[Football] Zaha watch - *** The SEGW finally managed to escape***

[Triggaaar]

Quite - that's the reason why they are 'insulted' by the offer.

Well no, because the reality is that they wouldn't have to pay £24m. I think Bragfan has made a mistake on thinking the contract gets paid up. Also, Palace can't be insulted that they have to pay some of the money to Utd, that's just their contract. My point was simply that of course they won't sell if they only get £6m, and Wilf would of course understand that (but as said, he won't get anything like £24m).

I still think this will boil down to WZ waving his right to any money from Palace in order to get his move.

Agreed. Palace won't want to sell him at the price Arsenal will be prepared to pay, so if Wilf wants to go, he'll certainly have to wave any bonus fee he would have been due. That won't require a transfer request, just an agreement.

 

[Hillian1]

and they will only piss whatever money they get up the cladding anyway

Tidied.

 

[Del Fenner]

1) Wilf owes Palace nothing, and it would be quite reasonable for Palace to allow him to move this summer. It would be a bit disingenuous of him to think that this should be arranged at his own instigation without submitting a transfer request.

2) Any deal that results in Palace profiting to the tune of £6m or less is not going to happen.

3) In my experience referring to a proliferation of fried chicken has racist overtones to many South Londoners, whilst it may well have none to many residents of Sussex.

 

[Easy 10]

Unfortunately I read it in the book so haven't got a link. It kind of makes sense though, if you're contracted to someone and they sell you they're terminating your contract, which is why they have to pay it up. Where as if you hand a transfer request in, you're the one ending the contract.

I've never heard of a club paying up a players contract when they've sold him. Surely once a transfer is agreed with another club, the current contract is cancelled, the other club pay the agreed transfer fee for the player (over whatever term), and the player gets a new (usually improved) contract from his new club - done deal.

Liverpool sold Benteke to Palace for £27m, 1 year after signing him from Villa for £32m on a 4 year deal. I wouldn't imagine they took a 3 year hit on the remainder of his contract as well as that £5m loss they made. Nothing is ever mentioned in terms of a wages deduction from the transfer fee - something like that would show up in the clubs Accounts.

Maybe [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION] could provide some wise counsel here.

 

[schmunk]

Liverpool are watching developments with interest , Klopp really rates Wilf . The price will significantly rise in the coming weeks .

 

[Sheebo]

1) Wilf owes Palace nothing, and it would be quite reasonable for Palace to allow him to move this summer. It would be a bit disingenuous of him to think that this should be arranged at his own instigation without submitting a transfer request.

2) Any deal that results in Palace profiting to the tune of £6m or less is not going to happen.

3) In my experience referring to a proliferation of fried chicken has racist overtones to many South Londoners, whilst it may well have none to many residents of Sussex.

Point 2 - we are discussing further up. There’s no way you’d only get £6mil out of it? I’m sure none / very little money will be given to the player?! Or if he wants the move he’ll get a nice contract at arsenal so would surely waiver it?

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

We’ll be ok .

Top scorers

Milivojevic 12 goals. Basically all pens from Zaha. GOALS GONE.
Zaha - 10 goals. GOALS GONE.
Townsend 6
Batshuayi 5 - GOALS GONE.

Rumours:
"Palace have targeted Carl Jenkinson to replace Aaron Wan-Bissaka"

Yeah, looks proper rosy.

 

[Del Fenner]

Point 2 - we are discussing further up. There’s no way you’d only get £6mil out of it? I’m sure none / very little money will be given to the player?! Or if he wants the move he’ll get a nice contract at arsenal so would surely waiver it?

This is close to how I see it. It seems likely that Wilf and Parish have an understanding that when the time is right he will be allowed the big move to take his career forward. In the meantime some poker playing is going to happen. No doubt Steve is getting coaching from Tony as we speak.

 

[Triggaaar]

Unfortunately I read it in the book so haven't got a link. It kind of makes sense though, if you're contracted to someone and they sell you they're terminating your contract, which is why they have to pay it up.

It doesn't make sense, because the player is agreeing to the move (they want to move, and know that they'll get paid even more at their next club.), so they mutually agree to terminate the contract.

Clubs try and get decent players on long contracts so that they'll get a decent price when the player is sold. That wouldn't be the case if they had to pay out the player's contract. It just doesn't happen that way.

 

[Triggaaar]

My understanding was that players often have loyalty bonuses - payments they get each year for staying with the club - and these get paid up when they're sold (unless they hand in a request). Signing on fees (also applicable to contract extensions) can also be spread over the term of a contract, and paid up in the same way. Not the whole bloody contract though.

There will be a clause - they're usually called "loyalty bonuses" - which reflect that the player didn't "ask" to leave. Hence the lack of a transfer request, which would waive the right to a "bonus" that the selling club has to pay.

Ah ok - I edited my reply above but get what you mean. How sure are you on that as you appear to know your stuff?

Well as they would say in Billions, I am not uncertain.

 

[Icy Gull]

He thinks if he hides away for a bit it’ll all blow over.

It won’t.

I am surprised and a little pissed off that the mods haven’t see fit to ban him. He brings absolutely nothing to the forum and has now gone a step too far. Let’s just cut the wanker loose.

 

[Weststander]

Not-so-Bright has been left incest by Arsenal's approach to sign Ivory Coast diver Wilfried Zaha.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

It doesn't make sense, because the player is agreeing to the move (they want to move, and know that they'll get paid even more at their next club.), so they mutually agree to terminate the contract.

Clubs try and get decent players on long contracts so that they'll get a decent price when the player is sold. That wouldn't be the case if they had to pay out the player's contract. It just doesn't happen that way.

Wonder how much that prima donna Brazilian at PSG would get if the club sold him without his asking? I agree, can't see a contract being paid out in full.

 

[Driver8]

Not-so-Bright has been left incest by Arsenal's approach to sign Ivory Coast diver Wilfried Zaha.

Unfortunate typo!

 

[Triggaaar]

Not-so-Bright has been left incest

 

[Braggfan]

I've never heard of a club paying up a players contract when they've sold him. Surely once a transfer is agreed with another club, the current contract is cancelled, the other club pay the agreed transfer fee for the player (over whatever term), and the player gets a new (usually improved) contract from his new club - done deal.

Liverpool sold Benteke to Palace for £27m, 1 year after signing him from Villa for £32m on a 4 year deal. I wouldn't imagine they took a 3 year hit on the remainder of his contract as well as that £5m loss they made. Nothing is ever mentioned in terms of a wages deduction from the transfer fee - something like that would show up in the clubs Accounts.

Maybe [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION] could provide some wise counsel here.

I'm just going what was said in the "secret footballer". I have to say I've not heard anyone else say it, but he does say there's lots of things that go unreported that most fans don't realise. It would make sense in lots of ways, as to why clubs demand silly money for players. And equally why players are so reluctant to hand in transfer requests. I'm sure it's more complicated than all of that, and probably not as simple as just paying up the contract, it may even get explained away under a different heading. Ultimately though I was just saying, if it's true, it would explain why Palace want silly money for their highest ever earner.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

Not-so-Bright has been left incest by Arsenal's approach to sign Ivory Coast diver Wilfried Zaha.

That'll have Doogle up in arms about some kind of 'ism'!

 

[Triggaaar]

Wonder how much that prima donna Brazilian at PSG would get if the club sold him without his asking? I agree, can't see a contract being paid out in full.

Indeed, it's definitely not.

 

[Triggaaar]

I'm just going what was said in the "secret footballer". I have to say I've not heard anyone else say it, but he does say there's lots of things that go unreported that most fans don't realise. It would make sense in lots of ways, as to why clubs demand silly money for players. And equally why players are so reluctant to hand in transfer requests. I'm sure it's more complicated than all of that, and probably not as simple as just paying up the contract, it may even get explained away under a different heading. Ultimately though I was just saying, if it's true, it would explain why Palace want silly money for their highest ever earner.

https://www.fourfourtwo.com/feature...fer-request-fourfourtwo-investigates?page=0,1

I think you must have misread it.

 

[Weststander]

That'll have Doogle up in arms about some kind of 'ism'!

Where is the troll?