Doaksie Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 No we didn't. I'll try quoting this bit again, where you said we didn't have to accept the bid after it triggered his release clause. You know, the relevant bit. Of course we did - that's the whole point of it being in the contract. Regardless, I think Souey would do a splendid job at Boro.
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
fozzer Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 Duffer didn't want to leave... The club wanted the 17mil more than him!
doctorryan Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 I think it was a fair goal, as well. I think Grabbi would have been more effective for us had that been allowed, as well. Not a world beater, of course, but a better player than he was during his stay with us. Another reason to dislike the perpetual favour that Utd receive from refs. I concur. God, what a great night that was(a Monday Night matchup with ManU for our first home game back up) IF you take out the 2 unbelievably bad calls against us that evening. Duffer didn't want to leave... The club wanted the 17mil more than him! A little simplistic an explanation, but spot-on nonetheless.
47er Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 I'll try quoting this bit again, where you said we didn't have to accept the bid after it triggered his release clause. You know, the relevant bit. Of course we did - that's the whole point of it being in the contract. Regardless, I think Souey would do a splendid job at Boro. for 2 years.
Amo Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 Duffer didn't want to leave... The club wanted the 17mil more than him! I can't believe Duff didn't want to join the Chelsea Revolution and its Russian goldmine. Didn't take him long to start kissing the badge, in front of our own supporters no less.
den Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 I'll try quoting this bit again, where you said we didn't have to accept the bid after it triggered his release clause. You know, the relevant bit. Of course we did - that's the whole point of it being in the contract. We accepted the offer and contacted him at the airport - to tell him that we had accepted an offer and for him to go and talk to Chelsea. If we hadn't done that, he wouldn't have pushed for a move. That's what he said - and the fact that he took some time to accept Chelsea's offer suggests that was the case. That's why it wasn't "inevitable" that he left. I got the impression that we accepted the offer too readily. The offer was accepted before Duff was asked about whether he wanted to go.
FourLaneBlue Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 We accepted the offer and contacted him at the airport - to tell him that we had accepted an offer and for him to go and talk to Chelsea. If we hadn't done that, he wouldn't have pushed for a move. Surely we had to accept the offer and inform Duff? We did not have to sell, but if Duff wanted to leave for that price, we could not stop him. Presumably, that is how a release cause works. What would be the point in a club having a release cause if they did not have to sell - should the player agree to the move - when it is reached? It would be utterly pointless otherwise.
bellamy11 Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 Den - how do you not accept an offer that triggers a release clause?
broadsword Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 A cunning plan - let's just not tell him about the bid meeting the release clause. Shove him on the 'plane, he'll never find out.
47er Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 We accepted the offer and contacted him at the airport - to tell him that we had accepted an offer and for him to go and talk to Chelsea. If we hadn't done that, he wouldn't have pushed for a move. That's what he said - and the fact that he took some time to accept Chelsea's offer suggests that was the case. That's why it wasn't "inevitable" that he left. I got the impression that we accepted the offer too readily. The offer was accepted before Duff was asked about whether he wanted to go. Souness thought he could sell Duff and build a side around baby Barry Ferguson! Not his first mistake but one of his biggest!
chaddyrovers Posted October 23, 2010 Author Posted October 23, 2010 looks like Ince for the job now http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Former-Middlesbrough-captain-Paul-Ince-has-overtaken-Tony-Mowbary-as-new-front-runner-for-the-managers-job-article611691.html
47er Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 looks like Ince for the job now http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Former-Middlesbrough-captain-Paul-Ince-has-overtaken-Tony-Mowbary-as-new-front-runner-for-the-managers-job-article611691.html R.I.P. Boro.
Baz Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 Happen to know Chelsea didnt meet the release clause, so ultimately was Rovers decision. However the figure we accepted was very, very close to the trigger (believe it matched the figure but not the add-ons in the contract). Also given that Chelsea were coming back every few days it was obvious that they would bid eventually to get him. Rovers made the decision to cash in whilst their targets were available and before the trip to the USA would delay any transfer and maybe mean us missing out on targets.
gumboots Posted October 24, 2010 Posted October 24, 2010 Boro going down? Ince linked. This is my hometown club. I'd better get my family organised now to start the protests if it really looks like happening.
den Posted October 24, 2010 Posted October 24, 2010 Den - how do you not accept an offer that triggers a release clause? I can only tell you what happened Bellamy. When the offer reached the get out clause figure, or in fact just below that figure, JW felt obliged to put this to the trustees and following that Duff was told to talk to Chelsea. Duff said he would not have asked to speak to them himself and if he hadn't been told to talk to them, he wouldn't have asked to.
S15 Posted October 24, 2010 Posted October 24, 2010 Duff actually wanted to stay, and went to negotiate terms with Chelsea and came back to Rovers wanting to sign new terms (with higher wages, though not as high as Chelsea offered) but Souness wanted the money to splash in the transfer market. Probably the decision that led to the downfall in Souey's reign.
bellamy11 Posted October 24, 2010 Posted October 24, 2010 I can only tell you what happened Bellamy. When the offer reached the get out clause figure, or in fact just below that figure, JW felt obliged to put this to the trustees and following that Duff was told to talk to Chelsea. Duff said he would not have asked to speak to them himself and if he hadn't been told to talk to them, he wouldn't have asked to. Certainly seems that you're privvy to some information about the deal that I was unaware of. My impression was that the clause was activated, and from there Duffer was clearly taken by the ambition/potential and money of Chelsea (as anybody would have been). Given that he is by far one of my favourite ever players (and the number 11 in my username) it's incredibly disappointing that the club decided to take the money if the player strongly wanted to stay.
den Posted October 24, 2010 Posted October 24, 2010 Certainly seems that you're privvy to some information about the deal that I was unaware of. My impression was that the clause was activated, and from there Duffer was clearly taken by the ambition/potential and money of Chelsea (as anybody would have been). Given that he is by far one of my favourite ever players (and the number 11 in my username) it's incredibly disappointing that the club decided to take the money if the player strongly wanted to stay. What I've said are, I believe, the facts. The club inserted the get out clause, but that doesn't mean that the player has to be sold. Rovers could have said all the way through that Duff wasn't for sale, even when Chelsea met the clause/fee. If we believe Duff's comments afterwards, he wouldn't have demanded to talk to Chelsea. I obviously don't know whether that was the real case with him, but there's no reason to doubt it. It's water under the bridge now anyway - and I was only responding to comments that his transfer was "inevitable".
Backroom DE. Posted October 24, 2010 Backroom Posted October 24, 2010 Appointing Ince would be absolute madness by Boro, unless their aim is to get relegated in utter humiliation
doctorryan Posted October 24, 2010 Posted October 24, 2010 Duff actually wanted to stay, and went to negotiate terms with Chelsea and came back to Rovers wanting to sign new terms (with higher wages, though not as high as Chelsea offered) but Souness wanted the money to splash in the transfer market. The first part of that is spot-on, in fact the thing dragged on for all or parts of 6 days before it ended after Chelsea gave him a deadline. He would go to London in the morning for negotiations each day and be back at Brockhall in the afternoon for practice. That doesn't seem like the behavior of someone itching to accept Chelsea's offer to me. As for Souey wanting him out for the cash .........nah. We'd already sold Dunn & spent £8M on Emo , Gresko, etc... The idea was to put Emo with his crossing ability across from Duff. Oh well.....
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.