Thanks Woy
- Thread starter Red Mullet
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Yeah but Welbeck has a special place in Hodgson heart. He'll be given a chance as soon as he proves his fitness.
Well, Ings is definately better than Borini who we chose to spunk 12 mill pounds on.
The same Club lawyers that were in charge of the Suarez defence?
How can they decide the fee based on what he's doing this season? We evaluated him in the Summer and purchased him then. The only thing that should determine his cost is what evidence we had at the time of purchase, not the fact he's had an England call up, or scored a few goals for us.
Why not??
We bought him for his potential and that's what we're paying for.
His true value at the time we bought him was what he could do for us over the next 3 - 4 years (taking into account improvement from us etc).
It's just that that value can be better assessed now, with the benefit of hindsight.
Yeah, but no other transfer has the benefit of that when assessing the price, so why should this be any different? We were paying for his potential when he was a Burnley player and an England u21. Not what he's become thanks to playing for a bigger club and being elevated to full international status.
I think all transfer should be basen on that?
The point is, if the tribunal had decided on this in August when he hadn't started yet for us and he wasn't in the England squad, the price would have been different. I don't get why people don't see that as an issue. We're paying for what his status is now, two months into the season. So if in two months time he's sidelined by Klopp and seemingly not wanted, out the England squad etc, what would his price be then?
It's crazy.
It's crazy.
It's crazy but it's how it works.
For example, if you agreed to sell me a country house for £500,000 then changed your mind. I could sue you for the difference between the current price and our agreed price. But if the property market crashed between now and the time of judgment, my claim will become worthless.
Conversely, if a day before the hearing, we discover that the house has a secret tunnel leading to hidden Nazi gold, why shouldn't I should be entitled to the value of that?? Of course if you were smart you'd immediately come to me once you figured the true value of the property and reach a settlement before the true state of affairs is revealed, which is what we should have done...
All football related decision making seems random to me. Almost on a whim pronouncements are made and handed down. There should be strict criteria for valuations.
This is the problem with using faxes.
Like what?
Any transfer is an attempt at a valuation of what the player has done and will do.
The delay in the hearing has probably cost us somewhat but as someone else has said we could have simply agreed a figure earlier.
We knew the gamble we were taking
As per the PFCC's mandate now except that a 3rd party's valuation should be disregarded (there could be collusion) as the player is exercising his right to choose a club (employer) at the end of a contract.
The hearing requires each club to provide evidence to support their valuation of the player, and they'll endeavour to set the level of compensation according to each case’s merits that should be enough.
- Status