Dave Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Are there any benefits to us paying in a different way to the rest of football? Even the world's flushest club evidently don't do it this way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Given wanted out [move]Man City knew this [/move] [move][/move] Berbatov also wanted out... Bellamy wanted out, Man City knew that as well, yet West Ham robbed them blind, £15 million for that old waster. You've also got to remember that as a club we owed a lot more to Given than Spurs did to Berbs or West ham to Bellamy. For all the years of loyal service he'd given to the club he had to be allowed to leave if he wanted to, and therefore to even get £6 million is pretty good. On another point I'm still shocked and disgusted at the number of you who are willing to abuse Given, he is still and always will be a legend in my eyes. He eventually got fed up with the turmoil at the club, but who wouldn't have, I'm amazed he stayed with us as long as he did. Can you explain this please? I mean that given all his years of loyal service he should expect that he will be treated fairly by the club, along the lines that older players who have given long service are often allowed to move clubs for free even if they are still under contract. A service is defined as something that is offered for free. Given was paid a massive wage. He stayed with us for years, but your suggestion of letting your best players go for nothing is ridiculous, should Liverpool let Gerrard go for nothing then? link? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selfless_service Before you claim it as another service, the service above is obviously the one he was getting at if he feels that we should have let Given go for free. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Are there any benefits to us paying in a different way to the rest of football? Even the world's flushest club evidently don't do it this way. you say you want a revolution, well you know, we all want to save the world [works better if you sing it] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Are there any benefits to us paying in a different way to the rest of football? Even the world's flushest club evidently don't do it this way. Like someone else said, if were the buying club then if were paying up front then other clubs are probably more likely to agree to sell/agree a lower fee. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Doesn't seem to have helped us so far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Doesn't seem to have helped us so far. Maybe it has with the players we got in, we just dont know. Doesn't apply with Johnson when Man City have squillions though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Doesn't seem to have helped us so far. Maybe it has with the players we got in, we just dont know. Doesn't apply with Johnson when Man City have squillions though. They've got squillions but they don't want to pay up front for players either. Which players have we brought in which you feel we needed to twist their arm, or saved a significant amount on the fee through this method? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I'd be amazed if any other top level clubs paid upfront for deals. Regardless of how much money club does/doesn't have Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belfast Boy Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 So say they had accepted our bid for Johnson. Would we have paid it all upfront, and still recieved nothing yet for Given? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 So say they had accepted our bid for Johnson. Would we have paid it all upfront, and still recieved nothing yet for Given? Do you think anyone on here knows the answer to that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Doesn't seem to have helped us so far. Maybe it has with the players we got in, we just dont know. Doesn't apply with Johnson when Man City have squillions though. They've got squillions but they don't want to pay up front for players either. Which players have we brought in which you feel we needed to twist their arm, or saved a significant amount on the fee through this method? Like I said, we just dont know. Its conjecture either way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Doesn't seem to have helped us so far. Maybe it has with the players we got in, we just dont know. Doesn't apply with Johnson when Man City have squillions though. They've got squillions but they don't want to pay up front for players either. Which players have we brought in which you feel we needed to twist their arm, or saved a significant amount on the fee through this method? Like I said, we just dont know. Its conjecture either way. Much of the discussion on this forum is tbh; otherwise there would be nothing to talk about. If there's a benefit to paying up front I'm not convinced we've needed it considering the players we've bought (and not bought). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stalker Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Given wanted out [move]Man City knew this [/move] [move][/move] Berbatov also wanted out... Bellamy wanted out, Man City knew that as well, yet West Ham robbed them blind, £15 million for that old waster. You've also got to remember that as a club we owed a lot more to Given than Spurs did to Berbs or West ham to Bellamy. For all the years of loyal service he'd given to the club he had to be allowed to leave if he wanted to, and therefore to even get £6 million is pretty good. On another point I'm still shocked and disgusted at the number of you who are willing to abuse Given, he is still and always will be a legend in my eyes. He eventually got fed up with the turmoil at the club, but who wouldn't have, I'm amazed he stayed with us as long as he did. Can you explain this please? I mean that given all his years of loyal service he should expect that he will be treated fairly by the club, along the lines that older players who have given long service are often allowed to move clubs for free even if they are still under contract. A service is defined as something that is offered for free. Given was paid a massive wage. He stayed with us for years, but your suggestion of letting your best players go for nothing is ridiculous, should Liverpool let Gerrard go for nothing then? link? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selfless_service Before you claim it as another service, the service above is obviously the one he was getting at if he feels that we should have let Given go for free. firstly, i think you need to read that link, don't think its what I'm implying at all. Secondly, I don't think we should have sold Given for free but his loyalty to the club over many years weakened our bargaining position as it would have been unfair for us to hold city to ransom and possibly scupper a transfer that the player wanted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Doesn't seem to have helped us so far. Maybe it has with the players we got in, we just dont know. Doesn't apply with Johnson when Man City have squillions though. They've got squillions but they don't want to pay up front for players either. Which players have we brought in which you feel we needed to twist their arm, or saved a significant amount on the fee through this method? Like I said, we just dont know. Its conjecture either way. Much of the discussion on this forum is tbh; otherwise there would be nothing to talk about. If there's a benefit to paying up front I'm not convinced we've needed it considering the players we've bought (and not bought). Well the possibilities could be any of the players, but possibly Xisco and Colo coming our way because Depor needed the money. Perhaps more close to seeming evident would be the flux of what seem to be very talented and sought after youngsters that have come our way rather than anywhere else without much problem or resistance from lower league teams who may be glad to receive a fee up front. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raconteur Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 firstly, i think you need to read that link, don't think its what I'm implying at all. Secondly, I don't think we should have sold Given for free but his loyalty to the club over many years weakened our bargaining position as it would have been unfair for us to hold city to ransom and possibly scupper a transfer that the player wanted. I'm sorry, but that's fairyland bullshit. This is 2009 and romance in football died years ago. "Loyalty", "unfair" and "wanted" have no place in professional football. Given was owed nothing but the renumeration specified in his contract - by the same token he owed us nothing, but the manner in which he engineered his exit makes him a fucking dog... And I marvel at those who say he was such a loyal servant when every time Harper was played Given whinged, to the point of submitting a transfer request - something he refused to do when he really did want to leave... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 but the manner in which he engineered his exit makes him a fucking dog... And I marvel at those who say he was such a loyal servant when every time Harper was played Given whinged, to the point of submitting a transfer request - something he refused to do when he really did want to leave... howay man get some fucking perspective Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raconteur Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 but the manner in which he engineered his exit makes him a fucking dog... And I marvel at those who say he was such a loyal servant when every time Harper was played Given whinged, to the point of submitting a transfer request - something he refused to do when he really did want to leave... howay man get some fucking perspective If you say so... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 but the manner in which he engineered his exit makes him a fucking dog... And I marvel at those who say he was such a loyal servant when every time Harper was played Given whinged, to the point of submitting a transfer request - something he refused to do when he really did want to leave... howay man get some fucking perspective He has. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 Given in the end felt like he owed us nothing, cannot see why people think we owed him anything either. Some people just won't admit he treat us like shit over his move to Citeh, you are like battered wives...oh but i love him, he didn't mean it...its not his fault...he's depressed and unhappy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest koye Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 I think everyone should appreciate what Shay has performed on the pitch over the last 12 years, and for being such a great guy as well! He gave a lot to our club and we should respect his desicion to move on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 How do you determine who is right? If he goes for 8 million,will that be good business or not? Could we have got more? It just doesn't sit well with me that we are sending out the signal that we don't expect Given to be here at the end of this transfer window. We should have kept our foot down and have City offer us what we want or tell them to take a hike.. By "right" I mean we'll see who caves in first on the negotiating. You are saying Newcastle shouldn't have let Given talk to Man City. My opinion is that Newcastle buy themselves negotiating time by letting everything else be sorted out apart from the fee. Losing Given isn't good but he wants to leave. £5m is a joke offer. The money Man City have paid for other players in this window mean Given should be going for at least £12m in my opinion. If he goes for £8m it isn't great but it is better than £5m. It looks like whatever we get will be too late to spend. We may as well try to screw them out of every penny we can. We had a discussion back on Jan 31st about it being wise or not (pun intended) to let Given discuss personal terms and have a medical before agreeing a transfer fee. Some people thought this wouldn't make a difference to the transfer fee negotiable, some numtpies even thought it would strengthen our negotiation position... In the end it is confirmed we will receive 5,9 million, and that's in a future payment. In my view the club have f***ed up badly here and it was easily foreseeable, yet some people just can't look beyond their desire for Ashley & Co to work out at this club and critisise them for their mistakes. They are new to football and it clearly shows. Let's hope they wise up (or even wise out) quickly for our sake. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 To be fair to Ashley and Co they have done very well out of all our other player sales. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatwax Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 He's gone now, so whatever. Just get over it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 He's gone now, so whatever. Just get over it. A bit simplistic don't you think? It's not as him being gone or the circumstances surrounding his departure could have no ramifications on our future.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 He's gone now, so whatever. Just get over it. A bit simplistic don't you think? It's not as him being gone or the circumstances surrounding his departure could have no ramifications on our future.. Probably true. It does stick in the craw that Craig Gordon can be worth £9m moving from Scotland to Sunderland whereas Shay Given, a far better/more proven goalkeeper in the prime of his career, can cost only 2/3 of that moving from Newcastle United to the richest club on the planet. As others have said though, it is slightly offset by the apparent gains made on most other sales under Ashley. However, it still doesn't justify it or make it acceptable when looked at as an individual case, especially when you consider the money City paid for other players in January... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now