beano Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Would be a nice gesture if he chose to waive the clause. Either way it looks like he will be looking for a new club next year, yet at least this would allow him to keep up his fitness and sharpness. Would surely put him in a better stance for finding a new club and would put him in the window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Bach Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Would be a nice gesture if he chose to waive the clause. Either way it looks like he will be looking for a new club next year, yet at least this would allow him to keep up his fitness and sharpness. Would surely put him in a better stance for finding a new club and would put him in the window. To be fair, and this is a general observation in a broad football sense. Why should he? It's in there for a reason - he clearly has a number of years in football ahead of him. It would undermine the contract process which, if done properly, benefits players and clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Distraught! Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Would be a nice gesture if he chose to waive the clause. Either way it looks like he will be looking for a new club next year, yet at least this would allow him to keep up his fitness and sharpness. Would surely put him in a better stance for finding a new club and would put him in the window. 100% agreed. I think this would be best for both parties as things stand now. I can't think why TM would want to be sat on the sidelines after his performance last Tuesday. His best chance of getting a good deal at another club is showing what he can do on the pitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Bach Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 100% agreed. I think this would be best for both parties as things stand now. I can't think why TM would want to be sat on the sidelines after his performance last Tuesday. His best chance of getting a good deal at another club is showing what he can do on the pitch. Hardly got good bargaining power at the negotiation table if he has a record of forsaking lucrative contract clauses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Distraught! Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Hardly got good bargaining power at the negotiation table if he has a record of forsaking lucrative contract clauses? Hardly got good bargaining power with two seasons of injuries and mediocre form. He has hit a bit of real form lately and the best way of securing a good deal in my eyes is to spend the last five games of the season showing it, not sat in the stands watching! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beano Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 To be fair, and this is a general observation in a broad football sense. Why should he? It's in there for a reason - he clearly has a number of years in football ahead of him. It would undermine the contract process which, if done properly, benefits players and clubs. There is no moral reason why he should, I just believe it would be beneficial for the club and also for him. It may undermine the contract process, however it would reaffirm the view that some footballers do still play for the love of the sport and not just the money. Perhaps I am thinking a little too idealistically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Bach Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Hardly got good bargaining power with two seasons of injuries and mediocre form. He has hit a bit of real form lately and the best way of securing a good deal in my eyes is to spend the last five games of the season showing it, not sat in the stands watching! At 32 years old I don't think he would particular care what any given club think of his current form. At the end of the season a dozen clubs would offer him a contract from The Championship downwards of varying length and value and he knows it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torryowl Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 100% agreed. I think this would be best for both parties as things stand now. I can't think why TM would want to be sat on the sidelines after his performance last Tuesday. His best chance of getting a good deal at another club is showing what he can do on the pitch. probably got a new club lined up for next season already, why would risk an injury playing for the club when he knows he'll be off in may .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest totemowl Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 100% agreed. I think this would be best for both parties as things stand now. I can't think why TM would want to be sat on the sidelines after his performance last Tuesday. His best chance of getting a good deal at another club is showing what he can do on the pitch. Or perhaps, just to turn that round a bit. 'I can't think why TM would want to be sat on the sidelines after his performance last Tuesday. He showed what he can do on the pitch to give him his best chance of getting a good deal at another club.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beano Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Hardly got good bargaining power at the negotiation table if he has a record of forsaking lucrative contract clauses? Perversely it may aide in his negotations. If he has record of 'forsaking lucrative contract clauses', the new club may be more relaxed in agreeing to his demands if they are of the belief he will forsake them at a later date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Bach Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 (edited) There is no moral reason why he should, I just believe it would be beneficial for the club and also for him. It may undermine the contract process, however it would reaffirm the view that some footballers do still play for the love of the sport and not just the money. Perhaps I am thinking a little too idealistically. Of course, Chris Marsden ripped up his contract but then that was to retire. It wasn't only a genuine gesture to the club but also helped Chris personally move on from his playing career. Remember he probably didn't want to go through rehab and training himself! Three things have arisen in this thread that have surprised me: 1. Some fans think a completely frank and open club culture is beneficial - even individual contract stipulation disclosure. 2. Managers are 100% truthful in interviews as some kind of desire for acceptance from the fans. 3. Players think of the club before themselves when negotiating new contracts and/or play for the love of the sport. Idealistic is probably a good word to describe it! Edited April 10, 2011 by Arthur Bach Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Distraught! Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 At the end of the season a dozen clubs would offer him a contract from The Championship downwards of varying length and value and he knows it. Then activate his contract extension and move him on for a nominal fee if he is already so attractive to other clubs. Or is that too much of a risk to take? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Bach Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Then activate his contract extension and move him on for a nominal fee if he is already so attractive to other clubs. Or is that too much of a risk to take? How much would you pay for him!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Distraught! Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 How much would you pay for him!? I am not sure but if you think that all of these clubs are interested, try selling him first. 50k is better than zilch. And if nobody will pay cash, try a player trade or an enticement to lure a loan player. If that doesn't work, offload him on a free transfer. But of course, this only works if club's are really interested in him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Bach Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 I am not sure but if you think that all of these clubs are interested, try selling him first. 50k is better than zilch. And if nobody will pay cash, try a player trade or an enticement to lure a loan player. If that doesn't work, offload him on a free transfer. But of course, this only works if club's are really interested in him! The lower leagues almost exclusively works on a free agent basis. Nobody has any real money to spend and especially not on a 32 year old with a questionable appearance record over the last five years. I am convinced Miller could sign for a Championship club, thats nothing to do with his skill or fitness. He is currently playing in League One which means he would theoretically be happy to continue next year doing the same. Look at the clubs going down from The Championship or promoted from League Two and ask yourself if they would turn down a chance to sign Miller? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluesteel Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 What it boils down to is some decisions being made by Laws and Strafford when needing to get "the cream of the crop" which have caused issue post relegation. Had we been closer to relegation perhaps milan would take the hit in terms of using Miller but were chancing it and hoping to get over the finishing line without him, which should be possible. It should be the right decison in the long term and I think we may be looking at better prospects in the summer. Megson was stuck between a rock and a hard place with this one though. I don't think there's much he couldve said without being criticised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Distraught! Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 The lower leagues almost exclusively works on a free agent basis. Nobody has any real money to spend and especially not on a 32 year old with a questionable appearance record over the last five years. I am convinced Miller could sign for a Championship club, thats nothing to do with his skill or fitness. He is currently playing in League One which means he would theoretically be happy to continue next year doing the same. Look at the clubs going down from The Championship or promoted from League Two and ask yourself if they would turn down a chance to sign Miller? Therefore by your own thinking, nothing to lose. We are going to pay him for doing flip all until the end of the season then release him, presumably. We could activate his contract and let him go on a free - in theory no loss and we get an inform midfielder back in our team for the next few games. The risk being that nobody actually wants him and we get stuck or he gets injured resulting in the same problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Bach Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Therefore by your own thinking, nothing to lose. We are going to pay him for doing flip all until the end of the season then release him, presumably. We could activate his contract and let him go on a free - in theory no loss and we get an inform midfielder back in our team for the next few games. The risk being that nobody actually wants him and we get stuck or he gets injured resulting in the same problem. What about the contract he'd sign? If we released him in the summer we'd have to pay him off. One way to avoid this conundrum would have been to release him earlier this week with the remainder of this seasons pay rather than act surprised that he had this clause in his contract. But like I said, its difficult to make out which party at Wednesday is pissed off at this revelation. Megson, Mandaric or Miller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Distraught! Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 What about the contract he'd sign? It wouldn't matter. Miller's new club would still pick up his wages post transfer. After the free transfer, his contract would be null and void at Wednesday. It is only like Man Utd. giving Ronaldo a long contract extension and then selling him. It would just give the club more leeway. But you have to be fookin' sure that there are other clubs after Miller or else we would be stuck with him for another year on flip knows how much! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DobbinTheDonkey Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Mr Bach has already stated he has no problem with people lying to keep things confidential. It doesn't matter if at a later date the lie is discovered, although he would then be questioning the integrity of Megson for lying in the first place. Infact by condoning lying he has shown he has no integrity himself, which is funny as in other threads he loves to mount the high horse. 20K posts but how many were you truthful on? Megson was asked a direct question and he answered. Not once did I hear him say well we lost because of a clause in Miller's contract would kick in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now