Katrien said (during Bob's good run at the beginning of that season) that getting players in was a hard sell until Igor and JBG arrived. Maybe she thought this would be a nice little sweetener for Igor to persuade him to come...
Roland must be fuming surely. Contract negotion is solely her responsibility and I assume he has too much crazy stuff to do in his Belgian lair to have the time to give such a thing a final overlook/approval.
We are all moaning about her ...but surely this big unnecessary weird screw up directly affects him to the point of being at least a bit pissed off? Roland enjoys the process of selling players FOR MONEY.
Or is Charlton just a victim of her?
It's almost actually quite amusing...I'm doing my forced Katrien smile.
I hate to stop another Katrien hate fest (and there are many good reasons to have one) but this bloke looks absolutely shot, is probably on decent money and - due to these two facts - has almost no transfer value.
I hate to stop another Katrien hate fest (and there are many good reasons to have one) but this bloke looks absolutely shot, is probably on decent money and - due to these two facts - has almost no transfer value.
Binning him for free is probably for the best.
If he goes, as above. I doubt if it's a two-way clause.
Reliably informed that Teixera has exactly the same clause.
If true, this is a far bigger cock up. At least when Vetokele was signed it was in the close-season and they may have genuinely believed that there was no danger of relegation. When Tex signed we were in the danger zone, shipping goals, unable to score and looking favourites to go down.
I hate to stop another Katrien hate fest (and there are many good reasons to have one) but this bloke looks absolutely shot, is probably on decent money and - due to these two facts - has almost no transfer value.
Binning him for free is probably for the best.
That is irrelevant to the overall embarrassing point though surely.
Would any other professional club at our level agree for their big money summer signing(which he was at the time) to have a clause in his contract that means he could walk away for nothing if they have a bad season?
I hate to stop another Katrien hate fest (and there are many good reasons to have one) but this bloke looks absolutely shot, is probably on decent money and - due to these two facts - has almost no transfer value.
Binning him for free is probably for the best.
If he goes, as above. I doubt if it's a two-way clause.
Didn't know that at the time either - he might have turned out to be a 30 goal a season striker (unlikely we'd be relegated if he did to be fair) and suddenly we might losing someone worth 10 m + for nowt.
I hate to stop another Katrien hate fest (and there are many good reasons to have one) but this bloke looks absolutely shot, is probably on decent money and - due to these two facts - has almost no transfer value.
Binning him for free is probably for the best.
That is irrelevant to the overall embarrassing point though surely.
Would any other professional club at our level agree for their big money summer signing(which he was at the time) to have a clause in his contract that means he could walk away for nothing if they have a bad season?
I hate to stop another Katrien hate fest (and there are many good reasons to have one) but this bloke looks absolutely shot, is probably on decent money and - due to these two facts - has almost no transfer value.
Binning him for free is probably for the best.
That is irrelevant to the overall embarrassing point though surely.
Would any other professional club at our level agree for their big money summer signing(which he was at the time) to have a clause in his contract that means he could walk away for nothing if they have a bad season?
That's not really the point I was making.
I thought you were suggesting that this was not another reason to mock our beloved CEO, sorry for misunderstanding.
I hate to stop another Katrien hate fest (and there are many good reasons to have one) but this bloke looks absolutely shot, is probably on decent money and - due to these two facts - has almost no transfer value.
Binning him for free is probably for the best.
That is irrelevant to the overall embarrassing point though surely.
Would any other professional club at our level agree for their big money summer signing(which he was at the time) to have a clause in his contract that means he could walk away for nothing if they have a bad season?
That's not really the point I was making.
I thought you were suggesting that this was not another reason to mock our beloved CEO, sorry for misunderstanding.
You're probably right. I'm absolutely hammered. I assumed it meant we could bin Vetokele which, as much as he was good 18 months ago, he's absolutely finished now and no way could we afford to carry him in the multiple years of League One we have the infront of us.
How many more are on contracts like this? What if Lookman is on the same sort of contract? We know he will be sold this summer but what if he has a relegation get out clause.
I'm going to guess this may have been a standard practice for our 2014 signings then - and possibly 2015 - in which case it could explain the JBG tweet which was very much seen as a goodbye for many. Honestly speaking, I don't even think I'm surprised anymore - just genuinely disappointed at how laughable our club is at the moment.
Perhaps the biggest concern is that this was apparently Katrien's specialist area. She's a qualified lawyer, and her only previous football experience was doing contract negotiations in the network if I remember correctly. Not to mention the small fact that she seems to be quite proud of her role with liaising with agents and conducting negotiations - it's really the only part of her job I've heard her talk about before.
Imagine being Roland at the moment; he's appointed an ambitious and intelligent individual - complete with a law degree - and in the space of a few weeks he's realised that there are legal agreements in place about the assets the club owns (in relation to previous directors) and now that he's down at least EUR3,000,000 because she cocked up negotiations.
As for Igor? I can't help but feel happy for the poor bastard. He came in to the squad, looked dangerous and played very well. Then ol' Peeters had the brainwave of playing him up front alone and he got hacked to absolute shreds. Then he got injured, was forced to play, got hacked to shreds even more...
Good on him. The complete nightmare that has been Charlton Athletic since 2014 has most likely set his career back a couple of years. If I remember rightly he was interviewed and mentioned that he thought his football playing days were over due to his injuries, and between the lines, how they were mismanaged.
I've tweet Louis and Sven about this, but I've never heard of such a clause. Only thought is they want him off the wage bill. I'm fucking flabbergasted.
The only thing I can add is that this is another sign that this isn't necessarily about the money for Roland, it's about Power. Power, after all, is the means, not the ends.
I hate to stop another Katrien hate fest (and there are many good reasons to have one) but this bloke looks absolutely shot, is probably on decent money and - due to these two facts - has almost no transfer value.
Binning him for free is probably for the best.
If he goes, as above. I doubt if it's a two-way clause.
To get this straight so it sounds even more ridiculous:
Say Millwall get promoted. They are looking for players.
Millwall decide to pursue igor, they think they can polish him and get him scoring again. They enquire his availability...and are pleasantly surprised? What's the catch?
Charlton have to fork out probably more then 100k...so another club can take our striker?
Firstly, does this explain how strangely willing we seemed to accommodate the efforts of Bolton to nab Igor earlier on this season? If so, what does that say about KM's real expectations for this season?
Secondly, you can guarantee Lookman's release clause is as poor as Gomez's relative to their positions.
Reliably informed that Teixera has exactly the same clause.
If true, this is a far bigger cock up. At least when Vetokele was signed it was in the close-season and they may have genuinely believed that there was no danger of relegation. When Tex signed we were in the danger zone, shipping goals, unable to score and looking favourites to go down.
Tex probably only signed if the clause was in the contract. To be honest, any players signing for the club with current incumbents would be an absolute mug not to have relegation clauses in their contract.
Silly clause to have but may work in the boards advantage. No other CEO is going to pay any money for him and he will just sit on the bench and in the treatment being crap for another couple of years on good wages while we all remember the first 10 games of a season long long ago.
Reliably informed that Teixera has exactly the same clause.
If true, this is a far bigger cock up. At least when Vetokele was signed it was in the close-season and they may have genuinely believed that there was no danger of relegation. When Tex signed we were in the danger zone, shipping goals, unable to score and looking favourites to go down.
Tex probably only signed if the clause was in the contract. To be honest, any players signing for the club with current incumbents would be an absolute mug not to have relegation clauses in their contract.
This makes sense to me now, at the time of him signing I thought why on earth at 29 with his pedigree would you tie yourself for 4 years to the shambles of a club we had become, favourites to go down and with things only likely to get worse.
Reliably informed that Teixera has exactly the same clause.
If true, this is a far bigger cock up. At least when Vetokele was signed it was in the close-season and they may have genuinely believed that there was no danger of relegation. When Tex signed we were in the danger zone, shipping goals, unable to score and looking favourites to go down.
Tex probably only signed if the clause was in the contract. To be honest, any players signing for the club with current incumbents would be an absolute mug not to have relegation clauses in their contract.
This makes sense to me now, at the time of him signing I thought why on earth at 29 with his pedigree would you tie yourself for 4 years to the shambles of a club we had become, favourites to go down and with things only likely to get worse.
Well it sort of does, in his case.
But in Igor's case it seems to go against all previous wisdom that goes around about what RD is really up to. Igor was, before he got injured, a classic case of uncovering a gem which could be sold on for a profit once we had polished it up. I just don't see why RD would agree to a clause like this. Not if "player trading" is his business raison-d'etre' ahead of success on the pitch, which is the majority view. Why would the agent need such a clause/ He would know full well that if relegation happened, RD would be happy to let Igor go. I'd have thought the agent would be more interested in a cut of such a transfer fee.
You just know that Roger Johnson has nothing like this in his Contract... the negotiations would be:
KM: Right we're going to insert a Relegation Clause in your Contract which means you can leave for free RJ: Dont worry about that luv, am used to relegation now you can leave that out KM: Thats very nice of you Roger, none of the other players said that, because of your generosity, have an extra 12-months.
The interesting thing for me is why these players deem themselves worthy of being able to escape life in league one. I know it works both ways and it's useful for us to get them off the wage bill, but for me, a lot of them are league one quality, Igor being one of them
Comments
We are all moaning about her ...but surely this big unnecessary weird screw up directly affects him to the point of being at least a bit pissed off? Roland enjoys the process of selling players FOR MONEY.
Or is Charlton just a victim of her?
It's almost actually quite amusing...I'm doing my forced Katrien smile.
Binning him for free is probably for the best.
Would any other professional club at our level agree for their big money summer signing(which he was at the time) to have a clause in his contract that means he could walk away for nothing if they have a bad season?
Perhaps the biggest concern is that this was apparently Katrien's specialist area. She's a qualified lawyer, and her only previous football experience was doing contract negotiations in the network if I remember correctly. Not to mention the small fact that she seems to be quite proud of her role with liaising with agents and conducting negotiations - it's really the only part of her job I've heard her talk about before.
Imagine being Roland at the moment; he's appointed an ambitious and intelligent individual - complete with a law degree - and in the space of a few weeks he's realised that there are legal agreements in place about the assets the club owns (in relation to previous directors) and now that he's down at least EUR3,000,000 because she cocked up negotiations.
As for Igor? I can't help but feel happy for the poor bastard. He came in to the squad, looked dangerous and played very well. Then ol' Peeters had the brainwave of playing him up front alone and he got hacked to absolute shreds. Then he got injured, was forced to play, got hacked to shreds even more...
Good on him. The complete nightmare that has been Charlton Athletic since 2014 has most likely set his career back a couple of years. If I remember rightly he was interviewed and mentioned that he thought his football playing days were over due to his injuries, and between the lines, how they were mismanaged.
I've tweet Louis and Sven about this, but I've never heard of such a clause. Only thought is they want him off the wage bill. I'm fucking flabbergasted.
The only thing I can add is that this is another sign that this isn't necessarily about the money for Roland, it's about Power. Power, after all, is the means, not the ends.
Say Millwall get promoted. They are looking for players.
Millwall decide to pursue igor, they think they can polish him and get him scoring again. They enquire his availability...and are pleasantly surprised? What's the catch?
Charlton have to fork out probably more then 100k...so another club can take our striker?
Oh my.
Firstly, does this explain how strangely willing we seemed to accommodate the efforts of Bolton to nab Igor earlier on this season? If so, what does that say about KM's real expectations for this season?
Secondly, you can guarantee Lookman's release clause is as poor as Gomez's relative to their positions.
Silly clause to have but may work in the boards advantage. No other CEO is going to pay any money for him and he will just sit on the bench and in the treatment being crap for another couple of years on good wages while we all remember the first 10 games of a season long long ago.
He looked a good fit at first.
But in Igor's case it seems to go against all previous wisdom that goes around about what RD is really up to. Igor was, before he got injured, a classic case of uncovering a gem which could be sold on for a profit once we had polished it up. I just don't see why RD would agree to a clause like this. Not if "player trading" is his business raison-d'etre' ahead of success on the pitch, which is the majority view. Why would the agent need such a clause/ He would know full well that if relegation happened, RD would be happy to let Igor go. I'd have thought the agent would be more interested in a cut of such a transfer fee.
KM: Right we're going to insert a Relegation Clause in your Contract which means you can leave for free
RJ: Dont worry about that luv, am used to relegation now you can leave that out
KM: Thats very nice of you Roger, none of the other players said that, because of your generosity, have an extra 12-months.