Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
- 1.5K All Categories
- 1 Site Stuff
- 31 Admin (FAQs, rules, queries etc.)
- The Boleyn Arms
- 34 General Chatter
- 7 Member info & Family Album
- 3 Radio Llama (music videos)
- 405 Fun & Games
- 107 BA Predictor Threads
- 33 Word Games
- 4 Quizzes
- 2 Pun Threads
- 294 Magic Minutes
- 3 Other Fun & Games
- 113 Current West Ham
- 199 Men's First Team
- 3 Women's Team
- 11 PL2 & Academy
- 31 Management & Board
- 15 Stadium & Training Ground
- 26 West Ham Miscellaneous
- West Ham Matches
- 396 Match Threads
- 66 MOTM
- 8 West Ham Nostalgia
- 34 Former Players and Staff
- 4 Past Games & Glories
- 37 Transfers
- 46 Transfer Speculation
- 87 Completed Transfers
- 55 Internationals
- 48 Men's Internationals
- 5 Women's Internationals
- 2 Youth Internationals
- 118 Football Chatter
- 43 Football Chatter
- 268 Other Teams & Matches
- 25 Other Players & Staff
Comments
Nothing wrong with what Antonio said, it's just surprising considering how clubs try to manage news.
#conspiracytheoriesrus
West Ham agree to pay me 50,000 every week in return for me being a West Ham player. For this salary, I have some obligations, including playing when selected, following dietary, health and training advice given by West Ham's relevant professionals, and a certain amount of publicity work (appearances at the shop, autographing a dozen shirts or so, trips to hospitals, etc. This is usually defined as a set number per season.)
West Ham sign a contract, let's say, until the end of 2023. The contract is binding. But what if I don't want to exclude the opportunity of playing for Barcelona in the Champions' League final, or earning 600,000 per week at Beijing Sinobo Guoan (thank you, Uncle Google!). Maybe Pellegrino will be sacked next year for only reaching fifth place, and I won't like the new manager. So, I ask for a release clause to be put into the contract. West Ham don't want to make it too easy for me to go, so they say that I can go if I pay them, say, 15 million. Or they may insist that it can only be triggered after, say, two years.
So, if any other team agree to pay my release clause, I can go and play for them. Of course, there are other conditions set by the Premier League and UEFA about when who can talk to whom, how, and through whom, but the point is this: If Juventus offer me 175,000 a week, and tell me they'll pay my release clause fee, West Ham just have to sit quiet and wait.
Therefore, if Arnautovic's brother is telling West Ham to take the 35 million, his release fee is higher, or cannot be triggered yet. Therefore, the ball is very much in West Ham's court. Of course, as Payet showed us, Marko might develop a "niggling back injury", or just play terribly.
Furthermore, they Bosman ruling only relates to EU players moving between clubs in the EU.
In addition, it is directly due to the Bosman ruling that players have more say in their movement, which means that if Dagenham and Redbridge roll up and offer Cristiano Ronaldo a racehorse and a Wagon Wheel every day, the only thing standing in his way is the termination fee in his contract with Juventus.
Unless I've misunderstood your post.
How does it give players more power in contract negotiations?
While your Ronaldo example is accurate, how does that relate to the Bosman ruling? What's standing in his way is the terms of the contract he is still bound by - as is his club. So if he has a release clause, that will pertain. If he doesn't, then he can't go if the club says he can't. The Bosman ruling is not in any way applicable to that example.
In fact the last time Arnie scored prior to Brighton was against Burnley on the 3rd November
I know injuries played a large part in the above stats but the above form isn't exactly doom and gloom should he leave
The problem we have is replacing him should the move happen (£50mil minimum)
Wilson won't be allowed to leave Bournemouth, Batshuyai is unpredictable, Origi is flat out just not good enough.
Marega is a good shout but is expensive and probably would prefer to stay at Porto
The Bosman ruling simple means Free transfer, meaning players could move to a new club at the end of their contract without their old club receiving a fee. Players can now agree a pre-contract with another club for a free transfer if the players' contract with their existing club has six months or less remaining.
You misunderstood my post. Apology accepted.
If the point is regarding whether we can hold onto Arnie untill that time then yes we can...but why would we?
We'd be paying a guy £100k p/week (£12mil over 2.5 years) who would most likely underperform whilst wanting out while missing out on a lump sum (over £40mil) so in total we would make min a net loss of £50mil if we keep him till his contract runs out
That's the whole reason we sold Payet, because it was the best situation we could get for a player who wanted out
ASLEF posted the stats that show it is 3+ years at each of his last clubs; that's hardly 'flighty', is it?
He's not been/being petulant with us, as far as I can see.
He's doing his job, then someone comes in with an offer of a new, better paid job.
Which is quite common in his industry.
He wants to take it.
He's not downed tools, or come out and said he won't play for us again.
In fact, he's not said anything, publicly.
Privately, we assume, he has asked the club to let him take the new job.
Meanwhile, he trains, he plays. He behaves properly.
I find it hard to criticise him too much tbh.
Although yesterday he wasn't disruptive on the pitch, I just felt he was just not 'with' the rest of the team emotionally.