RS this morning

[Revolution]

Wow Walker & Naughton = Ronaldo & Tevez , an interesting analogy.

A different world, of course, but the point is that both teams sold two of their best players, so when grafikhaus says that he can't imagine the reaction if we'd sold two players like that, the answer is that you can, because we had our own equivalent sale 12 months ago...

 

[Revolution]

No responses to this question... Anyone?

One answer is graded or incentive payments. He gets a higher wage once he's proved he's first team ready after his suspension.

Remember also that at that time, there's no QPR bid around - hence less leverage.

And it's all very well saying that he could have not signed and walked, but there's risk there as well. What if he had got injured during his suspension? He was always going to sign some sort of deal.

 

[Micalijo]

No responses to this question... Anyone?

Paddy, like Monty, wasn't happy with his contract offer before he got banned. So given his apparent willingness to go, the theoretical conversation doesn't seem too unrealistic.

I'm certain another club would have taken Paddy for nothing after his ban had he not been kept under contract and kept fit, so perhaps this clause was necessary to ensure we could command a future fee?

What's more, I doubt any club would have paid much more than £1m for him before he got banned. So is £750k that unrealistic given a 9 month drug ban?

To me, the most unpallatable aspect of this is the divergence between what Paddy said, and what the contract/sale rumours suggest.

Totally agree, plenty of others do, and no problem but this had been covered alot earlier.

 

[lenners]

No responses to this question... Anyone?

Paddy, like Monty, wasn't happy with his contract offer before he got banned. So given his apparent willingness to go, the theoretical conversation doesn't seem too unrealistic.

I'm certain another club would have taken Paddy for nothing after his ban had he not been kept under contract and kept fit, so perhaps this clause was necessary to ensure we could command a future fee?

What's more, I doubt any club would have paid much more than £1m for him before he got banned. So is £750k that unrealistic given a 9 month drug ban?

To me, the most unpallatable aspect of this is the divergence between what Paddy said, and what the contract/sale rumours suggest.

Why would we need any clause to sell him?
We could sell him whenever we liked.
But a clause does work for Paddy because it gives him a specific right to an escape route.

 

[Revolution]

The root of the problem is the interest shown by Warnock.

In a game where perception and reputation are sometimes more important than reality, I have always felt that one of the reasons why Paddy has been with us for so long and not moved on to better things is because he doesn't look like people imagine a top class keeper should look. Kevin Pressman was also affected by this.

Warnock, of course, knows better.

(another reason Paddy's reputation may suffer are the various stories about his personal life in the media and his trainwreck of a display for Ireland against Cyrpus)

Same with Morgan. Most fans of other teams just know him for the Hume or Van Persie incidents, and don't know how good a player he is.

 

[Ollessendro]

Birch " I'm sorry Paddy but that's the best wage we can offer in the circumstances"

Paddy's agent " I'm sorry Trevor but we think that Paddy is worth a lot more than that so we're not prepared to sign at that level unless we agree a realistic release clause"


Speculation on my behalf but what would your response have been?

I would have said it is out of the question. There could be the option of a contract renegotiation after X amount of appearences, or X amount of time. Alternatively there could staggered wage payments (as Revolution points out) after a certain amount of appereances.

No responses to this question... Anyone?

Paddy, like Monty, wasn't happy with his contract offer before he got banned. So given his apparent willingness to go, the theoretical conversation doesn't seem too unrealistic.

I'm certain another club would have taken Paddy for nothing after his ban had he not been kept under contract and kept fit, so perhaps this clause was necessary to ensure we could command a future fee?

What's more, I doubt any club would have paid much more than £1m for him before he got banned. So is £750k that unrealistic given a 9 month drug ban?

To me, the most unpallatable aspect of this is the divergence between what Paddy said, and what the contract/sale rumours suggest.

Ah I see, this is interesting. Tricky Trev only got Paddy to sign a contract just in case he might bugger off on a free at the end of the season. It's plausible. In those circumstances would it really make sense to pay Paddy say 500k in salary (assume he's getting around 10k a week) in order to command a 750k salary at a later date? I suppoose this changes a little if Paddy was on 7 or 8 k a week, but it's hardly convicing.

No responses to this question... Anyone?

One answer is graded or incentive payments. He gets a higher wage once he's proved he's first team ready after his suspension.

Remember also that at that time, there's no QPR bid around - hence less leverage.

And it's all very well saying that he could have not signed and walked, but there's risk there as well. What if he had got injured during his suspension? He was always going to sign some sort of deal.

To add to Rev's comments, Tricky Trev was brought in for his commercial nouss. Has he really shown any in this deal? On the one hand (if maidenhhead and JD are right) Trev has assured that no matter what we shall command some sort of fee from Paddy. However on the other hand we're letting a quality goal keeper go for way under his value. What about some sort of pay as you play deal? Or bonuses for appearences? there is a chance that United felt they were backed up against a a wall (i.e. Paddy could easily leave and go somewhere else for nowt at te end of the season) so maybe they just wanted him to put pen to paper. Then you get onto the question of value. 750k is nowt. However we are talking about a 31 year old who is banned for 9 months. At the time we might have taken 750k for him, but that seems to have changed now.

 

[Maidenhead]

I would have said it is out of the question. There could be the option of a contract renegotiation after X amount of appearences, or X amount of time. Alternatively there could staggered wage payments (as Revolution points out) after a certain amount of appereances.

Paddy's Agent, " I'm sorry then but we're not going to sign and Paddy will take his chances as a free agent at the end of the season because we're confident we can do much better than that"

Cue outrage from Blades over the Boards incompetence at letting the best goalkeeper in the world walk away for nothing.

BTW I just read that the deal was done before Trevs arrival but the principle remains the same.

 

[Ollessendro]

Paddy's Agent, " I'm sorry then but we're not going to sign and Paddy will take his chances as a free agent at the end of the season because we're confident we can do much better than that"

Cue outrage from Blades over the Boards incompetence at letting the best goalkeeper in the world walk away for nothing.

BTW I just read that the deal was done before Trevs arrival but the principle remains the same.

MMMMmmmm, not so sure it is as clear cut as that.

Do you really think there would have been outrage from Blades fans? Many were calling for him to be sacked at the time.

And do you think that Paddy and his agent would have been so confident as to get a better deal? We are talking about a 31 (or 32 when the time comes) year old who has just been released from his club, has broken the rules in a major way and is banned for 9 months. He can't train properly or play during that time. Would you, as a manager, be keen to snap him up and pay him 10k a week now? Maybe it is plausible, if you think QPR a willing to pay a mill, but I remained unconvinced.

 

[super_pig]

no matter how you slice or dice it.. kenny is a really popular player at the lane and i suspect it will cause more consternation than predicted..
this' gunna be a reight kick off ooer this ahm tellin' thi.

 

[ghandi]

I would have said it is out of the question. There could be the option of a contract renegotiation after X amount of appearences, or X amount of time. Alternatively there could staggered wage payments (as Revolution points out) after a certain amount of appereances.



Ah I see, this is interesting. Tricky Trev only got Paddy to sign a contract just in case he might bugger off on a free at the end of the season. It's plausible. In those circumstances would it really make sense to pay Paddy say 500k in salary (assume he's getting around 10k a week) in order to command a 750k salary at a later date? I suppoose this changes a little if Paddy was on 7 or 8 k a week, but it's hardly convicing.



To add to Rev's comments, Tricky Trev was brought in for his commercial nouss. Has he really shown any in this deal? On the one hand (if maidenhhead and JD are right) Trev has assured that no matter what we shall command some sort of fee from Paddy. However on the other hand we're letting a quality goal keeper go for way under his value. What about some sort of pay as you play deal? Or bonuses for appearences? there is a chance that United felt they were backed up against a a wall (i.e. Paddy could easily leave and go somewhere else for nowt at te end of the season) so maybe they just wanted him to put pen to paper. Then you get onto the question of value. 750k is nowt. However we are talking about a 31 year old who is banned for 9 months. At the time we might have taken 750k for him, but that seems to have changed now.

I thought that Kenny's new contract was completed before Birch's arrival, so this may have the pieman's prints all over it.

 

[JohnDenver]

Totally agree, plenty of others do, and no problem but this had been covered alot earlier.

Aha. I'll own up to not bothering with all the previous posts before chipping in... I'm kinda supposed to be working.

 

[Studge]

I thought that Kenny's new contract was completed before Birch's arrival, so this may have the pieman's prints all over it.

United are also believed to be seeking advice as to whether the terms of Kenny's employment, drawn-up before the arrival of chief executive Trevor Birch, render the clause null and void."

 

[DuncDisorderly]

My only surprise is that I appear to be the only one not to be surprised by it...

Rather than you not being surprised, the impression you always leave me with is that you just couldn't care less about player sales. Would any player sale bother you? I've never seen you complain about one. Of course, that ties in with your stance of defending every decision and act of the club, irrespective of its effect on the team.

If sales are done, what is there for me to argue about? I'm fiercely pragmatic about life, and there isn't much I could say or do to change the clubs mind. I didn't like us selling the two Kyles, but the club needed liquid cash more than they needed the players. Thanks and goodbye. I've seen it for nearly 40 years now, and to be honest as long as we are putting out the best 11 guys we can afford in red and white shirts then no, player sales don't concern me too much. The next one might be pap, or they might be the saviour.

As for defending every action of the club, I will defend it against unfair criticism, and I think there is a lot of unfair criticism of the club. But dont think for a minute that I dont see the problems or I am happy about everything...

 

[Ollessendro]

Here is a exract of an article from the Star:

"Having established a reputation as one of the division's most accomplished shot-stoppers before his ban - and awarded a new contract during his lengthy period in exile - the former Bradford Park Avenue and Bury protegee could usually be expected to command a fee of around £2 million on the open market.

But the problems United face as they attempt to foil Rangers' advances can be traced directly back to the negotiations surrounding that deal.

Prohibited from being involved in football at any level - which scuppered plans to loan him abroad - Kenny was facing an uncertain future in the game. Until, that is, United moved to quash fears that his career was over by extending his terms.

It was a remarkable gesture given that he would be unavailable for selection until the final two fixtures of the 2009/10 campaign. But a gesture that carried, from Kenny's perspective, a heavy price.

Having argued that his wages must be lowered - a reasonable demand given the circumstances - United attempted to soften the blow by promising a fresh round of talks this summer.

It was then, sources have informed The Star, a release clause was inserted into the

package to redress the balance. Anyone willing to pay £750.000 would receive permission to speak to Kenny and his representatives. Despite conflicting reports about the exact status of their offer, that's what QPR have done.

Birch arrived at United a month after the Kenny agreement, and it is not a problem of his making. But the vastly experienced and respected chief executive now finds himself wrestling through reams of red tape, potential PR pitfalls and legal argument in an effort to solve."

Nice work United!? Appears it wasn't Tricky Trevor mind.

 

[shorehamview]

It also makes you wonder about Speroni. If he's as good as Warnock reckoned when he was Palace manager why has he put a bid in for Paddy and not his last club's keeper? Would it be worth us taking the cash and going shopping at Palace? Palace may well sell considering they have just let a lot of staff unemployed.

 

[Jostein Flo]

Has any newspaper/channel/website actually categorically confirmed that a bid has been made and Paddy has made clear his desire to move on? Apologies if I've missed something but I've not yet seen anywhere except the Star (and subsequent sources quoting the Star) that a bid has been made and that seemed to have been quickly denied on Sky Sports News.

I know that it's likely that QPR did make a bid (or at least an enquiry) but the Star is only a merginal step up from the Beano as far as factual reporting is concerned and it's a slow time for football news. Has it ever been confirmed that Paddy wants to go or has confirmed that the wants to go to QPR?

 

[Come from away]

Thought Birch had opened up his own negotiations with Paddy to forstall any move?

 

[Foxy]

Thought Birch had opened up his own negotiations with Paddy to forstall any move?

They were always planning to sit down and discuss a new contract as soon as he came back from holiday, along with a few of the others.

 

[broomhillblade]

Good grief!

I come back from a week's holiday to find ten pages of speculation, based on misinformation, based on rumour, based on half-truths, all stirred up by the usual suspects with their familiar axes to grind....

The lunatics have truly taken over the asylum.

[Oh, I forgot... this is a Forum, so we can say anything that comes into our heads]

 

[Kentblade]

Good grief!

I come back from a week's holiday to find ten pages of speculation, based on misinformation, based on rumour, based on half-truths, all stirred up by the usual suspects with their familiar axes to grind....

The lunatics have truly taken over the asylum.

[Oh, I forgot... this is a Forum, so we can say anything that comes into our heads]

Do not fret Broomhill it is now a different world.Hope you enjoyed you holiday btw.
Much simpler when we relied on the Star /green un and a Friday night programme at 10 pm called York Sport for information on player movements.
Mind you this instant communication is much better.
UTB

 

[bladesman3]

i think if paddy goes and we get simonsen in, I am fine with that...

 

[boo radley]

What? Your nonsensical posts never cease to amaze me. All fans on here want what is best for Sheffield United football club and to say that they'd be happy to sell (arguably) the best keeper in the Championship to 'get on at management' is just plain silly. There might be pessimists and people who are pissed of with the current situation, but you're just being over the top.

Now now Olle there you go wanting it all ways again. Remember how you wanted us to lose 5-0 to the pigs to get rid of management? come on dont deny it. You initially asked that question then later in your thread you said yes you would take a 5-0 loss if it meant Blackwell would get the sack.

Oooh i feel another twisty turny thing coming

 

[Ollessendro]

Now now Olle there you go wanting it all ways again. Remember how you wanted us to lose 5-0 to the pigs to get rid of management? come on dont deny it. You initially asked that question then later in your thread you said yes you would take a 5-0 loss if it meant Blackwell would get the sack.

Oooh i feel another twisty turny thing coming

No, I never said I wanted us to lose to the Pigs. I said, in a hypothetical situation, I would take a 5-0 defeat to get rid of current management. This is more a reflection on my feelings towards Kevin Blackwell rather than me wanting bad things for United.

Nuddy said that some fans would want us to sell Kenny just to moan about the current management. The statement is plain silly. It is completely different to the situation I proposed (although I wouldn't expect you to understand).

 

[Micalijo]

No, I never said I wanted us to lose to the Pigs. I said, in a hypothetical situation, I would take a 5-0 defeat to get rid of current management. This is more a reflection on my feelings towards Kevin Blackwell rather than me wanting bad things for United.

Nuddy said that some fans would want us to sell Kenny just to moan about the current management. The statement is plain silly. It is completely different to the situation I proposed (although I wouldn't expect you to understand).

Totally agree. Let's hope the Kenny deal is the final straw for Blackwell and he walks away with a little pay-off.

 

[super_pig]

>Remember how you wanted us to lose 5-0 to the pigs to get rid of management?
not to be taken out of context.. many people agreed with this opinion at the time