Jump to content

Andreas Weimann


Adam2003

Recommended Posts

He seldom played as a winger per se, more of a narrow wide-forward. He usually had licence to move inside and play off Benteke too.

The reality is that he simply isn't very good. Technically hopeless and little awareness to boot. The jewel in his crown used to be that he appeared to be a real clinical finisher but that certainly cannot be said nowadays - probably one of the worst finishers in the squad. All he consists of is energy and mobility. Which qualifies him as a Championship standard player in my book.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are going to sell Wiemann for 2 million pounds? Exactly who are we going to get on that kind of money that is any better?

When you add that 2m to what we get for everyone else we sell, it wont really be viewed in those terms

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he hasn't asked for a transfer villa will be liable to pay him any money remaining on his contract anyway, at £30k a week he will be owed over a million quid from us. So we wont make a lot out of the deal if it is just £2million

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he hasn't asked for a transfer villa will be liable to pay him any money remaining on his contract anyway, at £30k a week he will be owed over a million quid from us. So we wont make a lot out of the deal if it is just £2million

I think you may have got confused there. No - I'm 100% reckoning you're confused. If benteke leaves the club this summer it's not like we're going to have to pay him the next two years wages eh!

Are you not confused by the man city deals we've done? Like, given and dunne had payoffs, but that happened because they were going from high wage contracts to sign a lower wage contract with us - hence in relation to both contracts they'd have a loss of earnings - that's what the payoff was for, so they'd leave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If he hasn't asked for a transfer villa will be liable to pay him any money remaining on his contract anyway, at £30k a week he will be owed over a million quid from us. So we wont make a lot out of the deal if it is just £2million

I think you may have got confused there. No - I'm 100% reckoning you're confused. If benteke leaves the club this summer it's not like we're going to have to pay him the next two years wages eh!

Are you not confused by the man city deals we've done? Like, given and dunne had payoffs, but that happened because they were going from high wage contracts to sign a lower wage contract with us - hence in relation to both contracts they'd have a loss of earnings - that's what the payoff was for, so they'd leave

 

I too don't think that a player receives wages for the remainder of his contract (on top of the wages from his new club)

 

I believe the decision will be left to a player if an offer is accepted. Its bitten us on the bum a few times in recent years as we've struggled to shift our big earners who would have had to take massive drops in wages if they left. Beye being the obvious one although there were several others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he hasn't asked for a transfer villa will be liable to pay him any money remaining on his contract anyway, at £30k a week he will be owed over a million quid from us. So we wont make a lot out of the deal if it is just £2million

I think you may have got confused there. No - I'm 100% reckoning you're confused. If benteke leaves the club this summer it's not like we're going to have to pay him the next two years wages eh!

Are you not confused by the man city deals we've done? Like, given and dunne had payoffs, but that happened because they were going from high wage contracts to sign a lower wage contract with us - hence in relation to both contracts they'd have a loss of earnings - that's what the payoff was for, so they'd leave

I'm not confused, it's a fact, unless a footballer waives the money he is due whatever is remaining on his contract, most famously was harry kewells £7million move to Liverpool where Leeds only received £4.5million because he had his contract paid up to the tune of £2.5million.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't that just loyalty bonuses though? That's different to his actual wages.

Na, when a player finishes his contract at the end of the deal the club sometimes gives the player a loyalty bonus. Nothing to do with wages

My understanding is that under contract law, when you breach a contract (or end a contract early), you have to pay damages suffered by the other side. The side suffering the damage cannot claim where damage has not arisen.

Edited by Jimzk5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we were cancelling their contract without knowing they had other employment then I'd agree, we'd need to pay a settlement amount equal to (or close enough to) their wages for the length their contract has left. But I don't think that's the case when everyone has agreed for the player to join another club on another contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we were cancelling their contract without knowing they had other employment then I'd agree, we'd need to pay a settlement amount equal to (or close enough to) their wages for the length their contract has left. But I don't think that's the case when everyone has agreed for the player to join another club on another contract.

Mayby, I'm under the impression if a player is sold without asking to be sold they are entitled to the balance left owing unless they agree to waive that money or negotiate a fee (which happens more often than not I believe)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

If he hasn't asked for a transfer villa will be liable to pay him any money remaining on his contract anyway, at £30k a week he will be owed over a million quid from us. So we wont make a lot out of the deal if it is just £2million

I think you may have got confused there. No - I'm 100% reckoning you're confused. If benteke leaves the club this summer it's not like we're going to have to pay him the next two years wages eh!

Are you not confused by the man city deals we've done? Like, given and dunne had payoffs, but that happened because they were going from high wage contracts to sign a lower wage contract with us - hence in relation to both contracts they'd have a loss of earnings - that's what the payoff was for, so they'd leave

I'm not confused, it's a fact, unless a footballer waives the money he is due whatever is remaining on his contract, most famously was harry kewells £7million move to Liverpool where Leeds only received £4.5million because he had his contract paid up to the tune of £2.5million.

 

 

I learned it from an episode of Dream Team :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Isn't that just loyalty bonuses though? That's different to his actual wages.

Na, when a player finishes his contract at the end of the deal the club sometimes gives the player a loyalty bonus. Nothing to do with wages

My understanding is that under contract law, when you breach a contract (or end a contract early), you have to pay damages suffered by the other side. The side suffering the damage cannot claim where damage has not arisen.

 

 

 

Correct. I read the same in the secret footballer's book. The club is liable for the full contract.

It is why you so rarely see transfer requests nowadays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we were cancelling their contract without knowing they had other employment then I'd agree, we'd need to pay a settlement amount equal to (or close enough to) their wages for the length their contract has left. But I don't think that's the case when everyone has agreed for the player to join another club on another contract.

Mayby, I'm under the impression if a player is sold without asking to be sold they are entitled to the balance left owing unless they agree to waive that money or negotiate a fee (which happens more often than not I believe)

Not correct, its usually a percentage of the sale fee if they didn't request a move. And if they're being offered less money elsewhere they can refuse to move unless the selling club pays the difference for the amount of time left to run on their deal at the time of sale (hence city paying wages of players who had left, as Leeds did previously)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he goes its probably best for all concerned. I don't buy the played out of position argument. He looked a great prospect a couple of years ago but sadly he has never kicked on. The very fact it looks like he is going to a Championship side tells me all I need to know. I wish he had proved himself with us but he has had loads of chances and put bluntly he hasn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â