omariqy Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 I don't think we need to sign him this month. I doubt he will leave and if we get promoted we can buy him then for the same price and I imagine he will stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodders Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 Yes, I think him staying here on loan until the season's end suits all parties well enough to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyp102 Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 14 hours ago, Grasshopper said: DrT‘s lackies can tweet what they like. If ManU lose a keeper and cant get a replacement they will recall him. Also, if they have their eye on someone for around 4mill then its a good move FOR ManU to 1- recall 2- sell 3- buy We shouldnt be under any illusions, ManU dont give a f*** about us Nothing to do with Man Utd caring about us, more to do with the terms of the contract agreed between the clubs. There will be deals where there is no recall option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grasshopper Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 28 minutes ago, mikeyp102 said: Nothing to do with Man Utd caring about us, more to do with the terms of the contract agreed between the clubs. There will be deals where there is no recall option. it is because it is how it is this deal (as said on vt) has the recall option ManUre will act in their own interest regardless how you argue a toss or not 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcRigo82 Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 5 hours ago, Grasshopper said: it is because it is how it is this deal (as said on vt) has the recall option ManUre will act in their own interest regardless how you argue a toss or not Manure perhaps insistant that a recall option was in place or they may not have sanctioned the loan move in the first place. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyp102 Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 10 hours ago, Grasshopper said: it is because it is how it is this deal (as said on vt) has the recall option ManUre will act in their own interest regardless how you argue a toss or not Well when he signed it was as a season long signing, that would indicate no recall option. It is not about me arguing the toss, it is about contract law. I don't know the terms of the contract and neither do you, but you'd hope the club do know contract terms and that's why they are sure he won't leave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grasshopper Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 2 minutes ago, mikeyp102 said: Well when he signed it was as a season long signing, that would indicate no recall option. It is not about me arguing the toss, it is about contract law. I don't know the terms of the contract and neither do you, but you'd hope the club do know contract terms and that's why they are sure he won't leave It has been mentioned on here that there is a recall clause. If that indeed is true and ManUre will lose a GK they will be able to do 1 of 2 things 1 recall SJ and keep him 2 recall SJ Sell him to whoever (or even force a sale to us) use the money for a replacement. Now if ManUre have to react to the situ at hand, they will not consider our needs, if they are not interested in SJ as a player for them, they wont be acting in his interest either they will just sell him. If that is the case, the Dr can say all he wants and SJ may even want to stay here for the whole loan period or permenantly, if ManU want 4/5mill for him and we havent got £££ (ffp) then we have no chance of keeping him long or short term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted January 5, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted January 5, 2018 Does make you wonder whether we have some unofficial deal in place to buy him when we free up funds. Tony seems quite confident that there's nothing to worry about when it should be out of our hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theboyangel Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 Appears to be ineligible for tomorrow in the Cup. makes me lean towards something is afoot with him being recalled/sold off by Manure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted January 5, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted January 5, 2018 10 minutes ago, theboyangel said: Appears to be ineligible for tomorrow in the Cup. makes me lean towards something is afoot with him being recalled/sold off by Manure Is there a link to this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theboyangel Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 Just now, Nigel said: Is there a link to this? Not yet, off twitter (@villareport) reporting on press conference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcRigo82 Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 I doubt it is nothing more than possibly a stipulation written in to the loan deal that he cannot play in Cup games perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theboyangel Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, Nigel said: Is there a link to this? http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/confirmed-forgotten-man-starts-aston-14116968 Confirmation that manure have not allowed Johnstone to play in the cup. Edited January 5, 2018 by theboyangel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted January 6, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted January 6, 2018 It would seem all is not as rosy as Tony implied 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcRigo82 Posted January 6, 2018 Share Posted January 6, 2018 It comes as no suprise really so not sure what the fuss is about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alreadyexists Posted January 6, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted January 6, 2018 Even if he was allowed, many teams, us included, tend to give sub keepers the cups games. Don’t sweat it, it means nothing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted January 6, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted January 6, 2018 16 minutes ago, alreadyexists said: Even if he was allowed, many teams, us included, tend to give sub keepers the cups games. Don’t sweat it, it means nothing. Absolutely, but that is not really the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alreadyexists Posted January 6, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted January 6, 2018 29 minutes ago, Nigel said: Absolutely, but that is not really the point. So what is the point? Man Utd put a meaningless caveat into his loan agreement? They’d have been stupid not to, but that doesn’t mean they have any intent on signing him permanently but to handicap themselves would make no sense. So I think they’re just keeping their options open, which I don’t blame them for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted January 6, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted January 6, 2018 1 minute ago, alreadyexists said: So what is the point? Man Utd put a meaningless caveat into his loan agreement? They’d have been stupid not to, but that doesn’t mean they have any intent on signing him permanently but to handicap themselves would make no sense. So I think they’re just keeping their options open, which I don’t blame them for. You dont think there is anything odd that its just the fa cup they dont let him play in? The fa cup that starts during the transfer window? You call it them keeping their options open, id say it means there is more intent to sell than we are led to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eastie Posted January 6, 2018 Share Posted January 6, 2018 1 hour ago, Nigel said: You dont think there is anything odd that its just the fa cup they dont let him play in? The fa cup that starts during the transfer window? You call it them keeping their options open, id say it means there is more intent to sell than we are led to believe. I’d agree with that - united refusing to allow him him to play in the fa cup certainly doesn’t make sense if he was here for the season anyway - a cup tied Johnstone would maybe lower the value and there has been no confirmation that united will not recall him this month . The ball is firmly in uniteds court and not villa”S and mourinho will make the decision not xia 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts