Cant hate that, if you are owed money then get it. I'd do the same, and so would most on here....
What a weird response..... but predictable. Shit post
Wan-Bissaka for sale | joins West Ham
- Thread starter Bastian
- Start date
- Status
Cant hate that, if you are owed money then get it. I'd do the same, and so would most on here....
Blame the club, not the player.
Has to be careful about his dreams of a huge sign-on bonus from other clubs as he might not have as many suitors as he thinks.
I guess we'll have to do the math and work out if it is beneficial for us giving him a pay-off or keeping him here for another year & letting him leave on a free.
Sigh....
Someone is telling lies here, how can a player with less than a year in his contract be demanding 7m to leave when his current contract is worth 90k per week which means his total wages for the time left on his contract is less than 4.6m.
Greedy cnut cause he wants what its stated in his signed contract.
Go on lad, go on.
Vast majority of transfers happen without players being paid out what's left in their contract. West Ham are matching his wages as well so he's not taking a paycut either. He's also asking for a lot more money than what's left on his contract anyway.
Fans have every right to be annoyed at a player who came to the club, has been poor for his 5 year tenure and then turns around and asks for a payout to leave.
If it's true, what is the 7m GBP stated in his contract for, though? I can't think of anything because even a shortfall of wages doesn't quite add up to 7m?
Are we sure what's left on his contract anyway?
And that West Ham is matching it?
I mean if he's asking something he's not entitled to than he is a greedy cnut but we really dont know that at this point.
Yeah, some always go way OTT with their criticism and without knowing all the fachts
On that point, if that tweet has any truth in it, what could possibly be in his contract that he'd be "owed"? I can't think of a thing - even if there's a shortfall for 1 year, between what WHU are offering him as a wage and what we're paying him, it's surely nowhere near 7m?
This is where we have to stop fecking playing him and chuck him in the reserves with a view that he's not going to play this season to force him out.
No idea what's in the contract or what's been agreed, but we never know do we? it's just ITK bollocks.... What I'm taking from this is that he feels he is owed something and wants things settled if he's to leave. Whether he takes a deal, gets what he asked for, or stays and pisses off half of redcafe periodically over the next few months by benching Dalot? I cant hate it....Yeah, some always go way OTT with their criticism and without knowing all the fachts
On that point, if that tweet has any truth in it, what could possibly be in his contract that he'd be "owed"? I can't think of a thing - even if there's a shortfall for 1 year, between what WHU are offering him as a wage and what we're paying him, it's surely nowhere near 7m?
He's going to play though because its a position where we're short in numbers.
Nothing wrong with it at all. Also hard to expect someone to be loyal to a company that's actively trying to get rid of you.
Can’t really let that go, it’s simply not true. He’s had some exceptional games, pocketed some really good wingers, and helped us to win games.
He’s limited as a footballer, fair enough, but he’s also tried hard.
Calling him poor for 5 years is terrible recency bias
No idea what's in the contract or what's been agreed, but we never know do we? it's just ITK bollocks.... What I'm taking from this is that he feels he is owed something and wants things settled if he's to leave. Whether he takes a deal, gets what he asked for, or stays and pisses off half of redcafe periodically over the next few months by benching Dalot? I cant hate it....
may the battle commence, i guess.Yeah, i'm just finding it weird i.t.o. "what he feels he is owed" if his contract is ending in 12 months. There really shouldn't be anything, outside of maybe a salary discrepancy between what WHU are offering and what we're paying (for the next year). Sets a bit of a weird precedent if he's not owed anything and we indulge it. But as you say, we don't really know anything and I don't really believe it - it's also tweeted from a WHU account.
There is a lot wrong with being greedy and demanding a 7m pay-off when the remaining wages left on your contract is less than 4.6m
He wants £7 million cause he's on a bosman? Doesn't make any sense as I presume he'll get similar wages at WHU, why do we owe him anything?
He wants a bosman signing on bonus to leave despite being under contract still?
He wants a bosman signing on bonus to leave despite being under contract still?
May as well pay him off because he’s leaving on a free next summer anyway
Yes, assuming it’s correct then the reasoning is essentially that he should get a substantial cut of the £15m fee from West Ham because we get nothing if he leaves in 12 months and he gets a larger signing on fee. Otherwise, he can sit tight and get his £4.5m wages this season.
The reward of a 4-5 year contract at your new club, and the continuation of your career, should outweigh the lost of a 20k a week for 1 more year.
The modern multi-millionaire footballer seem to want more and more money as they get older even if their skills are declining.
But they are all the same so no one can particularly blame AWB, and it could all be media bollocks any way.
The modern multi-millionaire footballer seem to want more and more money as they get older even if their skills are declining.
But they are all the same so no one can particularly blame AWB, and it could all be media bollocks any way.
I think it's written into the contracts that if the +1 is activated and then they're sold before it ends then they're entitled to a % of the transfer fee.
Apparently that's what happened with Fred too.
The club do it to themselves by playing him so much during the season and in preseason. They could done a "Chiesa" with him, but we've sent every message that we don't him, but we do want him. No wonder he's not pushing for the move. We're soft touches and not remotely as brutal as other top clubs are with expendable assets.
If that’s what the contract says, then there really should be no reason why we wouldn’t just pay it. We must have known all along it was due.
Perhaps he doesn’t have that type of clause but knows others did and is using the threat of leaving on a free to try and get the same benefit?
Still makes no sense as that's not the case, he's under contract and we are wanting to sell. Can't just go demanding cuts the bellend.
We can banish him to the reserves and his stock will plummet and so will his future earnings.
Different ball game then.
Sure. We can banish him to the reserves/not play him and he might not be able to get as good a deal with another club. We still pay him £4.5m and miss out on any transfer fee though, so a loss to us of £20m essentially.
I didn't realise the +1 contract clause above tbh, that changes everything.
Not really, there will be loyalty bonuses and such and we're the ones that want to get rid. I'm sure he's happy to stay and leave on a free. We're just in a weak negotiating position.
1) Make fewer signings who fail to live up to their fee and (by extension) the contract given to them. The bigger the step down a player will have to take, the more reluctant they will be to leave.
2) When you realise a player isn't good enough and needs to be upgraded (as has been evident for quite a while in AWB's case), act earlier to move them on, as opposed to when they have just 1 year left on their contract. Because you will inevitably attract lower fees and leave the player in a position where it's relatively easy for them to hold out for a free transfer.
Even if that means sidelining them and pushing them out the door before you "need" to from a footballing sense, in the long run you're better off maximising returns to put towards a long term replacement rather than minimising them by sticking with a not-good-enough player for the sake of kicking the can down the road.
3) Don't put yourself in a position where the player knows they will still get plenty of gametime if they stay. For example, if we were able to raise funds via other sales for someone like Mazraoui, then we could at least take a harder tact with AWB by making it clear he will spend this season not playing, which might make him more inclined to leave.
As is however, we're obviously dependent on him as our third fullback so there's little cost to him in refusing to go, as he will definitely play a lot of games.
I think the problem is that he wants more money on top of that, either because if the difference in wages he'll get at West Ham, or just because that's what he thinks he'll get if he leaves for free next summer.
He's well within his rights to ask for a payout tbh. Club's transfer and contract strategy completely at fault here.
This is just really dumb if true. What’s the incentive for a player to agree to leave with 1+1 year to go? You surely sit tight for a season in that scenario knowing that if the club wants to get anything for you that they will have to extend and then pay you a proportion of the transfer fee with 1 year left to go.
Reasons mate, reasons
Hmm, so maybe we are prepared to pay some of that £7m which he is entitled to but some of it is non-contractual and we don’t want to pay him more than his entitlement? Impossible to know but I do think he must be trying to get some money we weren’t expecting to have to pay him if that’s the reason the transfer has fallen through.
I don't blame AWB at all.
I do however want him bombed out the squad. Would rather play Oguneye who looks no where near ready.
I do however want him bombed out the squad. Would rather play Oguneye who looks no where near ready.
Oh my god. How incompetent were we?
It will be nonsense.
Which is why he's shifter to defence
- Status