|
|
Post by potterburt on Aug 2, 2021 12:54:16 GMT
So there’s some evidence that we do actually deal with contracts that state players have to play if fit etc… albeit against all the very vocal ones on here saying that such clauses don’t even exist in football 😆 I’ve always thought and said that the reason that we had Vokes for all those silly 10-5 minute cameos last season was because we couldn’t shift him and his contract said that if he was fit he needed to feature. That’s why the Liam deal was concluded a while a go while we were off trying to shift Vokes on. We couldn’t have x amount of players needing guarentees x amount of games at the club at the same time. The manager can do whatever he wants, any penalties for appearance get paid by the club, they sign the contracts. Unless we think TS comes to Clayton Wood to help choose the team of course. Eh!?!?? Wha… 😮 but… 🤯 😳 you actually believe this is how the world of football works within clubs 😂 Yeah it would be a shocking concept that a manager might be working in cohesion with the club as well as the players on the training pitch. It’s nice the board let him away from the training ground to come visit the stadium for the actual games but yeah generally, until his end of year review from the board MoN you better just stay within the confines of your bunk in the CW store room. |
|
|
|
Post by potterburt on Aug 2, 2021 12:57:58 GMT
So there’s some evidence that we do actually deal with contracts that state players have to play if fit etc… albeit against all the very vocal ones on here saying that such clauses don’t even exist in football 😆 I’ve always thought and said that the reason that we had Vokes for all those silly 10-5 minute cameos last season was because we couldn’t shift him and his contract said that if he was fit he needed to feature. That’s why the Liam deal was concluded a while a go while we were off trying to shift Vokes on. We couldn’t have x amount of players needing guarentees x amount of games at the club at the same time. Nonsense. You know all of the amount of zero same as myself Paul as to the contents of a players contract. The last tweets on Delap state that the clause from Man C was that he would be guaranteed 20 games on loan. So not nonsense at all, just about as possible true as to the speculative nature of you calling it “none sense” 😆 |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 2, 2021 13:05:42 GMT
You know all of the amount of zero same as myself Paul as to the contents of a players contract. The last tweets on Delap state that the clause from Man C was that he would be guaranteed 20 games on loan. So not nonsense at all, just about as possible true as to the speculative nature of you calling it “none sense” 😆 Of course it's nonsense. Clubs don't put clauses like that into players contracts, what if that player turns out to be a Wimmer or an Imubla or an Ndiaye or an Etebo etc. etc? Do you really think that a club would put themselves in such a precarious and unnecessary position? And furthermore, what happens when a new manager comes in who doesn't fancy said player? You don't need to know the zeros in somebody's specific contract, to know what is a completely illogical claim. And you seem to be getting confused between a parent club wanting some guarantee of pitch time for a player arriving at a club on loan and a club giving a contract to a player who is arriving as a permanent signing. |
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 2, 2021 13:05:55 GMT
So there’s some evidence that we do actually deal with contracts that state players have to play if fit etc… albeit against all the very vocal ones on here saying that such clauses don’t even exist in football 😆 I’ve always thought and said that the reason that we had Vokes for all those silly 10-5 minute cameos last season was because we couldn’t shift him and his contract said that if he was fit he needed to feature. That’s why the Liam deal was concluded a while a go while we were off trying to shift Vokes on. We couldn’t have x amount of players needing guarentees x amount of games at the club at the same time. What evidence is this, sorry? |
|
|
|
Post by shakermaker on Aug 2, 2021 13:10:42 GMT
You know all of the amount of zero same as myself Paul as to the contents of a players contract. The last tweets on Delap state that the clause from Man C was that he would be guaranteed 20 games on loan. So not nonsense at all, just about as possible true as to the speculative nature of you calling it “none sense” 😆 It would be a serious error of judgement to cave into guaranteed starts. Firstly, we have no idea how he is going to perform. Also, player injuries might force a change in tactics that don't suit Liam starting in certain games; and if we're forced to shoehorn Liam in then we're effectively handicapping ourselves. Such a situation would also affect player morale - what if appearances from other players are affected by being forced to play Liam? There may be certain nuances whereby he is guaranteed a start if he scores a goal or gets an assist in his previous game, which is reasonably justifiable. But we should not be forced into this kind of position for an unproven striker. City should know that if he's as good as they think he is, he will start games without the need for such a clause. |
|
|
|
Post by Turkish Delight on Aug 2, 2021 13:14:40 GMT
According to @ stoketom its done and about to be confirmed.
|
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Aug 2, 2021 13:18:30 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by xchpotter on Aug 2, 2021 13:29:07 GMT
Ha ha, imagine if this happens and the piss take for young Liam getting dropped off at work and taken home by his dad each day 😂😂😂.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2021 13:31:55 GMT
So there’s some evidence that we do actually deal with contracts that state players have to play if fit etc… albeit against all the very vocal ones on here saying that such clauses don’t even exist in football 😆 I’ve always thought and said that the reason that we had Vokes for all those silly 10-5 minute cameos last season was because we couldn’t shift him and his contract said that if he was fit he needed to feature. That’s why the Liam deal was concluded a while a go while we were off trying to shift Vokes on. We couldn’t have x amount of players needing guarentees x amount of games at the club at the same time. What evidence is this, sorry? Sounds purely anecdotal to me, i.e. probably not real. |
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Aug 2, 2021 13:34:03 GMT
I suspect the guaranteed starts thing is true but the club could still not pick him for that number of games but would have to pay an agreed financial compensation for not doing so. That or if he isn't getting the playing time agreed Man City could recall him in January and send him somewhere else. There is no way a club would agree to play a player in case said player ended up being a liability.
|
|
|
|
Post by Laughing Gravy on Aug 2, 2021 13:34:51 GMT
According to @ stoketom its done and about to be confirmed. Who he? |
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 2, 2021 13:38:23 GMT
What evidence is this, sorry? Sounds purely anecdotal to me, i.e. probably not real. Yep. It doesn't really happen. The closest thing I've seen is the kind of agreement whereby the loaning club has to pay the club more money every time the loanee doesn't play, which is what we reportedly did to Wigan with Haugaard, pretty much condemning them to relegation... |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2021 13:38:35 GMT
Even if he's photographed in a stoke shirt declaring his love for us and gets a tattoo of our badge on his arse, i won't believe it until Hiyaduck confirms it on here
|
|
|
|
Post by monkeycat on Aug 2, 2021 13:54:39 GMT
Good news if u still have stoke shirts with Delap on the back
|
|
|
|
Post by ab61 on Aug 2, 2021 13:55:14 GMT
Like he says. It’s up to Man City now no one else. Waiting game now 👀 |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2021 13:57:25 GMT
Good news if u still have stoke shirts with Delap on the back If we sign a player called Tweed I can dig an old home and away out of the wardrobe |
|
|
|
Post by GallysGuitar on Aug 2, 2021 14:01:02 GMT
Good news if u still have stoke shirts with Delap on the back Announcement this week? |
|
|
|
Post by potterpaul on Aug 2, 2021 14:03:25 GMT
Good news if u still have stoke shirts with Delap on the back Here’s hoping for Young Macari and Josh Ireland to make a break through 🤣 |
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Aug 2, 2021 14:05:03 GMT
The manager can do whatever he wants, any penalties for appearance get paid by the club, they sign the contracts. Unless we think TS comes to Clayton Wood to help choose the team of course. Eh!?!?? Wha… 😮 but… 🤯 😳 you actually believe this is how the world of football works within clubs 😂 Yeah it would be a shocking concept that a manager might be working in cohesion with the club as well as the players on the training pitch. It’s nice the board let him away from the training ground to come visit the stadium for the actual games but yeah generally, until his end of year review from the board MoN you better just stay within the confines of your bunk in the CW store room. Did you have a brain fart when you wrote that? My point was clearly that the board don't interfere with team selection. You then conflated that with Trent Vale being the equivalent of an asylum centre 😆 |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2021 14:13:26 GMT
Good news if u still have stoke shirts with Delap on the back Any timeline on an announcement MC? |
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Aug 2, 2021 14:16:01 GMT
Sounds purely anecdotal to me, i.e. probably not real. Yep. It doesn't really happen. The closest thing I've seen is the kind of agreement whereby the loaning club has to pay the club more money every time the loanee doesn't play, which is what we reportedly did to Wigan with Haugaard, pretty much condemning them to relegation... Most of the so called assurances will be gentlemens agreements with circumstances a risk factor in the discussion. We might say: "Steven F is the clubs #9 he will probably play 20 games without injury, we like to rotate our front 2 and all players rarely play 90 mins twice a week. I'm sure Liam will feature heavily. What do you think Pep? If we then buy a new #9 first team player or only play him 5 times Man City think twice before another development loan to dodgy Stoke who promised one thing and did another. This is all about reputation, trust, style of play and available competition. Pep will be confident Liam will get 20 games he doesn't need it written in a contract. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2021 14:19:19 GMT
Sounds purely anecdotal to me, i.e. probably not real. Yep. It doesn't really happen. The closest thing I've seen is the kind of agreement whereby the loaning club has to pay the club more money every time the loanee doesn't play, which is what we reportedly did to Wigan with Haugaard, pretty much condemning them to relegation... I agree. I’m sure that there’s also some sort of general agreement about expected playing time and where they want the player to play etc. Those are far from concrete contractual obligations though. It’s obvious that a loaning club would want the loanee to get many games and be playing in a position that works. If however the loanee has generally sucked during their spell, it’s highly unlikely that they HAVE to play. I do agree on the fees for not playing etc. I think I recall that being mentioned about Haugaard previously. |
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Aug 2, 2021 14:23:01 GMT
Yep. It doesn't really happen. The closest thing I've seen is the kind of agreement whereby the loaning club has to pay the club more money every time the loanee doesn't play, which is what we reportedly did to Wigan with Haugaard, pretty much condemning them to relegation... Most of the so called assurances will be gentlemens agreements with circumstances a risk factor in the discussion. We might say: "Steven F is the clubs #9 he will probably play 20 games without injury, we like to rotate our front 2 and all players rarely play 90 mins twice a week. I'm sure Liam will feature heavily. What do you think Pep? If we then buy a new #9 first team player or only play him 5 times Man City think twice before another development loan to dodgy Stoke who promised one thing and did another. This is all about reputation, trust, style of play and available competition. Pep will be confident Liam will get 20 games he doesn't need it written in a contract. That sounds like one of the preprogrammed FIFA negotiations. |
|
|
|
Post by LGH87 on Aug 2, 2021 14:27:36 GMT
Good news if u still have stoke shirts with Delap on the back Heard anything about Sam Surridge mate? |
|
|
|
Post by miltonstokienew on Aug 2, 2021 14:29:08 GMT
Even if he's photographed in a stoke shirt declaring his love for us and gets a tattoo of our badge on his arse, i won't believe it until Hiyaduck confirms it on here Or it's on YouTube |
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Aug 2, 2021 14:31:45 GMT
Is it a coincidence that squad number #24 isn't taken? That would be a nice gesture Attachment Deleted |
|
|
|
Post by monkeycat on Aug 2, 2021 14:43:37 GMT
Good news if u still have stoke shirts with Delap on the back Heard anything about Sam Surridge mate? No |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2021 14:55:00 GMT
Even if he's photographed in a stoke shirt declaring his love for us and gets a tattoo of our badge on his arse, i won't believe it until Hiyaduck confirms it on here Or it's on YouTube Has to be 'all over You Tube' which I believe is one bloke from the North saying it |
|
|
|
Post by potterburt on Aug 2, 2021 14:57:00 GMT
Heard anything about Sam Surridge mate? No We’d have never been near this would we. Sure is he has played almost all their preseason games bar the last and for most of those was wearing the captains armband. |
|
|
|
Post by LGH87 on Aug 2, 2021 15:18:02 GMT
We’d have never been near this would we. Sure is he has played almost all their preseason games bar the last and for most of those was wearing the captains armband. He’s not started a single friendly, let alone wear the armband |
|
