Rhian Brewster (rumour) (LOCKED)
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 Midlands Eagle  21 Sep 20 1.53pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by RASCAL
Parish has just put on his Twitter account that he has asked Sky to take down this bulletin as we haven't made a formal or informal bid.... Wow. Sky telling porkies - surely not
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| SurbsEagle 21 Sep 20 1.56pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
I don't think that anyone will dispute the fact that he has done a decent job but your original post said "I think the club has handled our business in the Premier League perfectly" and it was the word "perfectly" that I was disputing and I most certainly dispute your phrase that "given the evidence that we are still in the Premier League, we clearly didn't need to replace the departed/injured players at that time" as many will agree that we scraped through the year that we had no fit strikers more by luck than by judgement Yea I get that.. I said "perfectly" because our goal for each season so far is to stay in the premier league and our investments into the squad have done that. Of course there is always a dodgy buy but every club in the country makes dodgy buys. Edited by SurbsEagle (21 Sep 2020 1.59pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| RASCAL Purley 21 Sep 20 2.04pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
Wow. Sky telling porkies - surely not In this one I think I will take Parish's words over Sky and also those "ITK" ;-)
Peace and stability |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| pompeyeagle Relocated to Shropshire 21 Sep 20 2.19pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by RASCAL
In this one I think I will take Parish's words over Sky and also those "ITK" ;-) Or maybe we have made one but it’s supposed to be a secret.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| RASCAL Purley 21 Sep 20 2.22pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by pompeyeagle
True. I wonder if we will get another apology from Sky. Quite like watching them backtrack :-)
Peace and stability |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| silvertop Portishead 21 Sep 20 2.26pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Cpfc1861
For those who don't understand a buy back clause doesn't mean we have to accept Liverpool bid it essentially means if we were to accept a bid for him from say arsenal in the future Liverpool would have the right to trigger a 37 million bid if they wished then it would be up to the player. Premier league rules forbid purchase and sale of player in the same window so its unlikely they will do this for extra money. The effect of the clause depends on what the clause says. You suggest that the clause only bites should we decide to sell; and that Brewster has the final say on whether he goes to e.g. Arsenal or back to Liverpool. I am not sure that is right. The clause could be far more geared in Liverpool's favour. It is possible (i.e. certain in this case!) that the clause would be so heavily geared that Brewster would have to go back to Liverpool when they call for him. The player does not have a say and is powerless. Thus, nothing more than a glorified loan deal with Liverpool remaining the parent club, although I cannot imagine we would agree a deal without a decent minimum "own" period (3 seasons?) and maximum "recovery" period (5 years?). While you say they can't turn him in a year, why would they? The only party who would not benefit from that would be Liverpool.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 21 Sep 20 2.57pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by silvertop
The effect of the clause depends on what the clause says. You suggest that the clause only bites should we decide to sell; and that Brewster has the final say on whether he goes to e.g. Arsenal or back to Liverpool. I am not sure that is right. The clause could be far more geared in Liverpool's favour. It is possible (i.e. certain in this case!) that the clause would be so heavily geared that Brewster would have to go back to Liverpool when they call for him. The player does not have a say and is powerless. Thus, nothing more than a glorified loan deal with Liverpool remaining the parent club, although I cannot imagine we would agree a deal without a decent minimum "own" period (3 seasons?) and maximum "recovery" period (5 years?). While you say they can't turn him in a year, why would they? The only party who would not benefit from that would be Liverpool. I can't see how that would be legal. Brewster is a party to the contract and it has to be fair to be legal. It maybe that Liverpool have first dibs but if he doesn't want to go back there I can't see how they can enforce that. Edited by Badger11 (21 Sep 2020 2.58pm)
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| pompeyeagle Relocated to Shropshire 21 Sep 20 3.04pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Can you imagine the kind of goal return Brewster would need for Liverpool to want him back in a few year’s time? We’d have to be practically pushing for a Champions League place!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 21 Sep 20 3.16pm |
 |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Cpfc1861
For those who don't understand a buy back clause doesn't mean we have to accept Liverpool bid it essentially means if we were to accept a bid for him from say arsenal in the future Liverpool would have the right to trigger a 37 million bid if they wished then it would be up to the player. Premier league rules forbid purchase and sale of player in the same window so its unlikely they will do this for extra money.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
taylors lovechild  21 Sep 20 3.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by RASCAL
Parish has just put on his Twitter account that he has asked Sky to take down this bulletin as we haven't made a formal or informal bid.... Seems like an odd thing to do unless we are not interested.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Eaglecoops CR3 21 Sep 20 3.34pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Can’t believe we are having a protracted conversation about a non existent contract with a hypothetical clause for a player that we haven’t put a bid in for. At least with the discussion on the Sorloth thread he is still technically speaking our player, even though we don’t know what his contract says either so we are no better off there!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 AERO 21 Sep 20 3.38pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Seems to me someone is trying to up the price by leaking info thats not true.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.