Jump to content

Summer Transfers Window 2020


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, jonjon said:

With all this talk about Watkins and his release clause of £18 Million, you have to bare in mind that is the MINIMUM amount this player can be sold for, I believe, if I have read the rules correctly, if other clubs are interested they can bid against each other with bids more than the stated figure, therefore it could work out with the original minimum release clause being surpassed by a few million more.

Ezri Konsa  went for his original release clause of £12.5 Million because Villa were the only bidders, but it could have turned out differently if there were other clubs interested.

Why an earth would any club decide to bid anything above a release clause?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, useless said:

Clubs are only going to bid what the release clause is, if say Leeds bid £18m and someone else bids £22m, if Watkins decided he wanted to join Leeds that £18m bid  would have to be accepted. That's even if there is a release clause to begin with of course.

Exactly , it becomes players decision at that point, so let's say we bid 18 and Leeds bid 19 , all Watkins would need do is reject terms with Leeds and our bid is still there 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, pete101 said:

Exactly , it becomes players decision at that point, so let's say we bid 18 and Leeds bid 19 , all Watkins would need do is reject terms with Leeds and our bid is still there 

Am I missing some glaringly obvious fact here? Why would Leeds throw 1 million down the pan, when then can just bid the release clause.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jonjon said:

With all this talk about Watkins and his release clause of £18 Million, you have to bare in mind that is the MINIMUM amount this player can be sold for, I believe, if I have read the rules correctly, if other clubs are interested they can bid against each other with bids more than the stated figure, therefore it could work out with the original minimum release clause being surpassed by a few million more.

Ezri Konsa  went for his original release clause of £12.5 Million because Villa were the only bidders, but it could have turned out differently if there were other clubs interested.

eh, what will be will be.

if someone wants to bid 20-25m for him they can knock themselves out, personally i get the Hogan feeling about Watkins.

He might be amazing, i dunno, but Brentford are/were the most free flowing and attacking team in the division, scoring more goals than anyone else, gives me concerns about what happens when he's in a team struggling for chances (which is about 50-60% of the Prem teams)

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jonjon said:

With all this talk about Watkins and his release clause of £18 Million, you have to bare in mind that is the MINIMUM amount this player can be sold for, I believe, if I have read the rules correctly, if other clubs are interested they can bid against each other with bids more than the stated figure, therefore it could work out with the original minimum release clause being surpassed by a few million more.

Ezri Konsa  went for his original release clause of £12.5 Million because Villa were the only bidders, but it could have turned out differently if there were other clubs interested.

I'm pretty sure the club has to accept any offer of 18m. Then it's a bidding war over personal terms generally. It doesn't matter if someone bids 18m or 22m, both offers have to be accepted and it's up to the player to pick which club.That's how I interpret it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GENTLEMAN said:

Am I missing some glaringly obvious fact here? Why would Leeds throw 1 million down the pan, when then can just bid the release clause.

Watching Leeds content creators and reading leeds fan forums...they really are deluded worse than the dog heads..

They reckon not only they will stay up..they reckon big name players will come to them on the cheap and they will finish top 8

They are convinced that most of the players we have been linked with would rather sign for leeds...god i cant wait to thump them next season

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GENTLEMAN said:

Am I missing some glaringly obvious fact here? Why would Leeds throw 1 million down the pan, when then can just bid the release clause.

It's fairly self explanatory with example I gave , it shows how bidding above the release clause is of no benefit

Link to post
Share on other sites

Watkins is nothing like Hogan, if I had to compare him to a premier league striker in terms of style of play I'd compare him to Jiminez at Wolves. Also Brentford were one of the most free flowing attacking teams in the championship to a large degree thanks to Watkins and the way he held the ball up and linked up play in the final third.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, jonjon said:

With all this talk about Watkins and his release clause of £18 Million, you have to bare in mind that is the MINIMUM amount this player can be sold for, I believe, if I have read the rules correctly, if other clubs are interested they can bid against each other with bids more than the stated figure, therefore it could work out with the original minimum release clause being surpassed by a few million more.

Ezri Konsa  went for his original release clause of £12.5 Million because Villa were the only bidders, but it could have turned out differently if there were other clubs interested.

What??

You can have 20 clubs bid £18m. It makes no difference. Brentford have to accept. It's up to the player. A team could bid £40m and he could still turn them down. Don't be so ridiculous!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GENTLEMAN said:

While we're here can someone explain to me that whole Arsenal and Suarez release clause thing?

is that a genuine question?

If so i can answer, but not sure if ur joking or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you only need to meet a release clause to be given the green light to offer a player a contract no club would bid more than that. You gain no advantage by offering more than a release clause. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, jonjon said:

With all this talk about Watkins and his release clause of £18 Million, you have to bare in mind that is the MINIMUM amount this player can be sold for, I believe, if I have read the rules correctly, if other clubs are interested they can bid against each other with bids more than the stated figure, therefore it could work out with the original minimum release clause being surpassed by a few million more.

Ezri Konsa  went for his original release clause of £12.5 Million because Villa were the only bidders, but it could have turned out differently if there were other clubs interested.

No

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, KevinRichardsonsMoustache said:

I just watched a YT video of Edouard: selfish, arrogant so and so. But my god, he looks good:. I hate to say it, but I fear he is out of our league. Watkins it is.

ye, i would stump 40m for him tbh.

Buendia, Benrahma, Edouard, with Grealish.

:swoon:

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Philosopher said:

Tammy isn't a top striker, that's why they've signed Werner. I fail to see how Tammy is better than Wilson apart from being younger. We get quality on the wings that will also terrify defences. If we have 2 wing signing and one flops we can move jack back wide. We need to address our weaknesses, enhance or strengths while giving ourselves flexibility and options. 50m on Tammy won't achieve that! Plus let's say Tammy nicks an extra goal here and there, if our defence is better won't that mean a few less conceded?!

Ok I can’t take you serious now....Tammy isn’t better than Wilson....ok sure 😂😂😂

Lets just stop the discussion now before you really embarrass yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MaVilla said:

is that a genuine question?

If so i can answer, but not sure if ur joking or not.

I am actually being serious. I don't remember all the facts.Was going to look it up but if you're willing to enlighten, greatly appreciated.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, GENTLEMAN said:

I am actually being serious. I don't remember all the facts.Was going to look it up but if you're willing to enlighten, greatly appreciated.

As far as i know.......

Arsenal wanted to sign Suarez, somehow Arsenal believed that he had a release clause in his contract (mis advised maybe?), which was triggered by any offer over £40m.

I think Liverpool said something like "we wont sell him for £40m", so Arsenal, thinking they were clever and thought he had a release clause of anything over £40m, offered £40m + £1.

Unfortunately, Arsenal were wrong, and the clause apparently stipulated only that Suarez must me made aware of any offers over £40m, NOT a release clause.

Liverpool were so enraged by Arsenals arrogance that they said they wouldnt sell him to Arsenal for any amount of money.

Suarez got sold to barcelona the following season for c. 75m.

 

gotta love the "arrogance" of the "big clubs".

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â