a contract and then has a dip of form or say a new manager comes in and doesn't see a place for him in the team then absolutely he should get his money.
The twist here is Marcus instigated wanting to leave. So where is the protection for the club? It simply doesn't make sense that the player wants to leave but wants the full contract wage.
If anything I think the club come up looking good here. Player wants to leave, does leave and they continue to pay part of his wages.
Hope that makes sense
Just say he isn’t doing enough to get picked. Do you think saying he would rather pick a 60 year old coach is the only response to that question?
Yeah I understand your point but it doesn’t really work like that.
What usually happens if a player asks to leave is that they forgo their signing on bonus and other bonuses. That’s why it’s now rare to see players say that they want to leave publically.
But they would never touch the base salary. That would need a mutual change of contract.
For the record I think the club have played a blinder with the salary with Villa paying at least 75%
Except he hasn't left, he's on loan to another club, he's still a contracted employee of Manchester United and as such his contract hasn't or won't be changed (unless he agrees to it) - the loan details, how much Villa pay is a contract between Villa and United not Rashford, the only part of that contract he may be a party to is the option to buy section and whether there is any agreement on his contract if it is invoked
A different player. Where did this Marcus go?
https://www.facebook.com/share/r/154PFzaH3i/?mibextid=wwXIfr
https://www.facebook.com/share/r/154PFzaH3i/?mibextid=wwXIfr
Like you said, football isnt like other industries. Has some written and unwritten rules. That are hard to break.
Just gave you an example of that. When employers try to strong arm the players, it usually ends up badly for the club.
Escaping the norm is not easy. Which also means no one dares to put performance or starters/injuries related clauses on contracts, because it would be very hard to negotiate with agents in the future.
Apologies, because i thought it was was a straightforward connection.
Did he actually initiate it? If I remember correctly at the end of last season it was said that the club was open to sell Rashford, it's only late 2024 that Rashford being ready to leave was mentioned. Now generally when it is leaked that clubs are open to sell a player, it is a linked to the club telling the agent that if their client has an offer from an other club they will listen or that the agent is free to shop his client around. Now it's also possible that Rashford initiated it from day one but it's not necessarily the case.
Whatever
Just my 2 cents
1. If a player literally refuse to run, or say walking around in protest and scoring own goal in such a blatant way there are ways to punish him or even terminate his contract, or even extreme cases where a player is involved in criminal conduct (Adrian Mutu).
2. However bad performances, outright lazy and not giving a feck is very hard to prove. It's gonna be a long battle in arbitration court if push comes to the shoves which nobody would want. Is he bad? Out of form? Down tool? Or simply taking the piss to spite the club?
3. Clubs can't force a player out legally but have means at their disposal to "push them out" just like what we did to Bastian Schweinsteiger, making it very uncomfortable for him that he agreed to move on. Just like what we're doing with Rashford. It's not pretty but it happened more often than not. Players normally took the hint and simply move on, unless you're Winston Bogarde. Paying off one's contract simply means the club pays his salary for the full duration of the contract but letting the player leave. Club does this for cheap academy player on contract that has little value.
4. Players on the other hand have to honor their contract but have their own means to break their contract either legally (asking for a transfer and missing out on the transfer cut) or simply refusing to play until being sold. We had this instance with Ronaldo wanting to go to Madrid. Most of the times players would just tell their agents that they want to move and if the price is right club will simply sell.
5. Regarding salary cut. Technically the club can offer a new contract which is much less, but unless the players signs it club can't simply deduct pay. We have fines, disciplinary wage cut, but it's mostly 1-2 weeks salary for blatan infraction (missing a training) but hardly implementable on bad performance, unless it's stipulated in the contract. For example 25% cut if certain target are not met by the end of the season, but again clubs can't simply deduct pay based on subjective reasons such as not playing well enough
If Rashford is on 10k per week we can simply say "Here's 2.5M of your salary paid in full, dont bother to come on monday", but being on 300K per week that wont be a smart thing to do. Hence the clubs simply made the situation so untenable for Rashford that he have no other choice than to agree to move, even if it's not his prefered destination.
So yes, the club clearly push him out (rightly so). The how is just formality
1. If a player literally refuse to run, or say walking around in protest and scoring own goal in such a blatant way there are ways to punish him or even terminate his contract, or even extreme cases where a player is involved in criminal conduct (Adrian Mutu).
2. However bad performances, outright lazy and not giving a feck is very hard to prove. It's gonna be a long battle in arbitration court if push comes to the shoves which nobody would want. Is he bad? Out of form? Down tool? Or simply taking the piss to spite the club?
3. Clubs can't force a player out legally but have means at their disposal to "push them out" just like what we did to Bastian Schweinsteiger, making it very uncomfortable for him that he agreed to move on. Just like what we're doing with Rashford. It's not pretty but it happened more often than not. Players normally took the hint and simply move on, unless you're Winston Bogarde. Paying off one's contract simply means the club pays his salary for the full duration of the contract but letting the player leave. Club does this for cheap academy player on contract that has little value.
4. Players on the other hand have to honor their contract but have their own means to break their contract either legally (asking for a transfer and missing out on the transfer cut) or simply refusing to play until being sold. We had this instance with Ronaldo wanting to go to Madrid. Most of the times players would just tell their agents that they want to move and if the price is right club will simply sell.
5. Regarding salary cut. Technically the club can offer a new contract which is much less, but unless the players signs it club can't simply deduct pay. We have fines, disciplinary wage cut, but it's mostly 1-2 weeks salary for blatan infraction (missing a training) but hardly implementable on bad performance, unless it's stipulated in the contract. For example 25% cut if certain target are not met by the end of the season, but again clubs can't simply deduct pay based on subjective reasons such as not playing well enough
If Rashford is on 10k per week we can simply say "Here's 2.5M of your salary paid in full, dont bother to come on monday", but being on 300K per week that wont be a smart thing to do. Hence the clubs simply made the situation so untenable for Rashford that he have no other choice than to agree to move, even if it's not his prefered destination.
So yes, the club clearly push him out (rightly so). The how is just formality
Last edited:
Yeah, so for example someone who's not on track to hit quota will get a mandate to close like 9 deals in the next 6 weeks, whereas the standard expectation would be 1-2-3 a month, creates a real tense situation and often the people just either use that time to apply for new jobs or quit outright.
Of course not, but if you are asked specifics every press conference then at some point he is going to have give details about his lack of work ethic. Adding the comment about his coach being a better option was unnecessary, but I like his no nonsense approach.
Yea it may hurt values of players, but it’s not Sir Alex didn’t do similar things when disciplining and then ultimately selling players for less than they were worth, eg Stam and Beckham. We lost out in terms of money received but we gained in terms of respect for the manager and having a squad that were pulling in the same direction
Maybe this is not how you meant this to read but it comes across as saying Ronaldo refused to play because of him wanting to move to RM, I don't recall hearing that he refused to play at any time during that period, or maybe I just don't recall it given how long ago it was
Great summary.
It doesn't scream massive chance of success does it!
Wonder what Rashy thinks the long term plan is? Outlast our manager again?
Though I am nervous that could actually happen looking at how appalling we are right now. We're putting a hell of a lot on the next transfer window!
And it's like we've sort of slept on the way our squad has moved from genuine quality but other issues, to genuine massive lack of quality.
How have we moved from Cavani, Pogba, Lukaku, Ronaldo, Sancho, Rashford etc to our current front options.
Ronaldo stayed an extra year for Fergie due to his loyalty to him with the agreement to sell him that next summer.
He didn't refuse to play at all.
Both parties (the club and the player) are subject to the terms of the contract they have between them, including provisions for termination.
If any such provision had occurred, the club would have terminated the contract in accordance with the associated terms.
There’s really no grounds for speculation or ‘feels’, unless Lionel Hutz is your Attorney at Law
If any such provision had occurred, the club would have terminated the contract in accordance with the associated terms.
There’s really no grounds for speculation or ‘feels’, unless Lionel Hutz is your Attorney at Law
Last edited:
Would not surprise me, his ego is bigger than his pay packet.
I think he will turn it on at Villa, with a view to get a transfer to a big euro team in the summer.
He has jus gone somewhere that he believes he will play and got lucky with AV.
Journalist asking Amorim about him again even after the move to Villa was bit annoying. And it'll probably continue every time he scored for Villa.
Ah. Just my lousy use of period. Yes. He didnt do that. He just wanted out and made comment.
Yeah Rashy is only getting game time if Ramsey gets injured or for 10/20 minutes at the end of games on this showing so far.
Young lad with energy, pressing and making different runs across the field.
Young lad with energy, pressing and making different runs across the field.
yeah be he can’t even be bothered to fly to the states for a thursday night basketball game. he’ll never make the big time.
He'll come on to score a tap in at 3-0. Then point to his head.
Last edited:
And that's the mentality gap between top players (and i don't think Ramsey is top) and Rashford. He doesn't press, doesn't adjust his game to what the team/manager needs. I wish it wasn't like this but i feel there's no way back for Rashford as he isn't prone to change his mentality.
He’s just left Danso bleeding after contesting a ball in the air
He’s run more in the last 5 minutes than he has all season for us. Villa seems to be the tonic he needed
I miss him.
He’s actually jumped to try win the ball and also ran at his man in the first 5 mins, more than he’s done for us all season
I wanted him gone as much as anyone but it’s going to be really annoying seeing him play for another club. Just feels wrong. He fecked it. He totally fecked it.