Seat68 Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Genuine question how do people know that players dont have relegation clauses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaForever1970 Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, Seat68 said: Genuine question how do people know that players dont have relegation clauses. The same way the know how to manager and run a football club. Edited February 10, 2016 by VillaForever1970 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Because it's been widely reported in the media: No relegation clauses in Newcastle United contracts shows club cannot afford to go down News that Newcastle United have not inserted clauses in the deals of new signings Andros Townsend, Jonjo Shelvey or Henri Saivet was back page news on one national newspaper this week. But was it any great surprise given that the players signed in 2013 in a bid to secure United’s Premier League status – all of whom are still at the club – were signed on similar deals? United’s course is set if they go into the Championship. They would have to either sell players to finance the £40million or so shortfall in TV revenue or take the hit and hope they bounce up first time. They did a combination of both last time, but there are no guarantees such an approach would work. In reality, slicing a couple of million off the yearly salary of Shelvey and Townsend might seem like the sane approach, but with no one else on that kind of contract, it would have negligible impact. This is a club set up – financially, at least – to play in the top tier. The fact that none of United’s big earners would take a huge pay hit if the club went down would leave them with a wage bill in excess of £70million and by far the biggest in the second tier. Fulham’s last recorded wage bill was £60million but the average in that division is much closer to the £20million mark. Unlike Aston Villa, who are preparing for life after the drop, United’s approach has been to look forward and try to secure long-term assets with their January business. It’s a sizeable gamble and a hint that the hierarchy still believe relegation to be unthinkable. When the accounts come out in the spring, we’ll get a full picture of just how much impact relegation would have. It’s something that United simply cannot afford. http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/no-relegation-clauses-newcastle-united-10851167 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seat68 Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 yeah but my point is not just how people know here on VT, but the papers, is it speculation? It must be surely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Be hilarous if they did go down though as they would be massively screwed. I am more interested in Sunderland though have they inserted these clauses in their players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted February 10, 2016 Moderator Share Posted February 10, 2016 37 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: have they inserted these clauses in their players? Ouch!. That's got to make the eyes water. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Adam Johnson is **** now, pleaded guilty to 2 accounts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 55 minutes ago, Seat68 said: yeah but my point is not just how people know here on VT, but the papers, is it speculation? It must be surely. Well, nobody at the club has denied it. I know that's not 'proof', but short of seeing the contracts I don't know what could be. The alternative is believing the opposite of what has been reported, which just seems a bit contrarian really. 6 minutes ago, Zatman said: Adam Johnson is **** now, pleaded guilty to 2 accounts Why the hell has it taken this long to get to trial? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Just now, HanoiVillan said: Well, nobody at the club has denied it. I know that's not 'proof', but short of seeing the contracts I don't know what could be. The alternative is believing the opposite of what has been reported, which just seems a bit contrarian really. Why the hell has it taken this long to get to trial? Surely he is going down then for Rape? What an idiot has it all and has sexual interactions with a girl younger than 16. Mind boggles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Dr_Pangloss Posted February 10, 2016 Popular Post Share Posted February 10, 2016 Safe to call him a nonce now then? 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 He's admitted one count of sexual activity with a child and one count of grooming over the internet. He denies two further counts of sexual activity with children, and his trial will begin on Friday. It is indeed safe to call him a nonce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 So do Sunderland now suspended/sack him (again?) Money or morals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 they should have suspended him at the time which they did and switched opinions after 2 weeks when realised he was their best player. If honest Sunderland should be decucted points for playing him 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 I want Sunderland to go down, I hate them and they are surely massively over-leveraged with all of their signings. This is great news, this could impact them psychologically and he's also one of their best and most productive players! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 1 minute ago, Zatman said: they should have suspended him at the time which they did and switched opinions after 2 weeks when realised he was their best player. If honest Sunderland should be decucted points for playing him That was farcical, they either had to back him or suspend him for the entirity of the case. I could have understood if they had backed him from the outset, after all, innocent until proven guilty and all that. But suspending him and then bringing him back in made it look like they put performance/money over morals. If they don't suspended/sack him now he has pleaded guilty I think there will be mass and ugly protests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 In fact I'm not sure he'll ever play again after this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjaacckk91 Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Surely there's a bit of a moral issue here. He has pleaded guilty, you have to assume Sunderland knew he would, and yet they continued to select and play him. Unless he's pulled the wool over their eyes this doesn't sit right with me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 30 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Surely he is going down then for Rape? What an idiot has it all and has sexual interactions with a girl younger than 16. Mind boggles It's ego innit. He has everything he can legally have so why not push it a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 2 minutes ago, jjaacckk91 said: Surely there's a bit of a moral issue here. He has pleaded guilty, you have to assume Sunderland knew he would, and yet they continued to select and play him. Unless he's pulled the wool over their eyes this doesn't sit right with me. Previous to today, he had denied all four charges in public. I would guess he had done the same to his employer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 13 minutes ago, av1 said: In fact I'm not sure he'll ever play again after this. i bet they will still start him on the weekend if possible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts