Bloody hell Prague. How on earth, can you become so outraged, about something, when you don't understand how it works ? You're embarassing yourself mate.
never can so many words and so much time been wasted on something few if any really know very much about and absolutely nobody can now do anything about. JG's been sold, Charlton will be receiving monetary fees, at the moment they're not saying how much. Next...
Prague, you are still misunderstanding the concept of a release clause. The value of such a clause is not the value of the sale, it is just the minimum bid required to trigger both the player & their club to talk to the club making the bid. The actual transfer fee will then be negotiated in the normal way & the selling club has the right to walk away if they don't get the price they want.
I have been wrong all along then. I thought the release clause meant that if a buying club offers that amount the selling club are obliged to let the player go for that amount, what's the point in it otherwise?
It's been said. Gomez may not have signed a deal without it. With it, Gomez is allowed to speak to any club that offers the release clause price. But it only means he can TALK to them. Means nothing else concrete.
Prague, you are still misunderstanding the concept of a release clause. The value of such a clause is not the value of the sale, it is just the minimum bid required to trigger both the player & their club to talk to the club making the bid. The actual transfer fee will then be negotiated in the normal way & the selling club has the right to walk away if they don't get the price they want.
I have been wrong all along then. I thought the release clause meant that if a buying club offers that amount the selling club are obliged to let the player go for that amount, what's the point in it otherwise?
It just means if someone comes in and matches that amount... you have to at least hear them out. If the player doesn't want to go or you can't agree the deal, then there is no deal. But you can't just refuse the offer out of hand if it matches that figure.
But it doesn't make sense, as surely other clubs would have been willing to bid the same or higher!
Maybe, just maybe, Liverpool's initial bid was so significantly above the release clause value (and we still don't bloody know for sure if one existed!!!) that no other club was interested at that figure. It might also explain why Liverpool appeared to have a free run at it.
So all the other clubs have rubbish scouts - yes that makes sense not! Maybe we got a better deal than we are letting on! Or maybe, all the say was with the player when the clause was activated!
So all the other clubs have rubbish scouts - yes that makes sense not! Maybe we got a better deal than we are letting on! Or maybe, all the say was with the player when the clause was activated!
A tramp sleeping on a bench in Greenwich Park would have heard how good Gomez was - it's not a scout issue, it's a valuation issue.
I think it's fair to say we got a better deal than we're letting on, on the basis that we're saying feck all about the deal!
Prague - I don't believe Pedro45 was saying it offers exclusivity (which it doesn't) - he said any club offering 'at least' the release clause value may talk to the player.
Any number of clubs can offer that value initially, thereby triggering the release clause. Maybe only Liverpool did - or maybe there wasn't a release clause!
Ok , got that now.
But I am still unclear what the value of a release clause is to a club. I can see that it's of value to the player, it sets a figure whereby the club have to let him talk, regardless of whether they want to sell him. But if the figure is not confidential, then the club has placed itself in a lousy negotiating position, unless 2-3 other clubs are able to Join the discussion
But if the player refuses to sign without the clause then we are put in an even worse position.
Bloody hell Prague. How on earth, can you become so outraged, about something, when you don't understand how it works ? You're embarassing yourself mate.
Do YOU know, for certain, whether or not a release clause in a footballers' contract should be a matter of confidentiality? If so do tell, as I am not the only one on here who is interested to know.
Bloody hell Prague. How on earth, can you become so outraged, about something, when you don't understand how it works ? You're embarassing yourself mate.
Do YOU know, for certain, whether or not a release clause in a footballers' contract should be a matter of confidentiality? If so do tell, as I am not the only one on here who is interested to know.
No, but I'm not on here, effing & jeffing about it, before 8am & ranting about it, until mid afternoon.
Bloody hell Prague. How on earth, can you become so outraged, about something, when you don't understand how it works ? You're embarassing yourself mate.
Do YOU know, for certain, whether or not a release clause in a footballers' contract should be a matter of confidentiality? If so do tell, as I am not the only one on here who is interested to know.
No, but I'm not on here, effing & jeffing about it, before 8am & ranting about it, until mid afternoon.
Likewise everyone else.
Well thank you for your concern. Next time I'll ask your permission before raising any thing of interest to an existing thread, shall I?
And it's 9 a.m in that other place you call Europe....
It was 7.46am here. No need to ask permission and it's not the raising, of anything, of interest, that obviously fine.
As I said, it's the manic swearing at 7.46am British time & the continued rant, when you have no reason to rant, because you don't know what you're ranting about.
Bloody hell Prague. How on earth, can you become so outraged, about something, when you don't understand how it works ? You're embarassing yourself mate.
Do YOU know, for certain, whether or not a release clause in a footballers' contract should be a matter of confidentiality? If so do tell, as I am not the only one on here who is interested to know.
But why is the confidentiality factor important? As said above, the value that triggers any release clause is NOT the price of the subsequent transfer. It just allows the player to talk to the bidding club, which they would otherwise not be allowed to do. In my experience the "selling club" will advise the bidding club of the minimum value required if they want to trigger such a clause. It is not in anybody's particular interest to keep it a secret.
Prague, you are still misunderstanding the concept of a release clause. The value of such a clause is not the value of the sale, it is just the minimum bid required to trigger both the player & their club to talk to the club making the bid. The actual transfer fee will then be negotiated in the normal way & the selling club has the right to walk away if they don't get the price they want.
I don't think this is correct. If the buying club offers an amount that is equal to or above the the value of the release clause the selling club is obliged to let the player talk to the buying club and if he agrees terms with that club the selling club is obliged to sell the player for the amount that the buying club offered. If the amount offered is equal to or above the release clause the selling club does not have the option to 'walk away' if they feel the player is worth more.
The Suarez - Arsenal scenario last year was interesting for 2 reasons. Firstly, the people representing Suarez allowed the clause to be written in such a way that Liverpool could successfully claim that it only allowed Suarez to talk to the club offering the release clause amount but did not oblige Liverpool to sell Suarez to that club. Secondly, the fact that Arsenal offered £1 (I think) over the £40 million release clause made it quite clear that Suarez's representatives broke the contract confidentiality clause.
This article explains the difference between a 'release' clause and a 'buy out' clause.
Is there anything to stop Liverpool making incremental bids until a release clause is triggered? So, they send an email with a bid for £1 then try again with £2 and 3500000 emails later (well, 3499999 emails later than the £1 bid for the pedants) they get an email back saying that they can speak to Joe. Surely then, confidentiality is irrelevant.
Is there anything to stop Liverpool making incremental bids until a release clause is triggered? So, they send an email with a bid for £1 then try again with £2 and 3500000 emails later (well, 3499999 emails later than the £1 bid for the pedants) they get an email back saying that they can speak to Joe. Surely then, confidentiality is irrelevant.
To be honest if someone did that to me then after about 20 emails I'd probably snap!!
Look the release clause is £4m, you happy now you know... good, now fuck off emailing me
Is there anything to stop Liverpool making incremental bids until a release clause is triggered? So, they send an email with a bid for £1 then try again with £2 and 3500000 emails later (well, 3499999 emails later than the £1 bid for the pedants) they get an email back saying that they can speak to Joe. Surely then, confidentiality is irrelevant.
Comments
You're embarassing yourself mate.
Next...
I think.
I think it's fair to say we got a better deal than we're letting on, on the basis that we're saying feck all about the deal!
You will always get wild speculation when it's undisclosed.
Likewise everyone else.
And it's 9 a.m in that other place you call Europe....
As I said, it's the manic swearing at 7.46am British time & the continued rant, when you have no reason to rant, because you don't know what you're ranting about.
Carry on.
The Suarez - Arsenal scenario last year was interesting for 2 reasons. Firstly, the people representing Suarez allowed the clause to be written in such a way that Liverpool could successfully claim that it only allowed Suarez to talk to the club offering the release clause amount but did not oblige Liverpool to sell Suarez to that club. Secondly, the fact that Arsenal offered £1 (I think) over the £40 million release clause made it quite clear that Suarez's representatives broke the contract confidentiality clause.
This article explains the difference between a 'release' clause and a 'buy out' clause.
theguardian.com/football/charles-russell-sports-law-blog/2014/jan/20/rooney-cabaye-buy-out-contracts-premeier-league
Had he gone to Bournemouth we'd have paid them to take him away
Look the release clause is £4m, you happy now you know... good, now fuck off emailing me