failsworthblueboy
Well-Known Member
I simply believe he has tried his best and it hasn't worked out for him, I hope he gets a move soon and wish him the best.
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.
Kalvin Phillips
- Thread starter MAG
- Start date
He won’t be going anywhere unless it’s on loan. He won’t take a wage cut and he still has four years left to run on his deal. We are stuck with him.
It was clear he was never at the level (I said as much when city were linked with him) and it honestly is one of the worst signings in the post takeover era given length of contract reported wages etc
It was clear he was never at the level (I said as much when city were linked with him) and it honestly is one of the worst signings in the post takeover era given length of contract reported wages etc
4 years? Surely he wasn't given a 6 year contract?He won’t be going anywhere unless it’s on loan. He won’t take a wage cut and he still has four years left to run on his deal. We are stuck with him.
It was clear he was never at the level (I said as much when city were linked with him) and it honestly is one of the worst signings in the post takeover era given length of contract reported wages etc
bumbleblue
Well-Known Member
Yes he was I remember thinking wow at the time.4 years? Surely he wasn't given a 6 year contract?
We made an error of judgement. It happens. I can’t find the energy to be pissed off with it all because let’s face it, those errors in judgement are few and far between.
You have to consider the context, that was rhe season Dinho left, and the club would have been thinking get in another midfielder with energy that can break up play. Rodri having the season he did, a change in play with Haaland and 4 CBs made that less necessary, and ultimately Kalvin's own length of time to settle, changed the context.
decmancity
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2010
- Messages
- 12,670
Great for accounting purposes.Yes he was I remember thinking wow at the time.
Great for accounting purposes.
It's not like he was a £100m player. The amortisation on his fee is only like £1.5m a year less over 6 than it is over 5. Meanwhile we've committed to paying him £8.5m a year for an extra year. Completely stupid business.
Centurions
Well-Known Member
Ahh, hindsight, what a wonderful skill to have.It's not like he was a £100m player. The amortisation on his fee is only like £1.5m a year less over 6 than it is over 5. Meanwhile we've committed to paying him £8.5m a year for an extra year. Completely stupid business.
remember arthur mann
Well-Known Member
4 years? Surely he wasn't given a 6 year contract?
Yes he was I remember thinking wow at the time.
It must have been City's rag moment.