• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Geertruida


Coeus said:
I was of the understanding that if a clause was set, personal terms would need to be agreed prior and it would be a formality exercising that clause, like Pierre.
Click to expand...
Its not slavery,the terms are there to protect the clubs from either party reneging on the terms but the player always has the last say about future events and in truth not many clubs will want a player who doesn't want to play for them !The takeover of the loan thing is a tad bin dippery from liverpool so i hope we get some decent compensation.
 
LineTrash said:
If it’s out of the blue we tell them to fuck off!
Click to expand...
Hopefully. But if it's last minute and the player, who we don't have on a contract past the summer, has his head turned then we'd be in a shit situation. But aye, I'm assuming we've had a bit of notice. Albeit it's a position we wouldn't have been expecting to have to recruit for in January. But if we get a good enough replacement and get financially compensated then fair enough. Still think it's shit that clubs can come in for players on a season long loan without a recall clause though, Liverpool should have looked for someone who is actually available
 
Mowgli said:
You must be logged on to see media items

Looking for a midfielder allegedly
Click to expand...
Of the positions he can cover that’s probably most important for us right now. Injuries at centre half could be adequately covered by moving a first choice fullback inside I think. Plus there’s always Luke;)

Means we can make a big push for a top class centre half in the summer too. Bit of a silver lining at least.
 
Last edited:
The club won't let him go if it's going to screw us. If we've known about this for awhile, which I assume we have, then we will have a few good options lined up. If we can't land what we think we need, he will stay here.
 
King for a Day... said:
The club won't let him go if it's going to screw us. If we've known about this for awhile, which I assume we have, then we will have a few good options lined up. If we can't land what we think we need, he will stay here.
Click to expand...

That’s what I think but he hasn’t been playing him and we don’t have much time left like.
 
Guinness Guzzler said:
Hopefully. But if it's last minute and the player, who we don't have on a contract past the summer, has his head turned then we'd be in a shit situation. But aye, I'm assuming we've had a bit of notice. Albeit it's a position we wouldn't have been expecting to have to recruit for in January. But if we get a good enough replacement and get financially compensated then fair enough. Still think it's shit that clubs can come in for players on a season long loan without a recall clause though, Liverpool should have looked for someone who is actually available
Click to expand...
Agree it’s bullshit by the scousers, it’s a bit different with the giui deal as he was going back to the parent club this is the scousers having shit scouting and just falling back on a player the manager knows. It’s what Liverpool fans were ripping the piss out of ten hagg for doing the other season. Can’t blame the player in all this big move chance to play Europe and not exactly first choice here but we shouldn’t be put in this situation because another team is shit at planning.
 
King for a Day... said:
The club won't let him go if it's going to screw us. If we've known about this for awhile, which I assume we have, then we will have a few good options lined up. If we can't land what we think we need, he will stay here.
Click to expand...

It's going to screw us now irrespective of if we bring someone in or not. He's missed West Ham and obviously will miss a game he absolutely would have been starting tomorrow night, because of this.

Geertruida covers 3 positions (RB, CB and CM). It's pretty much a certainty that the incoming isn't going to be able to do that to the level that he can.

Reports of "the club recognise the opportunity and won't stand in his way" indicate we're more far more concerned about not upsetting anyone than we should be.

If it was solely about not screwing ourselves, we'd have to told Liverpool and Leipzig that he's our player until the summer and to take a hike.
 
Last edited:
oddbod said:
Its not slavery,the terms are there to protect the clubs from either party reneging on the terms but the player always has the last say about future events and in truth not many clubs will want a player who doesn't want to play for them !The takeover of the loan thing is a tad bin dippery from liverpool so i hope we get some decent compensation.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about slavery?

It's true that clubs will seldom exercise the clause when the player no longer wants to be there, but that's very different from requiring further acceptance.
 
King for a Day... said:
The club won't let him go if it's going to screw us. If we've known about this for awhile, which I assume we have, then we will have a few good options lined up. If we can't land what we think we need, he will stay here.
Click to expand...
Can’t see any scenario where he stays here in this window. Yes we can block the move, however we would have a player who won’t perform at his best when in the team. It’s why the transfer window should be closed during the season for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top