|
Post by mightyterrier on Aug 31, 2015 19:29:26 GMT 1
Whether we think it's right or wrong and I think it's wrong by the way we are contractually obliged to pay his wages or negotiate an end to his contract, unless of course he has given is reason to terminate (which he hasn't) and I agree he will never be out of pocket but that's the way of the world.
|
|
|
Post by Giggity on Aug 31, 2015 19:31:28 GMT 1
Right move by the club getting rid. Terrible injury record (which has finally taken its toll on his body) and a nuisance off the pitch. With that being said, he has alway given 100% on the field and added some much needed determination, fight and quality. A real shame we never got a full season out of him.
Vaughannnnnnnn, Vaughan will tear you apart again!
|
|
|
Post by 3Pipe on Aug 31, 2015 19:32:34 GMT 1
Equally if our job caused us to be injured so much we'd sue. Equally, if you acted recklessly and put yourself at so much risk of getting injured at work due to said recklessness you'd be in deep water.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Aug 31, 2015 19:50:15 GMT 1
Sounds like Vaughan is waiting for us to pay him off a bit. Hope we don't blow too much of the budget making severance payments or even covering part of his wages at Wigan In what way is this different from any other player who has been transferred before the end of their contract, when they haven't requested the said transfer? We will have done exactly the same with Smithies but because this is Vaughan he is judged differently by some eejits with agendas on here.
|
|
|
Post by impact on Aug 31, 2015 19:51:40 GMT 1
Equally if our job caused us to be injured so much we'd sue. Equally, if you acted recklessly and put yourself at so much risk of getting injured at work due to said recklessness you'd be in deep water. Not these days - you can chop your own arm off and find someone else to blame for it!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2015 19:56:06 GMT 1
Sounds like Vaughan is waiting for us to pay him off a bit. Hope we don't blow too much of the budget making severance payments or even covering part of his wages at Wigan In what way is this different from any other player who has been transferred before the end of their contract, when they haven't requested the said transfer? We will have done exactly the same with Smithies but because this is Vaughan he is judged differently by some eejits with agendas on here. Wait, what... Read that three times and can make literally no sense of it or how it is relevant to what was quoted.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2015 19:59:00 GMT 1
Sounds like Vaughan is waiting for us to pay him off a bit. Hope we don't blow too much of the budget making severance payments or even covering part of his wages at Wigan In what way is this different from any other player who has been transferred before the end of their contract, when they haven't requested the said transfer? We will have done exactly the same with Smithies but because this is Vaughan he is judged differently by some eejits with agendas on here. Is this fact as I often see it get posted on here It just doesn't seem right that the selling club would have to pay up someones contract who then moves on to another club and continues to get paid (usually at a higher rate). I can understand paying a player off when you release him early from his contract and he becomes a free agent but not when they are moving to another club. If you're correct, Smithies will have got a massive release payment from Town, a nice signing on fee from QPR and then starts to get paid £15-20k a week. Doesn't seem right to me
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Aug 31, 2015 19:59:27 GMT 1
In what way is this different from any other player who has been transferred before the end of their contract, when they haven't requested the said transfer? We will have done exactly the same with Smithies but because this is Vaughan he is judged differently by some eejits with agendas on here. Wait, what... Read that three times and can make literally no sense of it or how it is relevant to what was quoted. Quoted the wrong post. Every player at every club transferred before the end of their contract negotiates a contract settlement with the selling club before the transfer takes place so why is there a need to call out Vaughan on this accepted practice.
|
|
|
Post by upthetown on Aug 31, 2015 20:00:59 GMT 1
In what way is this different from any other player who has been transferred before the end of their contract, when they haven't requested the said transfer? We will have done exactly the same with Smithies but because this is Vaughan he is judged differently by some eejits with agendas on here. Is this fact as I often see it get posted on here It just doesn't seem right that the selling club would have to pay up someones contract who then moves on to another club and continues to get paid (usually at a higher rate). I can understand paying a player off when you release him early from his contract and he becomes a free agent but not when they are moving to another club. If you're correct, Smithies will have got a massive release payment from Town, a nice signing on fee from QPR and then starts to get paid £15-20k a week. Doesn't seem right to me All linked to loyalty payments I believe, rather than having their contract paid up. Generally entitled to £££ if they've not asked for a transfer, and they leave before their contract expires.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Aug 31, 2015 20:03:17 GMT 1
In what way is this different from any other player who has been transferred before the end of their contract, when they haven't requested the said transfer? We will have done exactly the same with Smithies but because this is Vaughan he is judged differently by some eejits with agendas on here. Is this fact as I often see it get posted on here It just doesn't seem right that the selling club would have to pay up someones contract who then moves on to another club and continues to get paid (usually at a higher rate). I can understand paying a player off when you release him early from his contract and he becomes a free agent but not when they are moving to another club. If you're correct, Smithies will have got a massive release payment from Town, a nice signing on fee from QPR and then starts to get paid £15-20k a week. Doesn't seem right to me I have been told that this doesn't occur when the player submits a transfer request. It is very very rare for the contract to be paid in full but a settlement is made in nearly every transfer when a player is under contract.
|
|
|
Post by detox on Aug 31, 2015 20:05:49 GMT 1
I thought if they left without asking for a transfer they got a % of the transfer fee ..never heard of being paid up then start earning a wage at the new club the next day...is that true ??
|
|
|
Post by Porrohman on Aug 31, 2015 20:07:19 GMT 1
I thought if they left without asking for a transfer they got a % of the transfer fee ..never heard of being paid up then start earning a wage at the new club the next day...is that true ?? Unless your Boothy (according to rumour) Sent from my SM-G900F using proboards
|
|
|
Post by Hammy (still in Golcar) on Aug 31, 2015 20:07:32 GMT 1
In what way is this different from any other player who has been transferred before the end of their contract, when they haven't requested the said transfer? We will have done exactly the same with Smithies but because this is Vaughan he is judged differently by some eejits with agendas on here. Is this fact as I often see it get posted on here It just doesn't seem right that the selling club would have to pay up someones contract who then moves on to another club and continues to get paid (usually at a higher rate). I can understand paying a player off when you release him early from his contract and he becomes a free agent but not when they are moving to another club. If you're correct, Smithies will have got a massive release payment from Town, a nice signing on fee from QPR and then starts to get paid £15-20k a week. Doesn't seem right to me Gone from 8k to 22.5k a week
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2015 20:09:04 GMT 1
Is this fact as I often see it get posted on here It just doesn't seem right that the selling club would have to pay up someones contract who then moves on to another club and continues to get paid (usually at a higher rate). I can understand paying a player off when you release him early from his contract and he becomes a free agent but not when they are moving to another club. If you're correct, Smithies will have got a massive release payment from Town, a nice signing on fee from QPR and then starts to get paid £15-20k a week. Doesn't seem right to me Gone from 8k to 22.5k a week This is the point that I might have to stop trying to kid myself that football hasn't gone mental
|
|
|
Post by HuddsTerrier on Aug 31, 2015 20:58:55 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by teddytheterrier on Sept 1, 2015 6:18:19 GMT 1
Can see him and Hammill being shipped off to wigan tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by Tez on Sept 1, 2015 6:23:03 GMT 1
Or even today... Deadline at 6pm tonight.
Let's see Town do some good business (ins as well as outs!)
|
|
|
Post by teddytheterrier on Sept 1, 2015 6:23:44 GMT 1
Or even today... Deadline at 6pm tonight. Let's see Town do some good business (ins as well as outs!) Good point still early ha
|
|
|
Post by Tez on Sept 1, 2015 6:27:49 GMT 1
Or even today... Deadline at 6pm tonight. Let's see Town do some good business (ins as well as outs!) Good point still early ha I know the feeling mate... Back to work after bank hol... blah.. Ah well, shorter week!
|
|
|
Post by thomo on Sept 1, 2015 6:48:05 GMT 1
Sounds like Vaughan is waiting for us to pay him off a bit. Hope we don't blow too much of the budget making severance payments or even covering part of his wages at Wigan In what way is this different from any other player who has been transferred before the end of their contract, when they haven't requested the said transfer? We will have done exactly the same with Smithies but because this is Vaughan he is judged differently by some eejits with agendas on here. I don't begrudge him getting his contract paid up, I was just hoping whoever took him would take over his contract. Wigan have enough cash to cover it. Perhaps if they are not prepared to take on 75%+ of his wage we should keep him.
|
|
|
Post by townrwe on Sept 1, 2015 7:36:59 GMT 1
Vaughan move delayed over loyalty payment.
|
|
|
Post by teddytheterrier on Sept 1, 2015 8:10:39 GMT 1
His medical should be interesting...
|
|
|
Post by thomo on Sept 1, 2015 8:40:21 GMT 1
The Championship player of last season (Bamford) was a season long loan, so was the lad who many thought should have won that award (Pritchard). Fair point - Lets clarify, there's a bit of a difference between signing a highly rated Chelsea player and Spurs player (who would add quality without doubt) to a player from Championship reserves (an ex Torquay, Kettering, Lincoln, Bristol Rovers and Middlesbrough player etc) who may add to us or league 1 who hasn't played for 8 months not matter how highly rated he was / is / could be! Also the difference is both those teams went out and paid good money for decent replacements after the loans expired. If we sign a good quality loan, they will likely leave and we won't have enough money to sign a decent replacement leaving a gaping hole in the side. We'll have spent all the money the loan fees and wages. A good example is Robinson/James - yes Davidson is doing ok, but it's clear we're missing the outlet the two loan players provided on the left. That makes Powell's favoured formation of using one winger on the right much less effective.
|
|
|
Post by fredcarno1 on Sept 1, 2015 9:32:09 GMT 1
Fair point - Lets clarify, there's a bit of a difference between signing a highly rated Chelsea player and Spurs player (who would add quality without doubt) to a player from Championship reserves (an ex Torquay, Kettering, Lincoln, Bristol Rovers and Middlesbrough player etc) who may add to us or league 1 who hasn't played for 8 months not matter how highly rated he was / is / could be! Also the difference is both those teams went out and paid good money for decent replacements after the loans expired. If we sign a good quality loan, they will likely leave and we won't have enough money to sign a decent replacement leaving a gaping hole in the side. We'll have spent all the money the loan fees and wages. A good example is Robinson/James - yes Davidson is doing ok, but it's clear we're missing the outlet the two loan players provided on the left. That makes Powell's favoured formation of using one winger on the right much less effective.That's the difference between getting a 750K fullback and one on a free. Although not always the case you more often than not get what you pay for.
|
|
|
Post by Frankiesleftpeg on Sept 1, 2015 10:02:13 GMT 1
Interesting reading. It makes you wonder why every bugger waits until the last minute to get these things sorted.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2015 12:11:40 GMT 1
|
|
Tiro
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,788
|
Post by Tiro on Sept 1, 2015 16:44:20 GMT 1
Not sure on the source, but the JV deal has hit a snag because of some issue with his medical, not because of contractual issues, apparently. ....no surprise there then. What were they expecting? #HeadShake if true.
|
|
|
Post by waltzingthecowshed on Sept 1, 2015 16:49:27 GMT 1
Cant believe anyone would be daft to take a chance on him, surely he cant pass a medical, wouldnt be surprised to see him still with us and then a loan deal of some kind
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Sept 1, 2015 16:53:04 GMT 1
Cant believe anyone would be daft to take a chance on him, surely he cant pass a medical, wouldnt be surprised to see him still with us and then a loan deal of some kind If he can pass a medical he ought to be giving his best shot to Town for the rest of the season.
|
|
|
Post by Frankiesleftpeg on Sept 1, 2015 16:57:53 GMT 1
I hope this deal fails to go through if only to piss off some of the disrespectful twats who have posted on here in the past few days
|
|