Swansea chairman Huw Jenkins is set to return from his holiday today and will immediately look at holding talks with the Blues aimed at avoiding a transfer embargo. Last week, Town reported the Swans to the Premier League for non-payment of £300,000 relating to Tamás Priskin’s loan spell at the Liberty Stadium.

Jenkins reportedly aims to speak to Blues chief executive Simon Clegg today with the Welsh club believed to be confident that they will avoid any sanction from the footballing authorities.

Over the weekend, the Premier League confirmed that they had received Town’s complaint, while there were also reports that the matter would initially be passed on to the Football League as Swansea were a Championship club at the time of Priskin’s spell in Wales.

Elsewhere, midfielder Billy Clark, who was told he wouldn’t be offered new terms in April, says he aims to show that his hometown club made a mistake: “Any released player would want to prove their old club was wrong. I just hope I can one day go back to Portman Road.”

Earlier this month, TWTD revealed that the 19-year-old, who made three sub appearances for the Town first team, is set to go on trial at Sheffield United during pre-season.

Photo: Action Images

suffolkpoker added 09:14 - Jun 27 amazing what a little bit of badpress can do it to pay an over due invoice :)
0

ITFC1812 added 09:22 - Jun 27 Talks, what talks? pay up Jenkins!
0

jclark20 added 09:23 - Jun 27 @suffolkpoker and let it be a lesson to them! haha
0

Frankley_Blue added 09:38 - Jun 27 I fail to see what there is to talk about! Sign the money transfer form Jenkins and get back on your holiday ...
0

DiamondGezzer added 09:46 - Jun 27 I suppose, all the while they are talking,the money is still in their account collecting them interest. I hope Mr. Clegg does charge them interest as reported.
0

bluelady added 09:47 - Jun 27 i dont really expect they feel that got good value for money :-)
0

fourth added 09:58 - Jun 27 There is bound to be a late payment penal interest clause
0

olimar added 09:59 - Jun 27 Id say the best solution to this is to let Swansea off, because they dont think they got value for money. Then we will go back to Watford, use the Swansea case as a precedent, and ask for our money back for signing Priskin.
0

bluelady added 10:02 - Jun 27 olimar great thinking, in fact all transfers should be on a try before you buy basis, i.e contract says "said player" will score 10 goals in 20 games, if he fails you simply send them back for a no quibble guarantee or to swap for the updated model.... :-) on those terms i think Keano was due a lot of money back!
0

Basil_Smallpiece added 10:05 - Jun 27 Swansea's promotion was founded on a season of endeavour, not on the short-term borrowing of a limp, talentless goulash-eater from East Anglia. Three hundred grand for two hundred quids worth of contribution? Joking! General's case has no moral foundation, although surely he will wave a scruffy bit of paper to support his pathetic demand. Get doing a proper job, General. Preferably somewhere well distant from Ipswich. FOG! COYB!

0

bedsitfc added 10:11 - Jun 27 bluelady - its not argos haha
0

olimar added 10:13 - Jun 27 Actually, I watched Priskins performance for them as a lone frontman up against Norwich. Id argue that Priskin made a pretty good contribution to that win, given that they were under pressure for the entire second half, from a team that eventually won promotion, but Priskins running took the pressure off quite a bit. And eventually ended up with a goal. Not worth 300k, but quite a good contribution in a big game.

0

Tillz9 added 10:17 - Jun 27 Basil - they owe the money. Do you really think we should not take the 300k they owe us because Priskin done nothing for them ?? That's hardly our problem. Sometimes things don't work out, tough, you still pay what you said you would. This is business not a Disney story.
0

Basil_Smallpiece added 10:32 - Jun 27 I accept Olimar's fair point and especially his (?) reasonable conclusion 'not worth £300k'. I do not agree with Tillz. The matter should have been settled in the Cobbold way, which might include a phone call and meeting, a verbal scrap, a gin and tonic and an agreement that Swansea pay a fair amount for services rendered. Instead we have the ghastly General screaming from the rooftops that he has a bit of paper and demands an undeserved share of Swansea's bizarre windfall for being promoted. We as fans are all belittled by this horrible man's behaviour. He is a creep and a yes-man of the worst order. FOG! COYB!

0

Tractorog added 10:35 - Jun 27 They are grown ups and they know that players can get injured so if they failed to put an injury clause into the contract then more fools them. They should pay what they agreed.
0

B1TFC added 10:39 - Jun 27 Tillz - who says it's not a Disney story?? Mickey mouse was managing our club for 18 months it just wasn't the fairy tale ending we'd all hoped for!
0

marcusevans added 10:41 - Jun 27 Basil. Companies do good deals and companies do bad deals. This is simply a case of 'A good deal for Ipswich' and 'A bad deal for Swansea' Swings and roundabouts I say. Swansea will simply have to pay up. End of.
0

osborne1nil added 10:52 - Jun 27 Basil, Swansea have just won promotion and £90 million to follow. I think paying Town the money that is due to them shouldn't be an issue in affordability to them. That aside they signed a contract and Ipswich are due the monies from them irrespective of how he performed. If he had scored 15 goals and individually got them promoted via play offs would Town be wanting more money based on how well he performed? Like or dislike Clegg, this was a good deal especially the bonus of if Swansea getting promoted we get extra money from them. Well done Clegg! I wouldn't want someone in charge who was going to run away everytime the likes of Jenkins doesn't pay up!

0

Jon_456 added 11:03 - Jun 27 Disagree with Basil. A contracts a contract, if a player is not as good as you expected when signing him then thats your problem. it would be like us asking for some money back from Watford because he's been awful for us. PAY UP SWANSEA.
0

bluelady added 11:08 - Jun 27 Basil you seem to pop up now and then come out with a load of old 'COBBLERS' , and then disappear again, what an odd chap you are!
0

bobble added 11:26 - Jun 27 theres only 1 way out of this they will have to buy him...yahooooooooo
0

brogansnose added 11:39 - Jun 27 Basil @ I would be more ashamed of our club if we were the ones trying not to pay.
0

HolbrookBlue added 11:57 - Jun 27 Some people on this blog need to grow up and act like true Ipswich Town supporters. We should be supporting the club and the staff not criticising.
0

froudy added 12:21 - Jun 27 Is it not more the case that this should never have been made public? It lacks class to air dirty laundry in public, and I doubt we can expect many favours from Swansea in the future as a result. Surely it would have been better for Clegg to arrange a friendly meeting with the chairman, point out he is well overude in paying us money, and work out a sensible deal to compensate us i.e. first option on a player on loan etc? This just smacks of someone who does not know how to handle himself in the football world.

0

whoppit added 12:24 - Jun 27 Give us the £300,000 and you can keep Priskin !!!!! We will even throw in a toaster to sweeten the deal !!!!!
0

Blogs 295 bloggers

Ipswich Town Polls