Jump to content

Other clubs' transfers


Recommended Posts

City backed out because they didn't want to pay when Arsenal wanted because his contract is out in the summer.

 

Plus there are reports Sanchez wants like 400k a week and a 15m signing bonus, no guarantee this is true of course. But if it is Sanchez isn't choosing anybody more that he's signing with the only team whose willing to give him what he wants.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest firetotheworks

 

 

Why is it weird?  He's joining a much better team than arsenal.

Because Man City are a much better team than Man United.

He'd start less games at city, I suspect he'll be wanting guaranteed 1st team status at this stage of his career.

 

I'm not sure about any of that, he's good enough to be part of Man City's rotation of everyone bar De Bruyne.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Either way, he's out of contract in the summer. He makes some cash, plays for a better team for 6 months, and signs with Bayern in June.

 

??? Why would he end up at Bayern in the summer?

 

:lol: Just spitballing, I have no real idea.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Either way, he's out of contract in the summer. He makes some cash, plays for a better team for 6 months, and signs with Bayern in June.

 

??? Why would he end up at Bayern in the summer?

 

:lol: Just spitballing, I have no real idea.

 

He'll probably get a new contract :lol: He's not going out on loan for six months.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just operating on the assumption that whoever signs him is merely assuming his Arsenal contract and getting him for 6-months. Hence the price being (relatively) low for a player of his quality:

 

Manchester City had been regarded as the favourites to sign the 29-year-old forward this month, but senior figures at the Etihad told ESPN FC on Friday that the Premier League leaders would not pursue a move for the Chilean unless Arsenal substantially dropped their £35m asking price for a player with less than six months remaining on his contract.

 

http://www.espn.com/soccer/soccer-transfers/story/3347821/alexis-sanchez-left-out-of-arsenal-squad-as-move-to-manchester-united-nears

 

I.e. not a guarantee that he signs a new contract with whomever he leaves Arsenal for this window.

 

I don't know why he wouldn't necessarily sign a new contract with either ManU or City, but as far as I'm aware, transfers aren't contingent upon players signing new contracts with their new clubs. Maybe I'm totally wrong about that and feel free to correct me if so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why he wouldn't necessarily sign a new contract with either ManU or City, but as far as I'm aware, transfers aren't contingent upon players signing new contracts with their new clubs. Maybe I'm totally wrong about that and feel free to correct me if so.

 

This is not the NBA. Yanks being yanks. :p

 

A transfer rescinds the existing contract with his current employer, the new club doesn't take up the old contract. Otherwise it's a loan.

 

The reason they say the price is inflated for somebody with so little left in the contract, is because in 6 months his transfer value for Arsenal will be zero.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why he wouldn't necessarily sign a new contract with either ManU or City, but as far as I'm aware, transfers aren't contingent upon players signing new contracts with their new clubs. Maybe I'm totally wrong about that and feel free to correct me if so.

 

This is not the NBA. Yanks being yanks. :p

 

A transfer rescinds the existing contract with his current employer, the new club doesn't take up the old contract. Otherwise it's a loan.

 

The reason they say the price is inflated for somebody with so little left in the contract, is because in 6 months his transfer value for Arsenal will be zero.

 

Tomato Juice having a nightmare :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why he wouldn't necessarily sign a new contract with either ManU or City, but as far as I'm aware, transfers aren't contingent upon players signing new contracts with their new clubs. Maybe I'm totally wrong about that and feel free to correct me if so.

 

This is not the NBA. Yanks being yanks. :p

 

A transfer rescinds the existing contract with his current employer, the new club doesn't take up the old contract. Otherwise it's a loan.

 

The reason they say the price is inflated for somebody with so little left in the contract, is because in 6 months his transfer value for Arsenal will be zero.

 

:thup: egg on my face, had always assumed it worked the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...