Delfer Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 (edited) BBC Gossip 20% of 7m = 1.4m Sorry, cocked up on the link - its on the BBC transfer gossip pages again Edited January 25, 2009 by Delfer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
real Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/g...ers/7849649.stm dunno if that'll work Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delfer Posted January 25, 2009 Author Share Posted January 25, 2009 It does indeed, thank you my friend. These sober early mornings are no good! I reckon at 1.4 m I'd be happy enough, City might just ask for 8m to help cover our payment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lookers_Carl Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 1.4 mill would line the coffers nicely indeed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcprozac Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 1.4 mill would line the coffers nicely indeed £1.4M will be nice but typical of our luck bearing in mind the figures being touted about 12-18 months ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddyblue Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 bird in the hand - bring on 1.4 million please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King_blue Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Some other rumours that Villa want Richards and Sturridge in a 10 million deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
real Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Some other rumours that Villa want Richards and Sturridge in a 10 million deal. Johnson and Sturridge accoring to the page on the BBC / Sunday Express Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King_blue Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Johnson and Sturridge accoring to the page on the BBC / Sunday Express No this is a different rumour on the bbc mb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueJazzer Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 There's no way the bird in the hand could afford him..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lags Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 It would be the best for all concerned. Certainly for Latics to finally get some wonga off the back of Richards, and defo for the player himself. He needs to discover his form of 18 months back and use this as a wake up call and not to believe his own hype. The publicity and the England call came from hard work not ability alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 It would be the best for all concerned. Certainly for Latics to finally get some wonga off the back of Richards, and defo for the player himself. He needs to discover his form of 18 months back and use this as a wake up call and not to believe his own hype. The publicity and the England call came from hard work not ability alone. I agree. I can't help feeling that Richards' value as a player is only going to fall. I get the feeling we might, if we get lucky, one day meet him in the Championship. Another case of too much hype too early in a career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonesyOAFC Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 I agree. I can't help feeling that Richards' value as a player is only going to fall. I get the feeling we might, if we get lucky, one day meet him in the Championship. Another case of too much hype too early in a career. And possibly being played out of position. For me, his natural and strongest position is right-back. Maybe if Hughes started playing him there again he'd refind his form and take his price tag up a bit... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 And possibly being played out of position. For me, his natural and strongest position is right-back. Maybe if Hughes started playing him there again he'd refind his form and take his price tag up a bit... He's a good player undoubtedly, but he needed time for his game to mature without the excess of media attention. Maybe that's impossible in the modern game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc1955 Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 It does indeed, thank you my friend. These sober early mornings are no good! I reckon at 1.4 m I'd be happy enough, City might just ask for 8m to help cover our payment. Reckon the bidding will start at 7m but could end up in excess of 10m.......The more the better!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 He#s still got the potential to be a world class player, being trained at a proper club like Arsenal could sort him out. Still though, he plays pretty much every game for Citeh, so wouldn't they be wanting to get at least two defenders in before he went? But they are only linked with fancy Dan attackers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmr Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Wanting £20m for him was pretty much dream world. Anything is a bonus, I'd jump at £1.4m considering citys current situation of relegation where they will have to let richards go for cheap! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Wanting £20m for him was pretty much dream world. Anything is a bonus, I'd jump at £1.4m considering citys current situation of relegation where they will have to let richards go for cheap! They don't have to let anybody go at all if they don't want to, even if they do get relegated. The new owners are richer than God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsPete Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 They don't have to let anybody go at all if they don't want to, even if they do get relegated. The new owners are richer than God. Well certainly than the thousands of low paid immigrants that Kuwait exploits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daboke Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 Don't know if this has been answered before but I'll ask it anyways.... cos it's on my mind. What would happen if Richards was part of a player for player deal? (Instead of money being involved). Would we be able to have the player on loan 10% of the time? In fact... what if money was involved. Would we receive a smidgin of what we should? Ta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeylandLatic Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 Don't know if this has been answered before but I'll ask it anyways.... cos it's on my mind. What would happen if Richards was part of a player for player deal? (Instead of money being involved). Would we be able to have the player on loan 10% of the time? In fact... what if money was involved. Would we receive a smidgin of what we should? Ta It goes to a tribunal and the value of the transfer is decided, Citeh then have to give us whatever they decide. There is no way around our sell on clause, unless he goes when his contract is up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 Well certainly than the thousands of low paid immigrants that Kuwait exploits. Whither Kuwait? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainjumpers100 Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 It goes to a tribunal and the value of the transfer is decided, Citeh then have to give us whatever they decide. There is no way around our sell on clause, unless he goes when his contract is up. Are u sure thats how this clause works??????My thinkin was that we wer on for 30% of future transfers?but i c this as irrelevant as the so called owners will pocket the cash even tho we av a side of our ground missin!!! YANKS OUT!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danoafc Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 (edited) Are u sure thats how this clause works??????My thinkin was that we wer on for 30% of future transfers?but i c this as irrelevant as the so called owners will pocket the cash even tho we av a side of our ground missin!!! YANKS OUT!!! Yeah! Damn right, soldier!................er.................hang on.....................if the 'yanks' go, who's gonna plug the £15k per week that we are still losing?! Edited January 26, 2009 by danoafc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danoafc Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 (edited) double post Edited January 26, 2009 by danoafc 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.