Man Utd in for Harry for £65 Million

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?




Leicester fans have been very critical of him and Smalling has been excellent since Jose left. Can't see this one happening
 
Casper Schmiecal is 32 now ..... maybe ManU can offer a young keeper in p/x
 
I’m sure I read on here that he’s fat and immobile when he played for us old ‘lead boots’
So it’s very doubtful.
 
itsinyerblood said:
When he moved from Hull was the moment we'll have received a percentage of his transfer fee. You can't expect something from every move, as nice as that would be.
Click to expand...
Some transfers are actually that all future transfers on a sliding scale down on each transfer but we probably don’t have that clause I’m afraid.
 
I know how good Harry is, I love him as player and a bloke even to this day but I will tell you what... theres 1 or 2 things that Egan does a lot better.
 
Love Harry but he ain`t got a magic hat and can`t speak scouse !
 
Even in today’s absurd market, and even when Champs League clubs need English players, and even a year ago at his World Cup zenith, 65m for Harry M would have been bloody ridiculous.

Today, after a come-down season of mixed performances and some ropey reviews, it’s bordering on insane.
 



“Sky sources” have been reading the BBC gossip column again.

Edit: nope just read what some other hack have put forward to cover column inches due to the international break. See also Sancho, Sterling, Hudson-Odoi, Chilwell, Kane all reported moving this week. Funny that?
 
Old Harry used to like a marauding run forward. Ahead of his time, that lad. Would enjoy playing in this side. Reckon with a license to get forward and Norwoods set piece delivery, he’d be a 10 goal a season man.
 
itsinyerblood said:
Sorry, it only says that any club who've contributed to a player's progress should receive something. What it doesn't say is whether this happens beyond the initial transfer. Personally I doubt it. It smacks of unreasonable business practice, and that the player's existing club are penalised for something they didn't enter into originally.
Click to expand...


The wording in the contract is key and without seeing that we won’t know but with fees as big as they are now the sell on fees will be substantial. I’d guess that when Leicester do sell the sell on fee Hull will receive will be as big as the fee they recieved when selling him to Leicester.

It could be argued that if Say Hull recieve just 10% sell on fee so £6.5m then our sell on fee rises to and we get £650k
 
mancunianblade said:
The wording in the contract is key and without seeing that we won’t know but with fees as big as they are now the sell on fees will be substantial. I’d guess that when Leicester do sell the sell on fee Hull will receive will be as big as the fee they recieved when selling him to Leicester.

It could be argued that if Say Hull recieve just 10% sell on fee so £6.5m then our sell on fee rises to and we get £650k
Click to expand...

Agree that Hull will receive something. This will have been negotiated when they sold HM to Leicester. What isn't mentioned is whether a player's previous clubs (in this case us) are obligated to receive any form of payment simply because the player once played for another club? I can't see Hull including a clause that benefits us, more to the point, why would they feel any sense of obligation to help us financially.
 
itsinyerblood said:
Agree that Hull will receive something. This will have been negotiated when they sold HM to Leicester. What isn't mentioned is whether a player's previous clubs (in this case us) are obligated to receive any form of payment simply because the player once played for another club? I can't see Hull including a clause that benefits us, more to the point, why would they feel any sense of obligation to help us financially.
Click to expand...

I don’t think there are any examples of this happening to date but the way fees are going , sell on fees are only going to increase I’d expect these types of clauses to come about
 
mancunianblade said:
I don’t think there are any examples of this happening to date but the way fees are going , sell on fees are only going to increase I’d expect these types of clauses to come about
Click to expand...

Not sure. My point is, why should a selling club have part of any incoming fees passed on to a player's previous clubs? It's not reasonable or deserved. As a selling club that's your opportunity to benefit from any transfer. Once this is done and dusted the player belongs to another club. However they choose to deal with any potential transfer of said player in future, it has nothing to do with a player's previous clubs.

The size of a transfer is irrelevant to what you're entitled to as a club who once, long ago, employed the player.
 



Is it just me who couldn't find any mention of Maguire in the link?

If Man Utd are in the market for a CB, they should go for Koulibaly. Probabaly the best CB in the world right now with the possible exception of Van Dijk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Deadbat
2025/26 SUFC SEASON REVIEW / SCHOOL REPORT - Part 3: Goalkeepers
Replies
2
Views
722
Addison
A
Steve Mackan
New Blades Data Dashboard
Replies
20
Views
2K
ReeceofBDTBL
ReeceofBDTBL
Deadbat
Derby 1 United 2 - report/ratings
2
Replies
57
Views
4K
Bell4
Bell4
Coolblade
The accounts, our strategy and options for the future?
2 3 4
Replies
101
Views
7K
Barmyblade
B
Deadbat
2025/26 SUFC SEASON REVIEW / SCHOOL REPORT - Part 2: Board/Club/Managers
Replies
18
Views
1K
10p
10p

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom