Man U to make Owen bid

[Unlucky Luque]

Owen: Linked with Old Trafford switchRoeder rubbishes Owen move talk

Newcastle manager Glenn Roeder has rubbished rumours linking Michael Owen with a move to Manchester United.

 

 

Newspaper reports on Sunday suggested Red Devils boss Sir Alex Ferguson was ready to trigger a £12million release clause in the 27-year-old's contract by tabling a bid in the close season.

 

Owen has been out of action since injuring his knee at the World Cup last summer, but Ferguson is still reported to be considering a move for him.

 

A source at Old Trafford was quoted as saying: "It's no secret that Sir Alex wants another striker and he is bound to be attracted by someone of Owen's pedigree at such a competitive price.

 

"Naturally we would have to be certain he has recovered from his injury and that is why his return will be closely monitored."

 

But Roeder told The Guardian: "It's all news to me.

 

"But I certainly haven't waited all these months to write Michael Owen's name on my team-sheet to even contemplate selling him.

 

"Michael is a very big part of my plans for next season and I know he's been as frustrated as everyone else and can't wait to start playing for Newcastle again.

 

"Personally, I can't wait to see him scoring goals for us that no-one else can."

 

http://www.teamtalk.com/football/story/0,16368,1780_2066536,00.html

[Howaythelads]

Without searching through ICNewcastle to prove it, I am 100% sure that Shepherd has already confirmed that there is no "£X million" get out clause in Owen's contract. This was first said around the time we bought Owen. It was in answer to all the tabloid papers who kept saying there was a clause (because they were upset because we bought Owen).

 

As I recall, Shepherd said that there were no clauses other than what was normal in a contract. So of course it's anyone's guess what constitutes 'normal'.

 

I don't understand why so many people are reluctant to believe in the existence of this clause. It's quite common with contracts for major players, and when you consider that Owen was openly reluctant to join us and we had to pay over the odds, I'd be amazed if he didn't manage to get a clause inserted.

 

I think there is a clause, and I think if Man U match the figure, then he'd be off. What's more, I wouldn't blame him. He's a professional, he'll have the chance to play for one of the world's top clubs, and he won't actually be breaking the terms of his contract. The fault will lie fairly and squarely with Shepherd for signing the player on such unfavourable terms.

 

mackems.gif

 

When there's a chance to slag the Board the terms are unfavourable, pity that in the same post you mentioned they are probably normal.

 

 

[Rob W]

I just don't trust FFS I'm afraid............................ 

[Howaythelads]

Sorry I didn't realise Zigic was Spanish, as for the Crouch comment thats just laughable, so I will

 

Fat lazy waster that he is Viduka scores and sets up goals, on a free and for £45k a week he will be better value than a lot of our recent purchases!

 

Where did I say he was Spanish? I said he was an unproven La Liga striker. Can you tell me about all the great buys we've made from Spain that have hit the ground running like Owen did and will again?

 

There's thousands of players who represent better value than most of our recent signings but that doesn't mean we should sign them all.

Whats the matter Gejon, don't you like somebody providing constructive arguments against your points?

 

Have I abused you in any way? Grow up FFS!

 

Yes Owen is a very good player and a world class finisher but he is also a big risk and given the length of his contract I am not sure we could risk turning down an offer that would fund us improving our squad and possibly reducing the risk.

 

No you haven't but your cocky 'didn't realise Zigic was Spanish' remark wasn't needed - maybe you think you're the font of all knowledge?

 

Par for the course mate, he never admits when someone makes a reasonable point in response to his own, in fact, he hardly ever responds directly to a counter point anybody makes.

[Cajun]

Sorry I didn't realise Zigic was Spanish, as for the Crouch comment thats just laughable, so I will

 

Fat lazy waster that he is Viduka scores and sets up goals, on a free and for £45k a week he will be better value than a lot of our recent purchases!

 

Where did I say he was Spanish? I said he was an unproven La Liga striker. Can you tell me about all the great buys we've made from Spain that have hit the ground running like Owen did and will again?

 

There's thousands of players who represent better value than most of our recent signings but that doesn't mean we should sign them all.

Whats the matter Gejon, don't you like somebody providing constructive arguments against your points?

 

Have I abused you in any way? Grow up FFS!

 

Yes Owen is a very good player and a world class finisher but he is also a big risk and given the length of his contract I am not sure we could risk turning down an offer that would fund us improving our squad and possibly reducing the risk.

 

No you haven't but your cocky 'didn't realise Zigic was Spanish' remark wasn't needed - maybe you think you're the font of all knowledge?

 

Par for the course mate, he never admits when someone makes a reasonable point in response to his own, in fact, he hardly ever responds directly to a counter point anybody makes.

 

Oww you bitch you

 

Funny how pretty much every thread that turns into a mass page cut and paste job normally involves you because you can never admit you are wrong!

[Cronky]

Without searching through ICNewcastle to prove it, I am 100% sure that Shepherd has already confirmed that there is no "£X million" get out clause in Owen's contract. This was first said around the time we bought Owen. It was in answer to all the tabloid papers who kept saying there was a clause (because they were upset because we bought Owen).

 

As I recall, Shepherd said that there were no clauses other than what was normal in a contract. So of course it's anyone's guess what constitutes 'normal'.

 

I don't understand why so many people are reluctant to believe in the existence of this clause. It's quite common with contracts for major players, and when you consider that Owen was openly reluctant to join us and we had to pay over the odds, I'd be amazed if he didn't manage to get a clause inserted.

 

I think there is a clause, and I think if Man U match the figure, then he'd be off. What's more, I wouldn't blame him. He's a professional, he'll have the chance to play for one of the world's top clubs, and he won't actually be breaking the terms of his contract. The fault will lie fairly and squarely with Shepherd for signing the player on such unfavourable terms.

 

mackems.gif

 

When there's a chance to slag the Board the terms are unfavourable, pity that in the same post you mentioned they are probably normal.

 

 

Buy-out clauses are normal, yes. But it's foolish to have a low buy-out clause in the contract of a player who's openly reluctant to join you, and who might well be in demand by other clubs. The odds at you losing money are quite high.

 

Freddie did it because he thinks in terms of buying individuals rather than building a team.

 

[Dinho lad]

The Times reckons Owen's buy out clause is less than 10m.

[Guest Invicta_Toon]

The Times reckons Owen's buy out clause is less than 10m.

 

Wasn't it the times who said we had been sold?

[Dinho lad]

The Times reckons Owen's buy out clause is less than 10m.

 

Wasn't it the times who said we had been sold?

 

Don't remember. But they reported the Sven story, so maybe we shouldn't worry too much.

[Guest johnson293]

The Times reckons Owen's buy out clause is less than 10m.

 

Wasn't it the times who said we had been sold?

 

Don't remember. But they reported the Sven story, so maybe we shouldn't worry too much.

 

Yep - The Times reported that the borad had agreed a takeover bid, which turned out to be rubbish.

 

They also let the like of Rod Liddle write spurious articles, and spout sh*te, so I take no heed on what they report anymore.

 

The Sun is a more credible source these days!

[Howaythelads]

Without searching through ICNewcastle to prove it, I am 100% sure that Shepherd has already confirmed that there is no "£X million" get out clause in Owen's contract. This was first said around the time we bought Owen. It was in answer to all the tabloid papers who kept saying there was a clause (because they were upset because we bought Owen).

 

As I recall, Shepherd said that there were no clauses other than what was normal in a contract. So of course it's anyone's guess what constitutes 'normal'.

 

I don't understand why so many people are reluctant to believe in the existence of this clause. It's quite common with contracts for major players, and when you consider that Owen was openly reluctant to join us and we had to pay over the odds, I'd be amazed if he didn't manage to get a clause inserted.

 

I think there is a clause, and I think if Man U match the figure, then he'd be off. What's more, I wouldn't blame him. He's a professional, he'll have the chance to play for one of the world's top clubs, and he won't actually be breaking the terms of his contract. The fault will lie fairly and squarely with Shepherd for signing the player on such unfavourable terms.

 

mackems.gif

 

When there's a chance to slag the Board the terms are unfavourable, pity that in the same post you mentioned they are probably normal.

 

 

Buy-out clauses are normal, yes. But it's foolish to have a low buy-out clause in the contract of a player who's openly reluctant to join you, and who might well be in demand by other clubs. The odds at you losing money are quite high.

 

Freddie did it because he thinks in terms of buying individuals rather than building a team.

 

So Fred is the Chairman AND the manager, eh? You're a believer that the manager doesn't decide the players he wants and the players he doesn't want? This means that you must believe Souness is a yes-man?

[NE5]

Without searching through ICNewcastle to prove it, I am 100% sure that Shepherd has already confirmed that there is no "£X million" get out clause in Owen's contract. This was first said around the time we bought Owen. It was in answer to all the tabloid papers who kept saying there was a clause (because they were upset because we bought Owen).

 

As I recall, Shepherd said that there were no clauses other than what was normal in a contract. So of course it's anyone's guess what constitutes 'normal'.

 

I don't understand why so many people are reluctant to believe in the existence of this clause. It's quite common with contracts for major players, and when you consider that Owen was openly reluctant to join us and we had to pay over the odds, I'd be amazed if he didn't manage to get a clause inserted.

 

I think there is a clause, and I think if Man U match the figure, then he'd be off. What's more, I wouldn't blame him. He's a professional, he'll have the chance to play for one of the world's top clubs, and he won't actually be breaking the terms of his contract. The fault will lie fairly and squarely with Shepherd for signing the player on such unfavourable terms.

 

You like "thinking" things up don't you, with no foundation, just like here

 

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=38074.msg770319#msg770319

 

Do you "think" the club recently, under the current board, finished in the top 5 for 3 consecutive years for the first time in half a century , or do you just "think" not ?

 

Or are actual   facts difficult to grasp ?

 

 

[Cronky]

Without searching through ICNewcastle to prove it, I am 100% sure that Shepherd has already confirmed that there is no "£X million" get out clause in Owen's contract. This was first said around the time we bought Owen. It was in answer to all the tabloid papers who kept saying there was a clause (because they were upset because we bought Owen).

 

As I recall, Shepherd said that there were no clauses other than what was normal in a contract. So of course it's anyone's guess what constitutes 'normal'.

 

I don't understand why so many people are reluctant to believe in the existence of this clause. It's quite common with contracts for major players, and when you consider that Owen was openly reluctant to join us and we had to pay over the odds, I'd be amazed if he didn't manage to get a clause inserted.

 

I think there is a clause, and I think if Man U match the figure, then he'd be off. What's more, I wouldn't blame him. He's a professional, he'll have the chance to play for one of the world's top clubs, and he won't actually be breaking the terms of his contract. The fault will lie fairly and squarely with Shepherd for signing the player on such unfavourable terms.

 

You like "thinking" things up don't you, with no foundation, just like here

 

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=38074.msg770319#msg770319

 

Do you "think" the club recently, under the current board, finished in the top 5 for 3 consecutive years for the first time in half a century , or do you just "think" not ?

 

Or are actual   facts difficult to grasp ?

 

 

 

No, I'm aware of the facts. You don't mention that since Sir Bob's sacking, we've finished 14th, 7th and now look on line for another mid-table finish. It's also true that in the last three seasons we've spent some time flirting around the relegation area. That's the current position, and those are the facts that bother me.

 

Okay, I feel that there's something seriously wrong in the way in which Shepherd runs the club, and in particular the way he gets over-involved in football-related decisions. I've no proof, but I think there's plenty of evidence, not least in Sir Bob's own book. I also think Shepherd's style is a major factor in our decline. I think he got worried about some mistakes that Sir Bob had made in the transfer market (Bassedas, Viana), and decided to get more closely involved.

 

If you interpret things differently, fine.

[Mick]

 

No, I'm aware of the facts. You don't mention that since Sir Bob's sacking, we've finished 14th, 7th and now look on line for another mid-table finish. It's also true that in the last three seasons we've spent some time flirting around the relegation area. That's the current position, and those are the facts that bother me.

 

Okay, I feel that there's something seriously wrong in the way in which Shepherd runs the club, and in particular the way he gets over-involved in football-related decisions. I've no proof, but I think there's plenty of evidence, not least in Sir Bob's own book. I also think Shepherd's style is a major factor in our decline. I think he got worried about some mistakes that Sir Bob had made in the transfer market (Bassedas, Viana), and decided to get more closely involved.

 

If you interpret things differently, fine.

 

Sir Bobby spent less per year than any other manager since and including Keegan, maybe Shepherd should have done his sums if he was worried.  Also take into account our league finishes and cup runs and I think Sir Bobby can hold his head up high, unlike most at the club today.

[macbeth]

Sir Bobby spent less per year than any other manager since and including Keegan, maybe Shepherd should have done his sums if he was worried.  Also take into account our league finishes and cup runs and I think Sir Bobby can hold his head up high, unlike most at the club today.

 

you must mean an average for Robson? As you never fail to tell me there was huge investment in 2001-early 2003 which you also never fail to tell me meant that no other spending was required. 

 

 

 

http://www.nufc-finances.org.uk/transf6.gif

[Howaythelads]

mackems.gif

[Baggio]

Newcastle United chairman Freddy Shepherd has issued a statement denying there is any get-out clause in Michael Owen's contract at St James' Park.

 

Reports claimed Owen would be allowed to leave the North East club in 2006 if he felt the switch had not worked out.

 

However, Shepherd has blasted those suggestions, despite admitting there are clauses in the four-year deal.

 

"The statement explains everything, I won't elaborate on it," he affirmed. "The statement is written and that's the end of it."

 

The statement read: "I have heard a little rumour that Michael has a clause in his contract which states he can leave Newcastle United in one year's time.

 

"I can tell you now that he hasn't. Of course Michael has clauses in his contract.

 

"In this day and age, all top players do. Alan Shearer does. But that is not one of them.

 

"We promised our supporters that we would sign a top-class striker and we have exceeded every expectation by signing Michael from Real Madrid on a four-year contract."

 

Owen has been speaking about possibly replacing Shearer in the number nine shirt at St James' Park.

 

"I'm the type of lad who doesn't like a big fuss and to see my face on the pages of the papers every day," said the club's record buy.

 

"That's still to be discussed [taking over the fabled number nine jersey] and decided. One of the main things that surprised me when I met Alan was he offered me the number nine for his last season, which was a great gesture.

 

"But I would never have taken it off him. Everyone knows what he means to everyone up here. The numbers are registered for the season anyway but the gesture was unbelievable.

 

"I've been number ten throughout my professional career, I was number nine as a kid, but number ten in the whole course of my career so we'll see how that goes."

 

Owen is targeting a successful future in the black and white stripes after being greeted by jubilant supporters within the stadium.

 

"That's the plan," he said. "To do as well as we can in the league and as well as we can in the cups. It goes without saying.

 

"I don't just play football for the hell of it. I want to win trophies and play in front of passionate supporters.

 

"I love playing the game. It's an exciting club to join. Unfortunately for them, they haven't won anything for a long, long time.

 

"In a selfish way, that's a great thing for me because as soon as we do win something, I do think it's a matter of when not if, it'll be like a country winning the World Cup. It'd be absolute fantastic and I hope I can be part of it when it does happen.

 

"It's not an easy thing to fill [shearer's boots]. Maybe it's an impossible thing to fill. I can only guarantee whatever team I'm playing for, I always give 100 percent. I always try and win games and score as many goals as I can. More importantly, I want to win as many games as possible.

 

"As for taking over from Alan, I can only do my best and guarantee I'll give it my best shot.

 

"As long as football exists, the most important thing will be scoring goals and I don't think anyone will convince anyone any different."

 

 

[Cronky]

"The statement explains everything, I won't elaborate on it," he affirmed. "The statement is written and that's the end of it."

 

The statement read: "I have heard a little rumour that Michael has a clause in his contract which states he can leave Newcastle United in one year's time.

 

"I can tell you now that he hasn't. Of course Michael has clauses in his contract.

 

"In this day and age, all top players do. Alan Shearer does. But that is not one of them.

 

 

So effectively all Shepherd denied was that Owen could walk out in a year's time. He didn't even say that there was no buy-out clause in a year's time, let alone a buy-out clause in two or more years. He then refused to take any questions on the subject.

 

Sorry, but anyone who still says there's no buy-out clause just doesn't want to believe it.

[lovejoy]

buy out clause or not, he wont go imo.

 

it will ruin his reputation letting us pay him for 2 years while he lay ther einjured.

 

we'll get next season out of him, and then unless we make great leaps, he'll be off next summer

[LoveItIfWeBeatU]

After a season and a half destroyed by injury Owen could probably do without the extra games playing in Europe would involve.

[tmonkey]

After a season and a half destroyed by injury Owen could probably do without the extra games playing in Europe would involve.

 

ManU would probably do what Real did with Owen, ie be smart and not sign him to play in every game and be the club's talisman player like we did. Theyd most likely rotate him and rest him regularly, something that would help him to avoid injuries as it did at Real.

[Guest johnson293]

After a season and a half destroyed by injury Owen could probably do without the extra games playing in Europe would involve.

 

ManU would probably do what Real did with Owen, ie be smart and not sign him to play in every game and be the club's talisman player like we did. Theyd most likely rotate him and rest him regularly, something that would help him to avoid injuries as it did at Real.

 

That being the case, would he go there then, just to be 'rotated'? Is that not why he left Real Madrid?

 

Reports suggest Fergie was planning to bid if Owen returned this season and 'proved his fitness' - How does playing in a max of 4 games prove that fitness? Also, rumours are that Man Utd are gonna ditch Saha as he is injury prone - then why take the risk on Owen then??

[tmonkey]

After a season and a half destroyed by injury Owen could probably do without the extra games playing in Europe would involve.

 

ManU would probably do what Real did with Owen, ie be smart and not sign him to play in every game and be the club's talisman player like we did. Theyd most likely rotate him and rest him regularly, something that would help him to avoid injuries as it did at Real.

 

That being the case, would he go there then, just to be 'rotated'? Is that not why he left Real Madrid?

 

Reports suggest Fergie was planning to bid if Owen returned this season and 'proved his fitness' - How does playing in a max of 4 games prove that fitness? Also, rumours are that Man Utd are gonna ditch Saha as he is injury prone - then why take the risk on Owen then??

 

He left Real because they spent big on another two forwards (Robinho and Baptista) on top of already having Raul and Ronaldo. With a Brazilian manager in charge, he was set to be 4th choice forward at best if Baptista was to be counted as a midfielder, or 5th if otherwise.

 

Saha may possibly leave, but whos to say ManU are looking at only one forward? Larsson wont be there next season for certain, and ManU have already been linked with a move for Gudjohnsen in the past week. Maybe they want to sign two forwards, and hence maybe thats why theyre interested in Owen and his release clause - why spend 25mill on a top goalscorer when you can spend 12mill on Owen and use a similar amount to get another forward in? For ManU, its not a huge risk if Owen returns to full fitness. 10-12mill on a quality goalscorer would be a good deal for them even if hes injury prone purely because they wouldnt be heavily reliant on his fitness.