Jump to content

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, GEFAFWISP said:

Hard not to blame Jamie Reuben and Andy Howe for everything wrong here the little nepo wanksplats.

 

:lol:

 

18.3m a goal so far. 

 

 

Edited by La Parka

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are several things that are not clear to me. We had many loan options without risk, but we bought Wissat for a lot of money. Knowing that he is playing in the Africa Cup of Nations and that he does not fit our profile because of his age. What shocked me was his weekly salary, I can't believe it. 140,000 a week??? And that is the basic salary. At Brentford he got 25,000. Whoever did this needs urgent medical attention.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And this is after he went on strike all summer too... It's like we couldn't look at our own striking prick and think "hmmm we should probably avoid this kind of profile". Hindsight is 20/20 and all that but there were A LOT of red flags.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that we bought Wissa, Osula is in the starting lineup several times, does anyone understand this?Why is Osula, who has been ignored so far, playing more than Wissa? I know they're in roughly the same category, but it's interesting.

 

 

 

Edited by sanyi75

Link to post
Share on other sites

If there really is a sell on clause it would be pretty inexplicable.

 

I could only guess they (and possibly we) assumed he'd retire off to the Saudi League after a few years of banging in goals in the CL here.

 

But it's all worked out so badly so far that it's become quite funny.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said yesterday, I just assume it was a fairly easy clause to agree to because either we would never be able to sell him or we'd sell him for a small amount in 4 or 5 years. Not a big deal in terms of finances. 

 

Pretty unusual for them to even ask for the clause TBH, I guess they just had us over a barrel and were throwing out whatever they thought they could get us to agree to. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, John P said:

Chris Waugh in The Athletic reporting that we're actively looking to move him on in the summer for a big loss, but that he wants to stay. 25% sell on clause as well :lol:


When I saw this post last night, I thought it was us who were looking to put the 25% sell-on into any 'big loss' sale.

Waugh did mention this when Wissa signed in September, but obviously it was missed in the excitement at the time. [emoji38]

https://archive.ph/ndfQl

image.thumb.png.c2459a263b1bee8beadaad556b37c3c4.png

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It should have been left at the beginning of his salary negotiations. He became one of our highest-paid players. He's an idiot who signs a contract like that when Hall, Livramento or Miley play football for a fraction of the salary.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The guy had just come of a 20 goal season.

 

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but nobody expected the knee injury or the drop off to be as big.

 

If we were to sign another 20 goal striker this season we would all be excited.

 

The fact there are only two strikers over 20 goals this season shows that the guy was not as bad as people made out.

 

Just hasn't worked out for anyone... Rule is , don't go on strike as there is a reason players need a preseason!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, just wow.

 

I always hoped that if and when Isak went, the profit would at least be our Grealish of sorts and set us up nicely for a better squad. Would never have anticipated blowing it on a 5ft 9 turd and an easily toppled matchstick. The 25% profit clause is just the chef's kiss. Brentford must find it hilarious. What a dream deal we gifted them.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sanyi75 said:

How can other teams integrate players into the squad in a shorter time? e.g. Semenyo, Ekitike, Mbeumo, Cunha, Simons

 

Did any of them have a career threatening injury before kicking a ball for their new team?

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

We're not making any form of profit on him so that 25% is pointless in this discussion.

 

 

I'd assumed it was 25% of any fee tbh. I did think it meant profit initially but then reading all the messages here I thought maybe not. 

 

 

Edited by TRon

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...