Jump to content


Sheffield Wednesday Fan
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Bluesteel

  1. Its clear where it’s come from. But they must be pretty confident to be commenting on it at all.
  2. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2019/07/21/newcastle-confident-have-no-legal-case-answer-appointment-steve/
  3. The telegraph article is in line with a few things I’d heard about it.
  4. https://thesefootballtimes.co/2017/12/05/domenico-tedesco-the-32-year-old-italian-building-a-new-schalke/ Certainly intriguing but perhaps a stint at schalke means he’d be looking at top tier jobs? He seems a bit like the Fonseca types we got linked with before their stock improved.
  5. There’s never a good time for things that need extended leave, but this is an especially unfortunate time isn’t it?
  6. Given that I was pulled up on it and told Nixon was re-iterating 4m today. I thought it interesting that a similar paper maybe even the same one said it was also under 4m today. Given that 3.5m is now being treated the same as 4m by proxy I’ll take that The loans is a new thing though isn’t it and wouldn’t likely be contractual or actually linked to compensation if it happened. Just the two clubs smoothing things over in my view.
  7. They don’t have a good relationship with Ashley. They were banned for ages.
  8. I’m not making a big deal of it to be fair. I am answering the various quotes and questions (and a few negs ) I keep getting because I said I didn’t think it would be as high as the 4m everyone would ideally like it to be (including me) As I say. Nixon doesn’t get defended so strongly when his rumour is a stinker and not in our favour. If the Nixon thing is what people genuinely think is the most likely out of the various reports and not just the preferable rumour then fair dos. But thinking about it, I don’t. By the time we find out, if ever, will be old news anyway (and probably already is).
  9. The one this am about loans. I think 3m if that is the case is decent money. Even for all three. I think that is more likely than the upper ranges.
  10. I think a guess of 3m would be my gut feeling too as it’s bang in the middle of the various reports.
  11. Would be great but it has no more basis than the other press based scenarios. I’m skeptical on that to be honest, 4m plus for the three Steve’s....when Sarri and his team went for 5m. Itll no doubt come out in the wash at some point.
  12. They stated that NCL hoped/thought they would only need to pay 1m. Not that it actually was that much. Then there was as talk of it being up to as high as 4/5. But the gist from the chronicle journos was that it wasn’t quite that high.
  13. I’ve not said how much it is, just that I don’t think it’s as high as 4m. Which is what everyone other than Nixon is saying. Nixon is often correct with the gist of what happens, but not always the full details. If you boys genuinely think we got 4m for Bruce and co then crack on.
  14. Im not relying on that there has been a lot of water under the bridge since then. At the outset it was ranging from ncl wanting to pay 1 and weds wanting 5 with the truth somewhere in between.
  15. He can be consistently incorrect if his source is wrong. Folk scrutinise the detail of his rumours when they don’t like them and choose not to when they do. Id much prefer it to be 4m and so does everyone else clearly. But I think he’s wrong. With regard to local journos, the Newcastle ones are pretty well informed.
  16. There are journos in Newcastle and the latest paper referring to loans also states under 4m.
  17. He did but he’d have to be careful what he says now and he’s an old hand at this situation
  18. Yep, a lot of people need to agree with that. But Aaron’s did seem to get on with teammates here so I could see that one.
  19. Just as in any commercial move there are various parties ie both employers and the employees and they all need to be comfortable with their contractual restrictions before forcing a move elsewhere. Particularly employees who can get caught short if it’s done wrong. They wouldn’t leave a well paid job for a competitor unless they were sure it was water tight and even Bruce has said there was a compensation clause in contract which has been paid. I know people might say this is NUFC and Ashley but there is nothing to suggest he hasn’t paid anything either. So I’m going off what is the most likely situation commercially rather than claiming as facts.
  20. I don’t know. Could be anything. Did we give permission to approach him or authorise the move? That seems to be where it gets ambiguous. Others hint there were talks as soon as Rafa left. Don’t know if that’s true but even Shearer said he’d had dinner with Bruce weeks ago and discussed it.
  21. This is it in a nutshell IMO. for NUFC to have done what they did ie forced it. They must have surely paid what they believe is the legal requirement in contract for all 3. Bruce has said as much in his interview. However, this has generated a lot of negative PR for Newcastle and Ashley and even their own fans are using it against him. So I think they could do without it and may just think getting rid of a few players they’d loan out in any case to close it off may be worth doing.
  22. NUFC will have paid what they are told they need to contractually. (They more or less forced it with a money drop and resignation according to reports at least) SWFC probably feel like they want to chase something due to the timing and perhaps even the nature of the approach (seems ambiguous whether we did or didn’t sanction it).
  23. Note this article also suggests the compensation isn’t 4m as Nixon claims.
  • Create New...