Pilko Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 Newcastle United boss Chris Hughton remains optimistic of concluding a deal to sign Portsmouth defender Mike Williamson. The centre-half was expected to finalise a £1million move to St James' Park after undergoing a medical and discussing personal terms. However, the transfer has hit a snag as Pompey still owe Watford money from the £3million deal which took Williamson to Fratton Park in the summer transfer window. The deal with Newcastle could see Pompey take a further financial hit, but Hughton hopes he can wrap up the signing of Williamson. "I'm still very much hopeful of a deal going through as soon as possible," Hughton told The Journal. "I know where we were in the morning and it's just a case of waiting and seeing at the moment." Williamson has yet to make a first-team appearance for Pompey since his move from Watford and is keen to be playing regular football. http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11674_5879804,00.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 He's only played 17 games out of League Two in his career ... and he's 26. What's the point of this post? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 I think the Watford board need to be man enough to accept that they'll get more money if they renogotiate the clauses with Portsmouth and Newcastle Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 I think the Watford board need to be man enough to accept that they'll get more money if they renogotiate the clauses with Portsmouth and Newcastle Without having a clue what the clauses are how can you possibly reach that conclusion? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 I think the Watford board need to be man enough to accept that they'll get more money if they renogotiate the clauses with Portsmouth and Newcastle Without having a clue what the clauses are how can you possibly reach that conclusion? Obviously that is on the assumption that these clauses exist. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 I think the Watford board need to be man enough to accept that they'll get more money if they renogotiate the clauses with Portsmouth and Newcastle I think we're owed money and should receive it in full. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 I agree with that, just don't think the additional transfer fee would have made a great deal of difference to his playing time that's all. Based on what though? I just don't think he'd have been keeping Kaboul or Ben Haim out of the team. Just an opinion that's all. No offense though but I think that's just a guess based on nowt. I mean what do you about how much the manager rates each player or there general situation? Also Kaboul has been injured hasn't he? Just seems pointless to say this based on no info. We know the reason the lad hasn't played a single game, anything else is guesswork. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 Watford cannot demand money for appearances if he didn't make any. That's the nature of the beast, you take a chance, if it doesn't work you don't get paid. Watford must be owed money for the actual transfer to hold this up, meaning they've basically sold a defender and received nothing for it, which for a CCC is a fuking terrible thing to do. Hope Portsmouth go bust after this season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 It's an opinion based on Kaboul & Ben Haim being proven Premier League defenders keeping out a Football League defender. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 It's an opinion based on Kaboul & Ben Haim being proven Premier League defenders keeping out a Football League defender. How many times has a player come into a club and taken the place of a bigger name player. Not everyone picks players purely on reputation. I know its just an opinion, I just think its very frivolous Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 From lower league? I can't think of that many. Particularly when Kaboul was obviously first-choice and they signed Ben Haim at the same time as Williamson. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 You can't think of many players that have been bought from a lower league and ended up replacing a bigger name player? Ok not off the top of your head, but surely you have to accept its happened loads of times over the years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stozo Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 We have to buy him now in my opinion. Simpson is out until Cardiff and Taylor is out for far longer which leaves us very short at the back. As much as I hate paying over the odds for someone who isn't a stand out player I think we need to do it in this situation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ProudToBeAGeordie Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 We have to buy him now in my opinion. Simpson is out until Cardiff and Taylor is out for far longer which leaves us very short at the back. As much as I hate paying over the odds for someone who isn't a stand out player I think we need to do it in this situation. Pompey have already accepted £1 million bid from us. Now they have read the terms of the contract and owe Watford £2.3 million, so Pompey have said they will nto sell for less now. Even Ashley is not stupid enough to play ball with Pompey now. It's a shame as it seems all eggs were in this basket, and it will linger on for a few more days before it falls through, leaving just a few days to try and bring in a striker and a defender on loan who probably will not have even been scouted, just a gamble on loan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Apparently according to the Sunday rags (that says it all really) we are going for Taylor from Birmingham. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Heneage Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Excuse my ignornace, but what exactly has gone on here? Surely if everything is agreed they can't just stop the deal? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovejoy Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Excuse my ignornace, but what exactly has gone on here? Surely if everything is agreed they can't just stop the deal? its not signed until its signed. and until it is, you can do anything you like tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 I would think next time the players salaries aren't paid on time Williamson should be well within his rights to walk out on breach of contract. It can't be right that players can be treated like this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Apparently according to the Sunday rags (that says it all really) we are going for Taylor from Birmingham. Maybe Ashley reckons a team of Taylor's will confuse man marking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Spaceman Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 As ridiculous as that sounds somewhere somebody would actually use that to their advantage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest geordienorway Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Lack of ambition imo, he can't even get in the team at Pompey. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Lack of ambition imo, he can't even get in the team at Pompey. It's been discussed. It's because Pompey would have to pay Watford if he plays, and they cant afford it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAK Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Excuse my ignornace, but what exactly has gone on here? Surely if everything is agreed they can't just stop the deal? its not signed until its signed. and until it is, you can do anything you like tbh. Not that I'm a legal expert or anything but transfers go like this: We fax offer to Portsmouth and they fax back saying they accept (I understand that's how transfers are done?). Wouldn't that be a binding contract for the sale of the players registration? Couldn't we seek damages for breach of contract for them not fulfilling their end? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilko Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 THANK FUCK, A TITLE CHANGE 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