Reda Khadra

[CrookesBlade]

Seen people on twitter really getting their knickers in a twist over a loan signing that hasn’t panned out worrying that he’s been treated shabbily and he “deserves a chance”. Seems to be another Mo Besic. Fans have seen a few exciting moments and think they know better than the professionals who watch them day in day out in training. Like Besic Khadra has found opportunities hard to come by on account of players ahead of them doing the business and not taking their chance when they do get a start.

Saw somebody saying that Hecky not being able to get a tune out of Khadra is “why he’ll never be a top manager”. I despair.

Maybe if we were struggling at the wrong end of the table and not creating much they’d have a point but we are 11 points clear.

It’s not worked out, that’s football. We have hardly suffered have we. Use the wages for a proper forward to give us more strength in the depth. Wonder if Gary Madine fancies another promotion on his cv.

 

[finlaytheblade]

Except Khadra seems to want to play.

Not shown enough to merit a start, what has he done !
Ok n ot had much game time just scored 1 goal and not much else.He has a habit of driving down blind alleys and losing possession.
I think the club have been very fair with him and really we could do better! I would end the loan and look elsewhere.

 

[CaptainMorgans]

I tried to find a good source for the buy clauses in his contract. Best I could find, from a credible source, was this from The Athletic:

“loan agreement includes an obligation to buy if United win promotion and he makes a set number of appearances”

Source: Here

So, this could be why he isn’t being played much. If we don’t think he is worth buying, and we think we might get promoted, then the only way out is to not play him.

Very interesting!

Recent reports suggest he's played too many games for us to enable Brighton to recall him, but that we do have the power to send him back.

If we have the power to send him back in January then I'm not sure why we'd be limiting his game time now, other than Hecky just not fancying him.

I just hope the Board agree to bring someone in if we do send him back.

 

[Charlieblade]

I tried to find a good source for the buy clauses in his contract. Best I could find, from a credible source, was this from The Athletic:

“loan agreement includes an obligation to buy if United win promotion and he makes a set number of appearances”

Source: Here

So, this could be why he isn’t being played much. If we don’t think he is worth buying, and we think we might get promoted, then the only way out is to not play him.

Very interesting!

It is interesting, as the Athletic don’t usually get it wrong! My reading at the time of his loan, was clearly in United’s favour, with an Option to buy, not an obligation? Of course I could be wrong, but there was not much else revealed about the terms of his loan, other than meeting a number of appearances, and blades gaining promotion.

 

[Champagneblade]

Recent reports suggest he's played too many games for us to enable Brighton to recall him, but that we do have the power to send him back.

If we have the power to send him back in January then I'm not sure why we'd be limiting his game time now, other than Hecky just not fancying him.

I just hope the Board agree to bring someone in if we do send him back.

Maybe something of the nature that:

1. He features in more than 50% of games through the entire season and United win promotion, then United have an obligation to buy him.

2. He plays less than 25% and Brighton have the opportunity to recall him in January.

3. There is a penalty clause United wish to terminate early.

4. The player may also instigate a termination with the agreement of 1 or both of the other parties.

In the first instance the assumption is he’s become a significant enough player to contribute to our success and it makes sense to have both United and the player make a more firm commitment to Brighton.

In the second instance, he’s nowhere near to the team, we have no intention of picking him, he isn’t going to trigger a permanent switch and all we are doing is devaluing Brighton’s asset and wasting the player’s time.

He’s played in 15 matches.

So in a 46 game season, even if he’s never picked again, he would have exceeded the clause for Brighton to bring him back. However, as soon as he plays in 8 more matches then he would automatically trigger a purchase arrangement.

Perhaps then club and player are evaluating if both parties see his role potentially growing beyond the 16% of available minutes in which he’s featured and whether it’s worth advancing headlong into a further commitment for a player who is already only featuring sporadically.

Then perhaps there is a conversation to be had with the player and agent to see if they can find an alternative club that may mitigate the penalty United may need to pay Brighton for early termination and any further loan fee they may be due.

This may also explain Hecky thinking he wouldn’t be able to replace him because whilst his wages would be gone, then the penalties and loan fees would mean that any balance would not be sufficient to bring in an equal caliber player (unless you get another club to take these obligations).

Not saying I’m correct at all, that’s just the type of scenario which may marry up with some of the comments.

 

[A_Bladesman]

Maybe something of the nature that:

1. He features in more than 50% of games through the entire season and United win promotion, then United have an obligation to buy him.

2. He plays less than 25% and Brighton have the opportunity to recall him in January.

3. There is a penalty clause United wish to terminate early.

4. The player may also instigate a termination with the agreement of 1 or both of the other parties.

In the first instance the assumption is he’s become a significant enough player to contribute to our success and it makes sense to have both United and the player make a more firm commitment to Brighton.

In the second instance, he’s nowhere near to the team, we have no intention of picking him, he isn’t going to trigger a permanent switch and all we are doing is devaluing Brighton’s asset and wasting the player’s time.

He’s played in 15 matches.

So in a 46 game season, even if he’s never picked again, he would have exceeded the clause for Brighton to bring him back. However, as soon as he plays in 8 more matches then he would automatically trigger a purchase arrangement.

Perhaps then club and player are evaluating if both parties see his role potentially growing beyond the 16% of available minutes in which he’s featured and whether it’s worth advancing headlong into a further commitment for a player who is already only featuring sporadically.

Then perhaps there is a conversation to be had with the player and agent to see if they can find an alternative club that may mitigate the penalty United may need to pay Brighton for early termination and any further loan fee they may be due.

This may also explain Hecky thinking he wouldn’t be able to replace him because whilst his wages would be gone, then the penalties and loan fees would mean that any balance would not be sufficient to bring in an equal caliber player (unless you get another club to take these obligations).

Not saying I’m correct at all, that’s just the type of scenario which may marry up with some of the comments.

He will needed for the away fixtures that R Cat A's

 

[Charlieblade]

Maybe something of the nature that:

1. He features in more than 50% of games through the entire season and United win promotion, then United have an obligation to buy him.

2. He plays less than 25% and Brighton have the opportunity to recall him in January.

3. There is a penalty clause United wish to terminate early.

4. The player may also instigate a termination with the agreement of 1 or both of the other parties.

In the first instance the assumption is he’s become a significant enough player to contribute to our success and it makes sense to have both United and the player make a more firm commitment to Brighton.

In the second instance, he’s nowhere near to the team, we have no intention of picking him, he isn’t going to trigger a permanent switch and all we are doing is devaluing Brighton’s asset and wasting the player’s time.

He’s played in 15 matches.

So in a 46 game season, even if he’s never picked again, he would have exceeded the clause for Brighton to bring him back. However, as soon as he plays in 8 more matches then he would automatically trigger a purchase arrangement.

Perhaps then club and player are evaluating if both parties see his role potentially growing beyond the 16% of available minutes in which he’s featured and whether it’s worth advancing headlong into a further commitment for a player who is already only featuring sporadically.

Then perhaps there is a conversation to be had with the player and agent to see if they can find an alternative club that may mitigate the penalty United may need to pay Brighton for early termination and any further loan fee they may be due.

This may also explain Hecky thinking he wouldn’t be able to replace him because whilst his wages would be gone, then the penalties and loan fees would mean that any balance would not be sufficient to bring in an equal caliber player (unless you get another club to take these obligations).

Not saying I’m correct at all, that’s just the type of scenario which may marry up with some of the comments.

How much of this is fact based, and how much is opinion or conjecture? Your first 4 points indicate a depth of factual knowledge, hitherto unseen by yours truly?

 

[A_Bladesman]

Maybe something of the nature that:

1. He features in more than 50% of games through the entire season and United win promotion, then United have an obligation to buy him.

2. He plays less than 25% and Brighton have the opportunity to recall him in January.

3. There is a penalty clause United wish to terminate early.

4. The player may also instigate a termination with the agreement of 1 or both of the other parties.

In the first instance the assumption is he’s become a significant enough player to contribute to our success and it makes sense to have both United and the player make a more firm commitment to Brighton.

In the second instance, he’s nowhere near to the team, we have no intention of picking him, he isn’t going to trigger a permanent switch and all we are doing is devaluing Brighton’s asset and wasting the player’s time.

He’s played in 15 matches.

So in a 46 game season, even if he’s never picked again, he would have exceeded the clause for Brighton to bring him back. However, as soon as he plays in 8 more matches then he would automatically trigger a purchase arrangement.

Perhaps then club and player are evaluating if both parties see his role potentially growing beyond the 16% of available minutes in which he’s featured and whether it’s worth advancing headlong into a further commitment for a player who is already only featuring sporadically.

Then perhaps there is a conversation to be had with the player and agent to see if they can find an alternative club that may mitigate the penalty United may need to pay Brighton for early termination and any further loan fee they may be due.

This may also explain Hecky thinking he wouldn’t be able to replace him because whilst his wages would be gone, then the penalties and loan fees would mean that any balance would not be sufficient to bring in an equal caliber player (unless you get another club to take these obligations).

Not saying I’m correct at all, that’s just the type of scenario which may marry up with some of the comments.

I think is lying. Billy bullshitter. Don't know until we have tried. Taken a visit to the devil's boneyard.

 

[Champagneblade]

How much of this is fact based, and how much is opinion or conjecture? Your first 4 points indicate a depth of factual knowledge, hitherto unseen by yours truly?

None of it is fact based. It wasn’t intended to come over that way. It’s just me putting some possible scenarios together which may explain some of the comments made by the manager and help to explain the scenario we perhaps find ourselves in.

 

[Champagneblade]

I think is lying. Billy bullshitter. Don't know until we have tried. Taken a visit to the devil's boneyard.

Mate, how long you intending on posting shite like this based on your suggested words on your phone or whatever origin it is?

I value everyone’s input on here, whether they agree with points made or not. That’s what makes it interesting.

I’ve not once put anyone on ignore. But your pissing about posting cryptic nonsense just undermines the forum.

Just let us know when the experiment is done and we’ll al know when to start engaging you seriously again.

UTB

 

[robbiez666]

I'm not sure why he'd come on loan here and we'd have the obligation to buy. Doesn't suit the club or the player unless Brighton were desperate to sell and we were desperate for the loan. Doesn't make sense from his point of view though.

I suspect the clubs and payer will have a chat in January to decide what to do. It's not like he'd not get a loan elsewhere in the Championship so could end up being in everyone's benefit to do that.

 

[Charlieblade]

None of it is fact based. It wasn’t intended to come over that way. It’s just me putting some possible scenarios together which may explain some of the comments made by the manager and help to explain the scenario we perhaps find ourselves in.

My apologies because I always find your posts interesting and your points are usually well considered.
Numbers 1 to 4 sound definitive or factual to me. I’m concerned now because we might have an issue with Khadra based on what you suggest?

 

[Champagneblade]

My apologies because I always find your posts interesting and your points are usually well considered.
Numbers 1 to 4 sound definitive or factual to me. I’m concerned now because we might have an issue with Khadra based on what you suggest?

That's very kind of you, Charlie.

I'd tend to agree that there may be a nagging concern that if we aren't careful we may well be obliging ourselves to purchase a player who doesn't feature in our future plans.

Hopefully he starts making a big impact because then it's problem solved. But for me, it's not clear who would drop out to give him the chance, unless injury strikes down a key player.

He's most likely to get a chance in the FA Cup away at Millwall, where I'd envisage we will play a much changed team. But if he thinks the move isn't working for him, perhaps he won't fancy becoming cup-tied for his next club?

It seems we have a few things to work out with him over the next week or so, with the Cup coming up next weekend.

Anyway, Happy New year to you.

 

[Cappy]

A_Bladesman what are you playing at? I’m also about to put you on ignore because you seem to be making weird posts on purpose. As an example of how you’ve changed your style from English to nonsense, see a randomly selected very early post from you, below:

Seems like you used to enjoy engaging in the forum and probably still do? Don’t push people to put you on ignore mate

If you have teenage kids that play online games, the new craze is to DDOS your router. I fucking hate cunts that do this, basically they get your IP and flood it with traffic which takes your internet offline. VPNS are good to avoid this. Bit of advice for you here, it may not be applicable to your situation. I dont think SKY have a static IP so once your turn it off and back on then you should be sweet.

Mate, how long you intending on posting shite like this based on your suggested words on your phone or whatever origin it is?

 

[brownblade]

A_Bladesman what are you playing at? I’m also about to put you on ignore because you seem to be making weird posts on purpose. As an example of how you’ve changed your style from English to nonsense, see a randomly selected very early post from you, below:

Seems like you used to enjoy engaging in the forum and probably still do? Don’t push people to put you on ignore mate

I was wondering if A_Bladesman has had a stroke or similar medical issue?

 

[biggiesablade]

A_Bladesman what are you playing at? I’m also about to put you on ignore because you seem to be making weird posts on purpose. As an example of how you’ve changed your style from English to nonsense, see a randomly selected very early post from you, below:

Seems like you used to enjoy engaging in the forum and probably still do? Don’t push people to put you on ignore mate

I don't think he's got much confidence in contributing anything decent so posts the shite he does. A shame cause he must enjoy the forum, doesn't exactly post anything inflammatory or that points to him being a pig.

 

[Barnette]

Reda seems to promise a lot and it seems baffling to us that he doesn't get brought on more towards the end of games we are holding onto.

However, in Hecky's world being a forward involves an awful lot of chasing and harrying off the ball, chasing down hopeless causes etc. Ie Jebbison when he came on v Blackpool did very little else other than run around like a headless chicken.

I wonder if Reda falls short here and won't/can't put the effort in required at the right time in the right place.

 

[CaptainMorgans]

I'm not sure why he'd come on loan here and we'd have the obligation to buy. Doesn't suit the club or the player unless Brighton were desperate to sell and we were desperate for the loan. Doesn't make sense from his point of view though.

I suspect the clubs and payer will have a chat in January to decide what to do. It's not like he'd not get a loan elsewhere in the Championship so could end up being in everyone's benefit to do that.

The obligation to buy is based on us achieving promotion and Khadra playing 'X' amount of minutes.
I believe his contract with Brighton expired this Summer, but had a 1-year-extension option on it.

In theory, the deal would (or should) have protected all parties interests had the loan worked out.
As it hasn't, it still seems everyone is protected.
Brighton could recall him if we barely played him.
We can send him back if we just didn't fancy him.

 

[Charlieblade]

That's very kind of you, Charlie.

I'd tend to agree that there may be a nagging concern that if we aren't careful we may well be obliging ourselves to purchase a player who doesn't feature in our future plans.

Hopefully he starts making a big impact because then it's problem solved. But for me, it's not clear who would drop out to give him the chance, unless injury strikes down a key player.

He's most likely to get a chance in the FA Cup away at Millwall, where I'd envisage we will play a much changed team. But if he thinks the move isn't working for him, perhaps he won't fancy becoming cup-tied for his next club?

It seems we have a few things to work out with him over the next week or so, with the Cup coming up next weekend.

Anyway, Happy New year to you.

Then we are of a similar mind, Khadra’s secret contract caveats notwithstanding. Happy new year to you too.

 

[Frank the tank]

A_Bladesman what are you playing at? I’m also about to put you on ignore because you seem to be making weird posts on purpose. As an example of how you’ve changed your style from English to nonsense, see a randomly selected very early post from you, below:

Seems like you used to enjoy engaging in the forum and probably still do? Don’t push people to put you on ignore mate

Need to report it

 

[A_Bladesman]

Need to report it

Yeah mate, sorry,laspes in concentration. Is it was about that issue with the missing 25million? X

 

[Panini]

The fact he said in his post match that we would see Khadra at QPR makes me think there’s also an element of mind games.

Maybe you're right, but PH's words were "we'll see him on Saturday".

That's today, which suggests to me that we had Friday off and came back in this morning to train before travelling down to QPR probably tomorrow. Khadra will obviously report in for training along with everyone else.

The reaction to the follow-up question about sending him back says that's really the only decision PH is thinking about.

If Khadra can't make the bench when McBurnie, Osborn, Brewster are injured and an academy winger is chosen over him, I think we're beyond last chance saloon.

I hope I'm wrong as I do think there's a player in there but we're doing well and he isn't a priority.

 

[djbaldken]

Having watched the qpr v luton game, i think khadra could do well. Rangers were woeful at the back and would hate a player running at them at pace. It's certainly worth a shot.

Havent we got someone called NDiaye who does that?

 

[Frank the tank]

Havent we got someone called NDiaye who does that?

Yeah but he keeps the ball in play
Thats not terrifying !

 

[Nightsweats]

Havent we got someone called NDiaye who does that?

Can't have too many pacey attackers. defenders worst nightmare. Not like Sharp can get up much of a head of dteam anymore. Would love to see Jebbo partner Iliman from around the 60 min mark when Billys' done. Think they'd spark off each other. Thought he and McB were starting to look good before his latest setback.

 

[A_Bladesman]

They sent the gladiator in his orange pick up. They got down to business.

 

[jt64]

I'm not sure why he'd come on loan here and we'd have the obligation to buy. Doesn't suit the club or the player unless Brighton were desperate to sell and we were desperate for the loan. Doesn't make sense from his point of view though.

I suspect the clubs and payer will have a chat in January to decide what to do. It's not like he'd not get a loan elsewhere in the Championship so could end up being in everyone's benefit to do that.

I'm not sure why you say this. He looked very good in the Championship last season, he is not going to get game time at Brighton (they have a World Cup winner at the same position ffs), he would want game time, would have expected it here, but hasn't got it because other players have performed better. Made sense at the time, it hasn't worked out unfortunately.

 

[A_Bladesman]

I'm not sure why you say this. He looked very good in the Championship last season, he is not going to get game time at Brighton (they have a World Cup winner at the same position ffs), he would want game time, would have expected it here, but hasn't got it because other players have performed better. Made sense at the time, it hasn't worked out unfortunately.

Simply amazing.

 

[Frank the tank]

I'm not sure why you say this. He looked very good in the Championship last season, he is not going to get game time at Brighton (they have a World Cup winner at the same position ffs), he would want game time, would have expected it here, but hasn't got it because other players have performed better. Made sense at the time, it hasn't worked out unfortunately.

Blackburn fans werent exactly gutted they didnt re sign him

 

[Belvedere Blade]

Premier League club considering terminating Sheffield United loan agreement

Reda Khadra's time at Sheffield United could be coming to an end, with parent club Brighton & Hove Albion ready to recall him from his disappointing loan stint at Bramall Lane.

footballleagueworld.co.uk