are we a charity, why does everyone wanna paint city as the big evil bad guys, we have just paid 33m to a club who signed a player for less than 100k 20 games ago, 30 plus million for an 18 year old everyone else offered less for, we consistently let players go who want to explore opportunities for a reasonable price.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Juma Bah
- Thread starter John Wayne
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
If this is the way we want to do business, great. But a bit like shacking up with a woman who left their husband for you, don’t be surprised if it bites you on the arse at some point.are we a charity, why does everyone wanna paint city as the big evil bad guys, we have just paid 33m to a club who signed a player for less than 100k 20 games ago, 30 plus million for an 18 year old everyone else offered less for, we consistently let players go who want to explore opportunities for a reasonable price.
Because we are bad whatever we do so just be bad at this pointare we a charity, why does everyone wanna paint city as the big evil bad guys, we have just paid 33m to a club who signed a player for less than 100k 20 games ago, 30 plus million for an 18 year old everyone else offered less for, we consistently let players go who want to explore opportunities for a reasonable price.
its bitten us on the arse plenty of times tbf, we try to be the nice guys and consistently get shafted, if we have offered a reasonable amount and they have chosen to say no hoping for more they have no one to blame but themselvesIf this is the way we want to do business, great. But a bit like shacking up with a woman who left their husband for you, don’t be surprised if it bites you on the arse at some point.
chesterguy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 16 Oct 2007
- Messages
- 1,533
I am sorry City don’t seem to do things in an underhand
My take is we offered a fair price they then got greedy so we told the player the deal was off. The player and the agent have then said stuff that we will cancel our contract and therefore become a free agent.
Not sure what anyone has done wrong here
My take is we offered a fair price they then got greedy so we told the player the deal was off. The player and the agent have then said stuff that we will cancel our contract and therefore become a free agent.
Not sure what anyone has done wrong here
Matt Diablo
Well-Known Member
This could be an unreal signing at that price! Players from here there and everywhere. Fantastic. They are all massive / strong/ rapid and well young! Well done City thanks fuk:)
Manc Born & Bred
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2005
- Messages
- 11,668
southamptonblue
Well-Known Member
"Presumably" "allegedly" "appears to" "they think" .....as usual, no one has a fucking clue except him/his agent/Valladolid. The rest is assumption and guessing.
Stoned Rose
Well-Known Member
Gone right off by the sounds of it. Sticking the boot right in.
Man-chester copperpot
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2017
- Messages
- 2,250
bumbleblue
Well-Known Member
Hello hello!CITY AGRO!
CITY AGRO!
ninjamonkey
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 22,235
Not a good look for us this but i imagine this was the last resort thats been forced upon us rather than our preferred method of business.
None of us know what has really happened but it sounds as though we offered a price higher than his release clause, they said no even though the extra money was a courtesy offer and wanted even more, attempted to get the player to sign a new contract with a higher release clause so they could demand more money from us so we esswntially played their own game and got the player to buy out his contract instead and now valladolid are crying about it.
If you play a game of bluff, don't cry when your bluff is called and you lose out. Not nice to burn bridges, I'm sure we would have preferred to keep it amicable but if they were taking the piss then fuck them.
End result is we'll get the player we want for less than we were willing to pay, they wont have a leg to stand on legally, this bad PR for us will all be forgotten very quickly, we have some bad blood with 1 club that we'll be unlikely to want to deal with again anyway and they lose out on the extra revenue they could have had.
None of us know what has really happened but it sounds as though we offered a price higher than his release clause, they said no even though the extra money was a courtesy offer and wanted even more, attempted to get the player to sign a new contract with a higher release clause so they could demand more money from us so we esswntially played their own game and got the player to buy out his contract instead and now valladolid are crying about it.
If you play a game of bluff, don't cry when your bluff is called and you lose out. Not nice to burn bridges, I'm sure we would have preferred to keep it amicable but if they were taking the piss then fuck them.
End result is we'll get the player we want for less than we were willing to pay, they wont have a leg to stand on legally, this bad PR for us will all be forgotten very quickly, we have some bad blood with 1 club that we'll be unlikely to want to deal with again anyway and they lose out on the extra revenue they could have had.
Alan Harper's Tash
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 69,549
Not sure it’s much to do with us. We’ve offered to pay his release clause, which seems to be €6m.Not a good look for us this but i imagine this was the last resort thats been forced upon us rather than our preferred method of business.
None of us know what has really happened but it sounds as though we offered a price higher than his release clause, they said no even though the extra money was a courtesy offer and wanted even more, attempted to get the player to sign a new contract with a higher release clause so they could demand more money from us so we esswntially played their own game and got the player to buy out his contract instead and now valladolid are crying about it.
If you play a game of bluff, don't cry when your bluff is called and you lose out. Not nice to burn bridges, I'm sure we would have preferred to keep it amicable but if they were taking the piss then fuck them.
End result is we'll get the player we want for less than we were willing to pay, they wont have a leg to stand on legally, this bad PR for us will all be forgotten very quickly, we have some bad blood with 1 club that we'll be unlikely to want to deal with again anyway and they lose out on the extra revenue they could have had.
Valladolid have tried to get a contract sorted in order that they get €14m.
The player and his representatives don’t believe the €14m clause is legal.
So player’s release clause was 6M. City paid the termination clause via player/agent.
Valladolid wanted player to sign improved contract which will increase his Release Clause. But player knew he was in demand and rejected the improved contracts, which is their right.
I am sorry but player has a right to refuse or accept any contract and how the hell City has done anything wrong here.
Valladolid wanted player to sign improved contract which will increase his Release Clause. But player knew he was in demand and rejected the improved contracts, which is their right.
I am sorry but player has a right to refuse or accept any contract and how the hell City has done anything wrong here.
Dribble
Well-Known Member
City have tried to play it straight & be respectful & where's that got us? 115...If this is the way we want to do business, great. But a bit like shacking up with a woman who left their husband for you, don’t be surprised if it bites you on the arse at some point.
We should look after number one. Fuck the lot of em.
So if I get this right:
He was on a youth contract which had a €6m release clause. They wanted to give him a senior contract that would bump his release clause up to €13m. Sounds like City was bidding in the range between €6m-€13m as a courtesy, even though they knew they could legally sign him for €6m. Since picking him up from Sierra Leone, one of the poorest countries of the world, they have reportedly paid him €2.5k a month (!) while being a regular starter in La Liga. His CB partner for Valladolid is supposedly making around €50k a month. Sounds a lot to me like exploitation of a young African (if the information online on their wages is in fact correct). Valladolid reject offers that are above the €6m release clause, against the will of their player as they want even more money than what they’re legally entitled to at the time. Bah gives them the middle finger and activates his release clause (with the help of City) which he’s legally alowed to do. And once again City are the bad guys?
He was on a youth contract which had a €6m release clause. They wanted to give him a senior contract that would bump his release clause up to €13m. Sounds like City was bidding in the range between €6m-€13m as a courtesy, even though they knew they could legally sign him for €6m. Since picking him up from Sierra Leone, one of the poorest countries of the world, they have reportedly paid him €2.5k a month (!) while being a regular starter in La Liga. His CB partner for Valladolid is supposedly making around €50k a month. Sounds a lot to me like exploitation of a young African (if the information online on their wages is in fact correct). Valladolid reject offers that are above the €6m release clause, against the will of their player as they want even more money than what they’re legally entitled to at the time. Bah gives them the middle finger and activates his release clause (with the help of City) which he’s legally alowed to do. And once again City are the bad guys?
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.