Jump to content

Tom Cleverley


Bunnski

Recommended Posts

I would imagine everything was signed to complete the deal in Jan for an agreed price.

Cleverley has not been an amazing player but I'd be amazed if he hasn't performed how Lambert expected, so while a few might think about walking away from a deal I see no reason why lambert would think the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"All settled in the summer" indicates it was an official deal, aka we signed something. I have no idea if that is legal, but it does not seem like it should be. If it is not legal, any agreement would be nothing more than a handshake deal. I see little reason why we would have to honor a handshake agreement, especially since it is a terrible deal.

 

Perhaps I am wrong on the legality of what would amount to a pre-agreement. Anyone know?

Legally there'd be nothing wrong with that. I don't know about FA/UEFA/FIFA rules though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lambert has said we have him on a long season loan anyway.. i doubt we will sign him permanently in January. We have the advantage of signing him permanently when his contract expires as hes played for us and knows what hes going to get. If hes enjoying it then he will stay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lambert: You wanna stay Tom?

 

Tom: Meebee

 

Lambert: Do I gosta pay 7.5 mil to sorta force that to happen or sign you for nothing at the end of the season because you love it here so much?

 

Tom: Ummm, well I just got sent this food basket, it had those really expensive German chocolate biscuits in there and some mini packets of Pringles so... erm, i think it was from...

 

Lambert: Martinez! I knew it! He just wants us to get you playing well and regularly and then steam in at the last moment! Oh well at least I can spend that transfer money on up to three burnt out central midfielders, oh wait, just got a text from Randy, it says '7.5 million no longer available as General Krulak had another episode and blew something up he really shouldn't have, which I may have to pay for,' God damn it!

Edited by VillanousOne
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As has been said a billion times on here already, i'm almost certain there is some sort of deal or first "option/refusal" in place. I see nothing wrong, let's say per say he is a better Westwood, it may be a step towards upgrading the squad overall. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As has been said a billion times on here already, i'm almost certain there is some sort of deal or first "option/refusal" in place. I see nothing wrong, let's say per say he is a better Westwood, it may be a step towards upgrading the squad overall.

Lambert's comments have made it quite clear that the agreed buy-clause isn't binding. We are free to negotiate as we see fit.

Edited by Isa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, if someone wanted to buy Westwood next month how much do people think he would go for? Comparable to the Cleverley fee cited?

No, I can't think of one club at this level who would have any real interest in Westwood, especially for any sort of significant fee.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, if someone wanted to buy Westwood next month how much do people think he would go for? Comparable to the Cleverley fee cited?

No, I can't think of one club at this level who would have any real interest in Westwood, especially for any sort of significant fee.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have to say I'll be surprised if no deal was in place. Seems strange for man utd to basically give him away for free 12 months before his contracts up.

Be interesting to see if we see a difference in his game now Sanchez is settled and delph is back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â