singe Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 (edited) What criteria did you use to split those players into two groups? I'm curious as to why you feel Stuart Giddings fits in to what appears to be a "very useful players" list, but Ryan Bertrand and Lewis Guy don't. It was more that Betrand and Guy did not play enough games (ie would have been better if it was more), probably got me on the Giddings, the memory plays tricks. Although Guy did not score enough for me personally, I'd built him up in my head to be a Defoe type impact!!! Edited January 16, 2011 by singe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fleetwood Blue Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 They are able to spend squillions on players yet a few million clause is a stumbling block? Just pay up :censored:eh you know we own his left foot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lags Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 I just can't see how City having to pay 20% of the fee to Latics is a stumbling block to the money men down there. Any problem if one exist's surely must lie with someone else there. I say lets find out and chop his balls off or demand a ransom of 4 million for his intact safe return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Sinnott Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 Why do I get the feeling this is something to do with that Marwood, who put the kibosh on us getting the pick of their kids on loan this season? Surely the clause is water-tight? Although knowing City they'll be doing everything they can to get out of it (as they have been doing for the last few years) What a he is, by the way! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 Didn't City (Marwood) offer us £500,000 to buy it out a few seasons back? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edhunteruk Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 Didn't City (Marwood) offer us £500,000 to buy it out a few seasons back? think it was more in the region of 300k when we was on our arse...club held tight...there willing to take hits on bridge wright philips n sant cruz to the tune of around 15 million so dont really see what the problem is...he isnt worth anything like he was a few seasons ago....maybe if they make us a decent offer n that we would be willing to listen...750k n maybe a friendly... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nava Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 Saw an interview earlier in the season with Marwood about how 'his vision' is now being out into place at youth level at City. He came across as thinking he is much more important than he really is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcprozac Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 (edited) Didn't City (Marwood) offer us £500,000 to buy it out a few seasons back? Not sure whether Marwood was there then. He was brought in around the time Frank Sinatra took over the club. The idea being he would be in charge of the overall strategy of building the club up from the bottom. Mansour wants a legacy (not just trophies (LMFAO!)) but he wants a dynasty to be built like red nose has created over the last 25 years. A lot of the grass roots stuff City are doing is right on the money but Marwood is pissing a lot of people off in football with his delusion of grandeur, he has the final say on all football matters at City and has blocked a number of loan moves from various clubs as he doesn't see it as value for money for their 'assets'. If he can wangle them out of the clause he will… On another note, i'm not sure how he (Marwood) has wangled such a high-profile gig, previously all he was doing was talking bollocks for a living as an occasional co-commentator on Sky... Edited January 16, 2011 by oafcprozac Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 think it was more in the region of 300k when we was on our arse...club held tight...there willing to take hits on bridge wright philips n sant cruz to the tune of around 15 million so dont really see what the problem is...he isnt worth anything like he was a few seasons ago....maybe if they make us a decent offer n that we would be willing to listen...750k n maybe a friendly... £1m, we'll also have given and SWP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senor_Coconut Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 I can bollocks on the story anyway. Citeh have shown no intention of selling Richards, they'll need him for the quotas in the Champions League if they get there and these clauses are water tight, the FA would come down tough on them if they tried to rip us off, which they won't because it's bollocks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 I can bollocks on the story anyway. Citeh have shown no intention of selling Richards, they'll need him for the quotas in the Champions League if they get there and these clauses are water tight, the FA would come down tough on them if they tried to rip us off, which they won't because it's bollocks. What? The FA come to the rescue of little poor Oldham? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcprozac Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 What? The FA come to the rescue of little poor Oldham? And if Richards wants to go, he'll go - the agent will ensure that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senor_Coconut Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 What? The FA come to the rescue of little poor Oldham? They would have no choice in the matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shefflatic Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 MICAH RICHARDS'S departure from Manchester City is being held up by a 20 per cent sell-on fee payable to ex-club Oldham. The England defender is fed up under City manager Roberto Mancini, after starting just two of the last seven Premier League games. Richards, 22, was in the Latics academy until the age of 13 before moving to Eastlands. City have slapped a £15million price tag on his head to compensate for the sell-on clause. Tottenham, Everton and Aston Villa are all keen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edhunteruk Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 MICAH RICHARDS'S departure from Manchester City is being held up by a 20 per cent sell-on fee payable to ex-club Oldham. The England defender is fed up under City manager Roberto Mancini, after starting just two of the last seven Premier League games. Richards, 22, was in the Latics academy until the age of 13 before moving to Eastlands. City have slapped a £15million price tag on his head to compensate for the sell-on clause. Tottenham, Everton and Aston Villa are all keen. so they want 12 for him....3 mill would be good,lol use 500k on team possibly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 It's not exactly a bad thing for us if they are trying to get a good price for him - so long as they do sell him in the end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 It's not exactly a bad thing for us if they are trying to get a good price for him - so long as they do sell him in the end. Happy for them to slap an extra few million on the asking price, more for us Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlossopLatic Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 It's not exactly a bad thing for us if they are trying to get a good price for him - so long as they do sell him in the end. This is what I think is happening (if ofcourse negotiations are taking place) they are using the fact that they have to give us 20% as a bargaining tool to get a better price its in there and our interests that they get the best price and also theres. The only problem is that we wont see any of it in this window should any deal go through. Plus we might only get it in 2-3 installments aswell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omar Don't Scare Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 This is what I think is happening (if ofcourse negotiations are taking place) they are using the fact that they have to give us 20% as a bargaining tool to get a better price its in there and our interests that they get the best price and also theres. The only problem is that we wont see any of it in this window should any deal go through. Plus we might only get it in 2-3 installments aswell. Although truth be told having heard this from a former Latics loanee who is good friends with Micah he'll only leave City for Arsenal. Don't get too excited kids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz_Oafc Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 Although truth be told having heard this from a former Latics loanee who is good friends with Micah he'll only leave City for Arsenal. Don't get too excited kids. I went to school with his best mate and he told me the same, but this was when he was being touted at £30mill a few seasons back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 I didn't go to school with his mate a loanee or his girlfriend but Micah is worth less these days and cant be quite so choosy. He will go for a fee we all think is a bit to low but better than nothing and then I couldn't care less what he does as he has sadly not done much to justify a massive fee. Difference between now and then, is that he was playing more regularly then, now he's hardly playing, so more likely he will be willing to go to tottenham/chelsea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laticsmad Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 so they want 12 for him....3 mill would be good,lol use 500k on team possibly. Try again! 20% of 12 million is 2.4 million ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsLee Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 Try again! 20% of 12 million is 2.4 million ;) still alot of money for us ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 Try again! 20% of 12 million is 2.4 million ;) £2m when you knock off the VAT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shefflatic Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 Try again! 20% of 12 million is 2.4 million ;) incorrect - this is the amount city would get after they have taken off our factored-in 20% i.e. sell for £15m as is rumoured = city get 12m we get 3m ;) tbh, even 1m is good for us, anything is better than nothing even if it keeps us going for another 2 years, it all helps 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.