deyres42 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 9 minutes ago, oafc1955 said: Tarkowski.....What an absolutely major dropped bollock that turned out to be!!! And Brentford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc1955 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 Brentford will have a sell on won’t they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deyres42 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 17 minutes ago, oafc1955 said: Brentford will have a sell on won’t they? They sold a soon to be England international for less than 5 million quid, much bigger dropped bollock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigDog Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 Lee Erwin starts and scores for Kilmarnock tonight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latics22 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 35 minutes ago, deyres42 said: They sold a soon to be England international for less than 5 million quid, much bigger dropped bollock. How is that bigger than us getting prob 50k, plus 50k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 1 hour ago, deyres42 said: They sold a soon to be England international for less than 5 million quid, much bigger dropped bollock. Nope, Tarky apparently threw his toys out of the pram and refused to play in a game to force a move*. Getting £5 million for a Championship level defender who does that isn’t a dropped bollock. It doesn’t matter if he then goes on to play for England a few years later he was signed by a Championship club from a Championship club having never played in the Premiership- that makes him a Championship level defender. Selling a sell on fee for a fraction of what it would have earnt because you’ve been over-ambitious and built too expensive a stand that you are going to hold in another company and need the money is a dropped bollock. Some would argue it could be something worse. Sell-on fees are pointless if you take the money before the sale. The whole point is to improve the value for both clubs on either end of the spectrum. Players who turn out good are worth more money but players who turn out bad are worth less. We sold Tarky for slightly less than his proper market value as we thought there was a good chance that we’d end up with more money if he continued to progress. He did but we didn’t get the proper market value as we had sold the sell-on clause. I know what some will say about not getting burnt twice after the Micah Richards issue, but the Landlords owed people money for the new stand and they sold Tarky’s sell-on clause to cover some of that debt. The fact that the new stand is still owned by the same Landlords despite them selling the club is a real issue for me. The club helped fund that new stand, but the club don’t own it (or the equivalent share). *I think Tarky’s Mum wasn’t well so he wanted to move back up North to be nearer to her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 https://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/brentford-beat-burnley-sign-oldham-6652805 £150k it was, absolutely sickening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevesidg Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 1 hour ago, Ryan said: https://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/brentford-beat-burnley-sign-oldham-6652805 £150k it was, absolutely sickening. And he didn’t come back on loan either Alfie Mawson has gone on to play in the Premier League too, at Swansea, wonder how much Brentford got for him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnafoafc Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 Hopefully Abdallah won’t be as naive, misguided or as desperate to cash in on sell on clauses as his predecessor. The club have missed out big time so far on Tarky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevesidg Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 Hindsight is a wonderful thing didn’t we get half a mill for Neal Trotman from Preston? unfortunately injuries blighted his career, but think he got sent off for Rochdale when playing us a few years later Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 3 hours ago, stevesidg said: Hindsight is a wonderful thing In the case of a sell on clause where a player is no longer yours it's akin to playing poker against a hidden ten card hand when your own five cards are face up for all to see. Brentford may well have known their plans for the player. We wouldn't have had a clue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deyres42 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 8 hours ago, rudemedic said: Nope, Tarky apparently threw his toys out of the pram and refused to play in a game to force a move*. Getting £5 million for a Championship level defender who does that isn’t a dropped bollock. It doesn’t matter if he then goes on to play for England a few years later he was signed by a Championship club from a Championship club having never played in the Premiership- that makes him a Championship level defender. Selling a sell on fee for a fraction of what it would have earnt because you’ve been over-ambitious and built too expensive a stand that you are going to hold in another company and need the money is a dropped bollock. Some would argue it could be something worse. Sell-on fees are pointless if you take the money before the sale. The whole point is to improve the value for both clubs on either end of the spectrum. Players who turn out good are worth more money but players who turn out bad are worth less. We sold Tarky for slightly less than his proper market value as we thought there was a good chance that we’d end up with more money if he continued to progress. He did but we didn’t get the proper market value as we had sold the sell-on clause. I know what some will say about not getting burnt twice after the Micah Richards issue, but the Landlords owed people money for the new stand and they sold Tarky’s sell-on clause to cover some of that debt. The fact that the new stand is still owned by the same Landlords despite them selling the club is a real issue for me. The club helped fund that new stand, but the club don’t own it (or the equivalent share). *I think Tarky’s Mum wasn’t well so he wanted to move back up North to be nearer to her. And breathe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcfluff1985 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 And in the case of Micah Richards we got bugger all by waiting. Once bitten twice shy and all that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 4 minutes ago, mcfluff1985 said: And in the case of Micah Richards we got bugger all by waiting. Once bitten twice shy and all that? Highly likely that a mix of this and financial desperation drove Corney's decision making. But when the other side holds all the cards when you try to cut a deal, it really isn't a deal worth cutting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yarddog73 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 8 hours ago, Ryan said: https://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/brentford-beat-burnley-sign-oldham-6652805 £150k it was, absolutely sickening. It ended up being twice that amount but we still near on gave him away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latics22 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 You have wonder why a club are interested in selling a buy out clause? If he is bobbins, you would refuse. If he has obvious potential, rumours he’s moving on, your thinking about selling him. Then u would sell it, so u would think the club holding the clause would think, let’s hold on a bit longer. But it is what it is, we needed the money at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzlatic Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 4 hours ago, opinions4u said: In the case of a sell on clause where a player is no longer yours it's akin to playing poker against a hidden ten card hand when your own five cards are face up for all to see. Brentford may well have known their plans for the player. We wouldn't have had a clue. Agreed. But we should have had a clue. For starters, if Brentford we’re willing to do a deal then it’s fair to assume they planned to sell him soon. Also, Tarky still had/has ties to the area. Surely someone could have had a dig around to see if a move was likely? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latics22 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 1 hour ago, latics22 said: You have wonder why a club are interested in selling a buy out clause? If he is bobbins, you would refuse. If he has obvious potential, rumours he’s moving on, your thinking about selling him. Then u would sell it, so u would think the club holding the clause would think, let’s hold on a bit longer. But it is what it is, we needed the money at the time. Bit harsh second bestie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deyres42 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 All of this assumes that it was indeed sold. Or ever existed at all... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 47 minutes ago, deyres42 said: All of this assumes that it was indeed sold. Or ever existed at all... The official site reported as much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deyres42 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 Just now, opinions4u said: The official site reported as much. Must be true then ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senor_Coconut Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 18 minutes ago, deyres42 said: Must be true then ?? You're really weird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deyres42 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 3 minutes ago, Senor_Coconut said: You're really weird They lied about other stuff so hardly a leap of faith to think they might have lied about this as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 11 hours ago, johnafoafc said: Hopefully Abdallah won’t be as naive, misguided or as desperate to cash in on sell on clauses as his predecessor. The club have missed out big time so far on Tarky. Hopefully now we won't have to give away the very promising Tom Hamer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanGrovesFanClub Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 6 hours ago, latics22 said: You have wonder why a club are interested in selling a buy out clause? If he is bobbins, you would refuse. If he has obvious potential, rumours he’s moving on, your thinking about selling him. Then u would sell it, so u would think the club holding the clause would think, let’s hold on a bit longer. But it is what it is, we needed the money at the time. If you can answer your own question then it isn't actually a question at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.