Silly

[alex]

Do we think that the players demanded this £100,000 get-out clause in the event of relegation, or the club, or their agents?
It makes a mockery to watch players like Dickov and Thatcher (potentially) walking out for £200,000....who do you think determines the amount? Why not £500,000?

 

[Scowcroft]

One word - Agents.

Players are generally too weak and thick to negotiate their own deals.

 

[Steven]

Do we think that the players demanded this £100,000 get-out clause in the event of relegation, or the club, or their agents?
It makes a mockery to watch players like Dickov and Thatcher (potentially) walking out for £200,000....who do you think determines the amount? Why not £500,000?

Everyone will tell you that they would not have come to City if the figure of £500,000 had been stipulated in the contract. I remain unconvinced as that is supposition which cannot be proved, whereas we can all see the damage these contracts are causing us. :roll: :roll: :x :x

 

[alex]

Why set it at £100,000? Surely the club could insist on more cash?

Sick to the stomach at the thought of another quality player leaving for peanuts...nightmare.

 

[Steven]

Why set it at £100,000? Surely the club could insist on more cash?

Sick to the stomach at the thought of another quality player leaving for peanuts...nightmare.

The players we are told will not sign if the figure is higher than £100,000. I say set a higher figure and if they will not come, then we are no worse off than we are now.

 

[Petrescu]

£100,000 is beyond a joke. He's one of the best left backs in the Premiership and he's off for 100,000! Sack Bassett.

 

[Malf]

It's because it was in the clubs best interests for us to be able to easily get rid of these players too. We make a little money on them and can ship them out, the club act as they are bothered, but they weren't. The club didn't want to pay them wages in division one even if they had agreed a wage cut, I think this suits the club as much as the players.

Sneaky and gay at the same time, similar to something that would go on in a public toilet or so i've heard.

 

[webmaster]

£100,000 is beyond a joke. He's one of the best left backs in the Premiership and he's off for 100,000! Sack Bassett.

But we got him for nothing.

Sack Hoddle and Pleat!
Oh they already have done....


When we were looking for players last summer we were desperate to sign experienced premiership players, but we had no money for transfer fees. In that situation we had to do whatever was necessary to get the players we wanted, but we also had to have a wage drop in the event of relegation, so the players (and their agents) had all the power when it came to negotiating opt outs.

In hindsight it might look like a very short term decision, but this time last year if you'd had to choose between signing experienced premiership players on free transfers, possibly just for one season, or free transfers from lower divisions for more than a season, which would you have chosen?
In my opinion the choice to sign premiership players was the right one, because they'd have given us a better chance of staying up.

 

[Joe_Fox]

Fully agree Webmaster, you seem to be saying the same thing a lot and it must be hugely annoying. I suggest setting up a hyperlink to the explanation so that you are less frustrated.