Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Albion] Deniz Undav **Gone To Stuttgart 09/08/24**



Han Solo

Well-known member
May 25, 2024
2,454
No, it really isn't. Modern day prem level footballer is not a 'normal' job, you can't apply the rules of a 'normal' job, even a fairly high paying one. These guys are being paid as if they were top level CxOs. They should try f***ing acting like them (the good ones!!). You have signed a MASSIVE contract, honour it.
"Honouring a contract" might come second to eg making family related decisions regardless how much you pay them. You could accept that or you can moan about it but it will remain the case :shrug:
 




Baldseagull

Well-known member
Jan 26, 2012
11,839
Crawley
The way I understand it, is that all comments in this thread on Deniz's intentions have been inferred haven't they? Has he publicly said he wants to leave? He may have said he was happy on loan and happy in Germany? But that's a different thing from wanting a transfer. It's just as likely a polite thing to say.

He may want to leave. But unless i've missed something, I don't think we know this. More likely this is one of the things that has been said so many times on here it has become true
No, he has said explicitly he wants to stay at Stuttgart, but he hasn't said he would be utterly pissed off to be back here.
Even if Stuttgart meet our transfer fee, we don't know if they will be able to offer him the same salary as we currently pay, or the salary we could pay if we end up trying to buy him back, and Undav might prefer the money to home comforts.
 


Hiheidi

Well-known member
Dec 27, 2022
1,881
The way I understand it, is that all comments in this thread on Deniz's intentions have been inferred haven't they? Has he publicly said he wants to leave? He may have said he was happy on loan and happy in Germany? But that's a different thing from wanting a transfer. It's just as likely a polite thing to say.

He may want to leave. But unless i've missed something, I don't think we know this. More likely this is one of the things that has been said so many times on here it has become true

He has very heavily inferred it!!

 


pb21

Well-known member
Apr 23, 2010
6,687
No, it really isn't. Modern day prem level footballer is not a 'normal' job, you can't apply the rules of a 'normal' job, even a fairly high paying one. These guys are being paid as if they were top level CxOs. They should try f***ing acting like them (the good ones!!). You have signed a MASSIVE contract, honour it.
A contract can be broken at anytime, wouldn't have our latest manager if he had 'honoured' it, as well as loads of players.
 


Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo

I believe in Joe Hendry
Oct 4, 2003
12,063
I don't know if its the reason, but he is already registered at Stuttgart for last season. The transfers of contracted players all happens in the transfer windows, so Ibrahim that we have bought already can't officially go through until this window.
I guess Undav would effectively have 3 transfers if we sold and bought back. End of loan transfer back to us, sell transfer ro Stuttgart, buy transfer back to Brighton. It might be the number of transfers is the problem, rather than the number of clubs.

A loan can be made into a permanent move at any time even if a transfer window isn’t open. So if the deal with Stuttgart was completed before the end of the loan contract (ie June 30th) then there wouldn’t be the extra transfers of player registration.

We could then in theory exercise our buy back clause in July and as we’ve seen with other players immediately loan him out to another club (if we wished to) so I’m guessing there could be another agreement within the buy back clauses that we can’t sell/loan Undav on within a certain amount of time after exercising the option.

The buy back clause certainly seems a complicated way of doing things. An alternative would have been a compensation clause where we pay them a certain amount to not exercise the option to buy. This would be easier than the buy back clause which is also reliant on Deniz Undav who doesn’t have to agree to a move back to us once Stuttgart have signed him permanently.

Edit - I’ve also remembered a player can be registered to a maximum of three clubs in one season but is only allowed to play for two. This is what allows a club to sign a player and then loan them out. So there must be another agreement within the buy back clauses that would prevent us from selling him on.
 
Last edited:




Baldseagull

Well-known member
Jan 26, 2012
11,839
Crawley
A loan can be made into a permanent move at any time even if a transfer window isn’t open. So if the deal with Stuttgart was completed before the end of the loan contract (ie June 30th) then there wouldn’t be the extra transfers of player registration.

We could then in theory exercise our buy back clause in July and as we’ve seen with other players immediately loan him out to another club (if we wished to) so I’m guessing there could be another agreement within the buy back clauses that we can’t sell/loan Undav on within a certain amount of time after exercising the option.

The buy back clause certainly seems a complicated way of doing things. An alternative would have been a compensation clause where we pay them a certain amount to not exercise the option to buy. This would be easier than the buy back clause which is also reliant on Deniz Undav who doesn’t have to agree to a move back to us once Stuttgart have signed him permanently.
Thanks.
I guess the buy back puts Stuttgart in a little more uncertainty than a compensation clause. With a compensation clause, if they can't really afford the money for the transfer, but were to offer it anyway, they would find out before the transfer went through, if we intended to keep him, and pocket the compensation. If we on the other hand we're happy to sell, they could pull out before it went through, so they don't end up buying a player they can't afford.
With the buy back, they can't be sure that we either will buy back, or Undav would agree to be sold to us, so can't make a risk free offer to try and make some money.
 




Baldseagull

Well-known member
Jan 26, 2012
11,839
Crawley
Stating the obvious but there's absolutely no point in retaining a player, however good he is, if he doesn't want to be here.
There is a difference between preferring to be at Stuttgart, and not wanting to be at Brighton.
 




Flounce

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Nov 15, 2006
4,256
Stating the obvious but there's absolutely no point in retaining a player, however good he is, if he doesn't want to be here.


If Stuttgart pay the transfer fee agreed, absolutely right. If they don’t or try and get the fee reduced are you suggesting the club just back down because Undav wants to stay? I don’t and I have serious doubts that the club will do that either. Stuttgart need to honour what they signed up to or the player comes back happy or miserable.
 




herecomesaregular

We're in the pipe, 5 by 5
Oct 27, 2008
4,650
Still in Brighton
Seems like perhaps he wants to stay there but doesn't want a reduced wage to ours or Stuttgart really want him but don't want to pay the agreed fee? Either way, I don't see Brighton backing down. He'll stay with us or be sold elsewhere imo.
 




Beanstalk

Well-known member
Apr 5, 2017
3,029
London
If Stuttgart pay the transfer fee agreed, absolutely right. If they don’t or try and get the fee reduced are you suggesting the club just back down because Undav wants to stay? I don’t and I have serious doubts that the club will do that either. Stuttgart need to honour what they signed up to or the player comes back happy or miserable.
Aren't the reports saying that it's actually more complicated than that? That if Stuttgart pay the fee, we can buy him back for essentially the same fee (slightly more apparently) and then sell him on for more elsewhere. So Stuttgart have to offer us above the fee they originally agreed essentially to make sure that they actually can sign him.
 


Flounce

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Nov 15, 2006
4,256
Aren't the reports saying that it's actually more complicated than that? That if Stuttgart pay the fee, we can buy him back for essentially the same fee (slightly more apparently) and then sell him on for more elsewhere. So Stuttgart have to offer us above the fee they originally agreed essentially to make sure that they actually can sign him.
Well he helped get them into the Champion’s League so TB seems to have played a blinder and is holding a winning hand. Stuttgart have a decision to make. Why am I not surprised?

Or am I still missing something?

Does all this have to be done by 30 June or another spanner is thrown in the works, or doesn’t it matter when it’s done as long as it’s before the window closes?
 


Baldseagull

Well-known member
Jan 26, 2012
11,839
Crawley
Aren't the reports saying that it's actually more complicated than that? That if Stuttgart pay the fee, we can buy him back for essentially the same fee (slightly more apparently) and then sell him on for more elsewhere. So Stuttgart have to offer us above the fee they originally agreed essentially to make sure that they actually can sign him.
I dont think that is how it is. I think it's as simple as they can't afford the fee. The hold up is probably because Undav is at the Euros and its all going to depend on what salary he would settle for there, or how he does in the tournament. We might agree to sell for less than the agreed fee, if he is really unhappy to come back to us, and he has a shit tournament. If he scores a hat trick in the final and wins the Euros, we are probably selling him to Bayern Munich for double.
 




Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo

I believe in Joe Hendry
Oct 4, 2003
12,063
Well he helped get them into the Champion’s League so TB seems to have played a blinder and is holding a winning hand. Stuttgart have a decision to make. Why am I not surprised?

Or am I still missing something?

Does all this have to be done by 30 June or another spanner is thrown in the works, or doesn’t it matter when it’s done as long as it’s before the window closes?
Unless we’ve set a time period in the loan contract that the option to buy is valid for then they’ve got until the window closes to sort it out.

Obviously sorting it sooner rather than later, one way or another, benefits everyone. Undav knows where he’s reporting for pre-season, Fabs can plan for him being in the squad or not etc.
 


Justice

Dangerous Idiot
Jun 21, 2012
20,663
Born In Shoreham
The way I understand it, is that all comments in this thread on Deniz's intentions have been inferred haven't they? Has he publicly said he wants to leave? He may have said he was happy on loan and happy in Germany? But that's a different thing from wanting a transfer. It's just as likely a polite thing to say.

He may want to leave. But unless i've missed something, I don't think we know this. More likely this is one of the things that has been said so many times on here it has become true
I’ve heard him say it’s up to Brighton the truth and sensible thing to say.
 


Hometownglory

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2014
647
Stating the obvious but there's absolutely no point in retaining a player, however good he is, if he doesn't want to be here.
He's had a good season there, didn't get game time here. No wonder he's enjoyed it and wants to stay. Having said that, a new manager for us may make him think about giving us another shot. I personally was a little confused why we let him go just as he started scoring.
 


US Seagull

Well-known member
Jul 17, 2003
4,661
Cleveland, OH
A contract can be broken at anytime, wouldn't have our latest manager if he had 'honoured' it, as well as loads of players.
Exactly. A contract is between two parties and if both parties agree not to be bound by it anymore, then it can be torn up. That's what happens in a transfer. The selling club agrees to tear up the existing contract (usually because the buying club is offering them a big bag of money) and the player agrees to tear up the contract (usually because the buying club has offered them a big bag of money, plus regular big bags of money for some defined period of time - i.e. another contract). If both parties are in agreement, then it's a done deal. Here we go! (as a great philosopher is keen on saying during transfer windows).
 




US Seagull

Well-known member
Jul 17, 2003
4,661
Cleveland, OH
Ok, so I'm just catching up on the Undav situation. So what's the deal with a "buy-back" and why does it matter?

My understanding was that we'd loaned him to Stuttgart for the season and we had a clause where Stuttgart would be able to buy him for an agreed £20m, if they want him and pony up the cash (my guess would be that we might be open to taking less if Stuttgart really can't afford it, Undav doesn't want to come "home" and we don't get better offers). So what's the buy-back got to do with anything? My assumption is that the £20m agreement includes a buy-back for some amount of money in excess of £20m that if Stuttgart were to buy him, we could, at some point, buy him back for this amount? But why would we want to do that? He seems to not want to play for us anyway. So it seems unlikely that if we triggered the clause, we'd be able to agree a contract with him anyway. He'd just say no and stay where he is.

If Stuttgart doesn't trigger the £20m option to buy (because they don't want to, or can't afford to and we refuse to budge), then the loan ends, Deniz returns to Brighton, and probably isn't super happy about it. The "buy-back" isn't important here.

I'd love for Deniz to come back and set the Premier League alight like he has in Germany this past season. But if, we whatever reason, he doesn't want to, then there isn't much value in forcing the issue. It's a team game, and it's important that the team actually wants to play.
 




Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here