Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
Hladky will have to step up. 12:46 - Jul 25 with 2044 viewskiwiblue

Burnley about to sell Trafford......27m......
Perhaps a sale for town to replace him?
0
Hladky will have to step up. on 12:48 - Jul 25 with 1987 viewspositivity

they bought a new keeper for 5m in the summer; hladky still won't be first choice

Poll: do you do judo and/or do you do voodoo?

0
Hladky will have to step up. on 12:56 - Jul 25 with 1897 viewsBlaggers12

Muric is going back to Turf Moor.
1
Hladky will have to step up. on 13:00 - Jul 25 with 1814 viewshowdonblue

Hladky will have to step up. on 12:56 - Jul 25 by Blaggers12

Muric is going back to Turf Moor.


🤞🤞🤞🤞🤞
0
Hladky will have to step up. on 13:09 - Jul 25 with 1706 viewsMatt_Netherlands

Hladky will have to step up. on 12:56 - Jul 25 by Blaggers12

Muric is going back to Turf Moor.


Does he need a lift?
0
Hladky will have to step up. on 13:12 - Jul 25 with 1668 viewsvictorysquad

Hladky will have to step up. on 12:56 - Jul 25 by Blaggers12

Muric is going back to Turf Moor.


we should keep him imo

Poll: If we sing for 90 mins for all remaining games, how many points is it worth?

0
Hladky will have to step up. on 13:20 - Jul 25 with 1577 viewsBlaggers12

Hladky will have to step up. on 13:09 - Jul 25 by Matt_Netherlands

Does he need a lift?


Well he certainly won’t be driving there himself for a while…
6
Hladky will have to step up. on 13:39 - Jul 25 with 1390 viewsHighgateBlue

In my view, selling clubs should not be able to insert re-purchase or matching rights into sales contracts. What next, a clause banning a player from playing against their former club? When you sell a player, that should be it, in terms of their services. I'm fine with sell-on clauses, because it allows a smaller club to benefit from the huge increase in value of a player whom they've developed in the first place.

But retaining essentially proprietory rights over another team's player should be banned in the same way as having a stake in another team is also banned.
4
Hladky will have to step up. on 14:09 - Jul 25 with 1188 viewshunty21

What is don't understand is the clause was 40m so how have they agreed 27m
0
Login to get fewer ads

Hladky will have to step up. on 14:14 - Jul 25 with 1131 viewsMetal_Hacker

He had bloody good feet that bloke …just saying

Poll: Philogene Conundrum

0
Hladky will have to step up. on 14:15 - Jul 25 with 1126 viewsMediocre_Quick

They can have Muric back, for what we paid for him
-1
Hladky will have to step up. on 18:49 - Jul 25 with 768 viewsMark

Hladky will have to step up. on 13:39 - Jul 25 by HighgateBlue

In my view, selling clubs should not be able to insert re-purchase or matching rights into sales contracts. What next, a clause banning a player from playing against their former club? When you sell a player, that should be it, in terms of their services. I'm fine with sell-on clauses, because it allows a smaller club to benefit from the huge increase in value of a player whom they've developed in the first place.

But retaining essentially proprietory rights over another team's player should be banned in the same way as having a stake in another team is also banned.


I agree this should be looked at, as big clubs are effectively holding onto rights over the player and capping the profit smaller clubs can make.
1
Hladky will have to step up. on 18:55 - Jul 25 with 742 viewstonybied

Hladky will have to step up. on 14:09 - Jul 25 by hunty21

What is don't understand is the clause was 40m so how have they agreed 27m


A club can still choose to sell lower than a clause, they just don't have to. Once the clause is met, the club have no choice in the matter.
0
Hladky will have to step up. on 20:30 - Jul 25 with 554 viewsNutkins_Return

Hladky will have to step up. on 18:55 - Jul 25 by tonybied

A club can still choose to sell lower than a clause, they just don't have to. Once the clause is met, the club have no choice in the matter.


They also had a matched clause and that is what this was. Newcastle were in at £27mil.

On Hladky he probably needs to move to play.

Poll: Who do we think McKenna (not you) will partner Greaves with ?

0
Hladky will have to step up. on 22:21 - Jul 25 with 420 viewsNthsuffolkblue

Hladky will have to step up. on 20:30 - Jul 25 by Nutkins_Return

They also had a matched clause and that is what this was. Newcastle were in at £27mil.

On Hladky he probably needs to move to play.


I wondered why reports said they had met the clause and got him below the clause price.

That explains it, thanks.

Poll: How do you feel about the re-election of Trump?
Blog: [Blog] Ghostbusters

0




About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Online Safety Advertising
© TWTD 1995-2025