It's a bit odd that they are wading in like good uns?
I wonder if either or both of them know someone in our dressing room who is a bit peeved from his critism post relegation?
Dixon might know something knowing the workings of stoke and neville might have heard rumours through his man u contacts and what shaqu has said in the press!!
Another player along with Arnautovic who was misused. Arnautovic came from Bremen as a striker come winger, forced out wide and gets accused of being a one trick pony and that his work rate is hit and miss. No one thought for a second how to use his obvious traits elsewhere. When we played 3 at the back and he played narrower he looked much more of a threat with limited defensive responsibilities. Similar scenario with Shaqiri.
Ah well. Been a pleasure to see class players in the red & white, who gave us something different from what we have been previously used to. Perhaps that's why they divide opinion.
I think most people understand it but it can still be a totally shit clause. Poorly negotiated by the same people who sleepwalked us into relegation yet unfathomably still have well paid careers at the club.
But playing devils advocate here, had Shaq turned us down them couple of years ago & it of come out that the only reason he didnt sign was due to him wanting a relegation clause & us not allowing one, the transfer team would of been criticized for not including one, guarantee it.
& as someone's rightly updated on here, if we'd of tried to renegotiate the terms of this clause a season or two ago his agent would of held us over a barrel in demanding wage increases and signing on fees etc..
When the initial relegation clause was initially included im guessing no-one at Stoke even considered it would ever come into play & be an issue until it was clear we were in a relegation battle & by then it's too late anyway.. & as for Shaq it was simply an insurance policy to safeguard his 5yr contract.
It is what it is. I personally don't see any issues with how the transfer team dealt with the signing of Shaq or the relegation clause.
Plus does anyone actually know if the approx 12.75mil relegation release clause is the actual set buyout fee or if that's just the minimum release fee. ie If say Liverpool and another offer the buyout fee does he choose between the two & that's the fee we get or does that then enable a bidding war to start? My interpretation would be the latter..
The only bidding war in that situation will be his agent and the buying club regarding wages. We're stuck with the peanuts we ceded in the first place.
I just don't get this "what if he wouldnt have come nonsense" Its a negotiation and for me this is as unacceptable a term as if he'd asked for £120k a week or a go on Denise every third Tuesday. Our hands weren't tied in any way with this one.
But playing devils advocate here, had Shaq turned us down them couple of years ago & it of come out that the only reason he didnt sign was due to him wanting a relegation clause & us not allowing one, the transfer team would of been criticized for not including one, guarantee it.
& as someone's rightly updated on here, if we'd of tried to renegotiate the terms of this clause a season or two ago his agent would of held us over a barrel in demanding wage increases and signing on fees etc..
When the initial relegation clause was initially included im guessing no-one at Stoke even considered it would ever come into play & be an issue until it was clear we were in a relegation battle & by then it's too late anyway.. & as for Shaq it was simply an insurance policy to safeguard his 5yr contract.
It is what it is. I personally don't see any issues with how the transfer team dealt with the signing of Shaq or the relegation clause.
Plus does anyone actually know if the approx 12.75mil relegation release clause is the actual set buyout fee or if that's just the minimum release fee. ie If say Liverpool and another offer the buyout fee does he choose between the two & that's the fee we get or does that then enable a bidding war to start? My interpretation would be the latter..
The only bidding war in that situation will be his agent and the buying club regarding wages. We're stuck with the peanuts we ceded in the first place.
I just don't get this "what if he wouldnt have come nonsense" Its a negotiation and for me this is as unacceptable a term as if he'd asked for £120k a week or a go on Denise every third Tuesday. Our hands weren't tied in any way with this one.
It’s a negotiation whereby we potentially get our money back and Shaq potentially isn’t stuck in a league below his perceived status. I don’t see that as unacceptable.
There may have been players who didn’t sign because the CEO didn’t think the player was worth the risk of whatever clause they wanted to be included. I’m fairly sure I’ve seen you being critical of the CEO for not getting deals over the line. This one we got over the line, and still the criticism comes.
The only bidding war in that situation will be his agent and the buying club regarding wages. We're stuck with the peanuts we ceded in the first place.
I just don't get this "what if he wouldnt have come nonsense" Its a negotiation and for me this is as unacceptable a term as if he'd asked for £120k a week or a go on Denise every third Tuesday. Our hands weren't tied in any way with this one.
It’s a negotiation whereby we potentially get our money back and Shaq potentially isn’t stuck in a league below his perceived status. I don’t see that as unacceptable.
Getting our money back does not represent a good deal in any way. Like with the Sobhi deal, we must be the only club in the league, where performing in the Premier League doesn't put a penny on your value. In Shaqiri's case he's scored a number of world class goals in the most watched league in the world and scored the goal of the tournament in a major international finals and we've made nada on him.
Everything the Swiss have done going forward has come through him. Not a world beating performance but certainly not a bad one. Especially against the best left back on the planet.
It’s a negotiation whereby we potentially get our money back and Shaq potentially isn’t stuck in a league below his perceived status. I don’t see that as unacceptable.
Getting our money back does not represent a good deal in any way. Like with the Sobhi deal, we must be the only club in the league, where performing in the Premier League doesn't put a penny on your value. In Shaqiri's case he's scored a number of world class goals in the most watched league in the world and scored the goal of the tournament in a major international finals and we've made nada on him.
It's tragically funny.
He's scored a number of world class goals in the most watched league in the world and he's done it for us for three years, which probably wouldn't have happened if we'd not negotiated a deal that got us our money back. It's neither tragic nor funny.
Getting our money back does not represent a good deal in any way. Like with the Sobhi deal, we must be the only club in the league, where performing in the Premier League doesn't put a penny on your value. In Shaqiri's case he's scored a number of world class goals in the most watched league in the world and scored the goal of the tournament in a major international finals and we've made nada on him.
It's tragically funny.
He's scored a number of world class goals in the most watched league in the world and he's done it for us for three years, which probably wouldn't have happened if we'd not negotiated a deal that got us our money back. It's neither tragic nor funny.
Yeah we really had to battle to get him didn't we. I mean who can forget all those clubs we beat to his signature. There was errr and ummmm and....
All this discussion about the relegation is academic. What I want to know is why couldn’t he cross like that at Stoke?
Maybe someone in the Swiss national set up noticed that he mostly placed his corners 15 metres past the far post, and told him to pack it in.
It either that or failing to get it past the first defender. Or maybe, just maybe, they practiced a couple of times. And was is it just me, or did he look like he had lost a few pounds?
He's scored a number of world class goals in the most watched league in the world and he's done it for us for three years, which probably wouldn't have happened if we'd not negotiated a deal that got us our money back. It's neither tragic nor funny.
Yeah we really had to battle to get him didn't we. I mean who can forget all those clubs we beat to his signature. There was errr and ummmm and....
I have no idea what clubs were in for him. They didn't tell me. But if he was so shit that no one wanted him, it was no big deal for us to let him have the relegation release clause, was it.
Yeah we really had to battle to get him didn't we. I mean who can forget all those clubs we beat to his signature. There was errr and ummmm and....
I have no idea what clubs were in for him. They didn't tell me. But if he was so shit that no one wanted him, it was no big deal for us to let him have the relegation release clause, was it.
I have no idea what clubs were in for him. They didn't tell me. But if he was so shit that no one wanted him, it was no big deal for us to let him have the relegation release clause, was it.
That post just doesn't make any sense.
The rational stuff's all been done now Sheiky. I went for quirky instead.
Maybe someone in the Swiss national set up noticed that he mostly placed his corners 15 metres past the far post, and told him to pack it in.
It either that or failing to get it past the first defender. Or maybe, just maybe, they practiced a couple of times. And was is it just me, or did he look like he had lost a few pounds?
Funilly enough, I thought he'd put on a bit of extra padding.
Yeah we really had to battle to get him didn't we. I mean who can forget all those clubs we beat to his signature. There was errr and ummmm and....
I have no idea what clubs were in for him. They didn't tell me. But if he was so shit that no one wanted him, it was no big deal for us to let him have the relegation release clause, was it.
I have no idea what clubs were in for him. They didn't tell me. But if he was so shit that no one wanted him, it was no big deal for us to let him have the relegation release clause, was it.
He's scored a number of world class goals in the most watched league in the world and he's done it for us for three years, which probably wouldn't have happened if we'd not negotiated a deal that got us our money back. It's neither tragic nor funny.
Yeah we really had to battle to get him didn't we. I mean who can forget all those clubs we beat to his signature. There was errr and ummmm and....
Even if we did not have to battle anyone, the fee was set at £12m. As part of the negotiations, Shaq/his agent said that they wanted a relegation release clause inserted for the same value (£12m). We then had the option of refusing the deal if that clause was mandatory OR trying to get the clause set higher (which they MAY have refused?) OR attempting to get the transfer fee lowered to give a profit on the release clause (which the sellers may have rejected) OR accepting the deal and release at £12m.
What other negotiating positions could we have assumed?
He’ll either end up at Billy Butlins on the south coast or go abroad imo
I can’t see anyone else being interested if the views expressed on TV tonight are widely held among the wider football community.
If the raw talent's there, there's not a manager worth his salt who won't believe they can get the best out of him, particularly for the comparatively low risk fee they'll have to pay.
The media will really have to go some to scupper this.
He’ll either end up at Billy Butlins on the south coast or go abroad imo
I can’t see anyone else being interested if the views expressed on TV tonight are widely held among the wider football community.
Possibly so, March, but those expressing those views are generally people with no responsibility for a club or country. People with Neville's track record as a manager should need to be a little more circumspect in their opinions. Generally I find that pundits are those who are unemployed within the game which is why they are free to pontificate. Others in jobs may feel that Shaqiri is worth considering.
I can’t see anyone else being interested if the views expressed on TV tonight are widely held among the wider football community.
Possibly so, March, but those expressing those views are generally people with no responsibility for a club or country. People with Neville's track record as a manager should need to be a little more circumspect in their opinions. Generally I find that pundits are those who are unemployed within the game which is why they are free to pontificate. Others in jobs may feel that Shaqiri is worth considering.
I can’t see anyone else being interested if the views expressed on TV tonight are widely held among the wider football community.
Possibly so, March, but those expressing those views are generally people with no responsibility for a club or country. People with Neville's track record as a manager should need to be a little more circumspect in their opinions. Generally I find that pundits are those who are unemployed within the game which is why they are free to pontificate. Others in jobs may feel that Shaqiri is worth considering.
Gary Neville chooses to be a pundit and gets well paid for having views that he is not afraid to express. He could get a job tomorrow managing at a decent level if he wanted.
Possibly so, March, but those expressing those views are generally people with no responsibility for a club or country. People with Neville's track record as a manager should need to be a little more circumspect in their opinions. Generally I find that pundits are those who are unemployed within the game which is why they are free to pontificate. Others in jobs may feel that Shaqiri is worth considering.
Gary Neville chooses to be a pundit and gets well paid for having views that he is not afraid to express. He could get a job tomorrow managing at a decent level if he wanted.
His sole managerial experience at Valencia was not something that sits well on his CV. Being a pundit is merely being given the air time to express your views (nothing wrong with that, of course) but that, in itself, does not bestow wisdom or credibility on those views. Many others with different views are not afforded that luxury. I hope we always treat opinions as just that and not as facts. Anything said in your job as a pundit does not of course bring retribution if you are wrong - a bit like media reporters and such, they don't get the sack for talking crap no matter how well meant
They said that the itv crew were sharing a hotel with the swis team, I wonder if crossed words were had before hand to warrant such a negative view point.