???Quote:
Originally Posted by GazFish35
WTF You on about??
Printable View
???Quote:
Originally Posted by GazFish35
WTF You on about??
ha! returning = re-turfing
stupid ipad.
Leading goal scorer for the club.......hmmmmm let's see.Quote:
Originally Posted by sh10
Oh right, we give them away for free.
Middleby'd.
Couldn't see that joke coming :deadhorse:Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
Well the herald are saying that Taggs & Birraz both have $400k buyout ceilings in their contracts, so I’m guessing at absolute best we’ll get $400k, no club CEO would pay over an existing buyout ceiling……….. (go on plague I’ve set it up nicely now just tap it in)
Brillante is the other that’s rumoured to potentially be on the move come the end of the season and he has no buyout ceiling so we could theoretically get more for him then our starting GK & our leading goal scorer, but I’m not sure when his contract is up he could actually walk for free.
400,000 + 1
Wonder if any clubs would be interested in buying all three. Similar to Utrecht with the Roar boys.
Beard I am sure signed on for another year after this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pico
Was one of the first of GVE's kids to commit longer term
FFS WLGQuote:
Originally Posted by pv4
Delete post QUICKLY
IF Middleby sees it and thinks what a great idea a buy one get 2 free offer we will never hear the end of it.
FFS Plague will never shut up on the subject if he doesn't neck himself
It wasn't a joke. That is what actually happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by leftrightout
I'm a very serious person.
Wasn't it an undisclosed fee? :lulzturtle:Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
So they are going to Arsenal then?Quote:
Originally Posted by GazFish35
Yep.Quote:
Originally Posted by leftrightout
When you take home the pretty girl you can't wait to tell your mates how hot she was.
When you take home the not so pretty one you're not so quick to announce it.
That is what an 'undisclosed fee' is.
Mate when I take home the not so pretty girl I just embellish how hot she was to the mates. Don't you do the same???Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
Their all glamours by the time I have finished big noting them
That's right.Quote:
Originally Posted by MFKS
"Errrrr trust me, she was awesome. Oh I'm sorry I don't have any photos, but trust me, she was great".
Exactly what an 'undisclosed fee' is.
you boys reckon Ian Holloway knows what you're on about?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJB3-vEKQDc
So if you go a not so pretty girls once, you can never ever get one of the pretty ones?Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
Besides that, a not pretty girl is still not no girl...
so after you "big note" them they are glamours? impressive :grin:Quote:
Originally Posted by MFKS
:blush: Here we go post season shenanigans start nowQuote:
ADAM Taggart believes the time is right for a move to Europe – now it’s up to his management to secure a club.
The youngest player to win the A-League Golden Boot, Taggart has a year remaining at the Jets but regards an overseas transfer as a priority.
‘‘If there is a time to go, it is when you have scored 16 goals,’’ he said.
‘‘For me it would be a bit silly to stay for another season.
‘‘If there is going to be an opportunity it is now when you are scoring goals.
‘‘Going overseas is a priority and it is up to management to get it sorted.’’
The Herald understands that Taggart negotiated a transfer ceiling in his most recent contract with the Jets.
The 20-year-old has been linked to a move to Holland but a formal offer is yet to materialise.
His agent Zeljko Susa was in China on Monday but business partner Richie Hinton confirmed that there were a "a lot of people interested" in their client.
Taggart, who is expected to be named in the Socceroos squad for a friendly against South Africa next month, has long held ambitions to head abroad.
"It would be stupid for any young player to say they don't want to go overseas and challenge themselves at the highest level," he said.
The Perth-born attacker capped a breakout season with a late goal, his 16th, in the 2-0 win over Adelaide on Friday night.
It created a new club record and moved him four clear in the race for the leading goal-scorer's title.
"At the start I didn't want to say anything about the Golden Boot," he said.
"You don't want to put more pressure on yourself than there already is.
"At the same time, it would be stupid if you are striker and said you were not going for the Golden Boot.
"Who are you to be a striker in the A-League and not want to score the most goals.
"It doesn't matter what league you are in, if you don't want to score the most goals why are you playing.
"That is why I said yes, of course it is a goal.
"It was on my mind from the first game. Even when I hadn't scored in the opening four rounds, it was still a goal.
"As they went in, I put more pressure on myself to work harder and keep improving and score more goals each week.
"You have to set standards and you have to set them high.
"If you don't meet them then you have to work harder."
Taggart credited former coach Gary van Egmond for "toughening him up" and admitted it was a difficult time when his AIS coach departed after round 15.
"A lot of coming here had to do with Gary in terms of hardening up the mentality and becoming a senior professional rather than a youth team player or someone on the verge," he said.
"We were away with the Olyroos at the time [of van Egmond's sacking].
"For us to be away when he left was a little disappointing.
"At the end of the day, Clayton [Zane] came in as coach and it was a positive move.
"He was a striker himself and has been good to me.
"As an attacking player, he encouraged the team to play forward and encouraged the team to take risks in the final third and things like that."
Zane also orchestrated a change in formation from a 4-3-3, in which Taggart played largely in a wide role, to a 4-4-2 where he partnered Emile Heskey up front.
Taggart had scored six goals in his first 13 games, including a brace and a hat-trick.
After the change in round 16, the striker netted 10 goals in the final 11 rounds.
"To be able to play up top alongside Emile, where more of the attention goes to him, was nice," Taggart said.
"I was able to sneak in around him and pinch a few goals.
"He does so well holding the ball up, and winning everything in the air.
"It allows me the space and freedom to go and attack and score goals."
Can see plenty more of this occurring
On another note I will get in early and say if Middleby has signed and agreed a clause in his contract allowing him to leave for a minimum 400k the bloke needs running out of town.
Strikers with his potential at his age are likely to develop and improve to say that no one expected him to continue to improve when he was re signed to a new deal early in the season shows naivety and incompetence.
400k is chicken feed for a bloke of his ability and talent and particularly with the position he plays if this 400k figure is true then he is well undervalued and the decision to allow a clause in his contract of those terms is a ****ing disgrace
Well now that depends on your opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by MFKS
Is it better to get a bloke to sign a 12 month extension, meaning if he leaves in the next transfer window the club gets a transfer fee, albeit capped at 400k, or is it better to allow a player’s contract to run out and then not have the player signed for the following year, meaning he could go and sign an early contract for the next season with one of your rivals and when the player lands a transfer you receive nothing & your rival cashes in, or even not have him sign a contract at all and move on a free as the golden boot winner.
Whilst I don’t like players having transfer ceilings I can see how they work out as a sort of compromise for the player and club.
And maybe if RM didn't agree to the ceiling he goes and signs elsewhere?
Perth are looking at what, $2,500,000 for da Silva, and we get $400,000 for Taggart, which we probably won't get.
There's something wrong with that.
Also MFKFC just assuming it is "only" 400k is a bit naive. DDS is going to Roma for "only" 500k. But with appearance bonus, sell-on fees, etc could escalate to 2.5m (so you're not right, Thomas). Taggz will have similar in his buyout clause.
And realistically, whilst the club wants to make money from him, they can't stand in his way if he wants to test himself in Europe. I daresay the FFA & PFA get heavily involved in buyout clauses too, to ensure clubs don't hold the young player(s) at ransom. 400k upfront is one of the higher sell prices the HAL has seen. Carle maybe was 500k, I think Rostyn Griffiths went for 1-2m to Asia but that's a different kettle altogether.
none of the money will go onto the club. may has well let him go for free imo. a lot of wasted energy thinking about it.
I'm on record as being unsatisfied with the one year extension he signed. I thought we negotiated from a position of weakness.
But anyway.
Having said that now is the time for him to go, and if we get $400k so be it. There's something about him that doesn't sit right. I just don't see him making it in the big time. We should get whatever we can and hopefully maximise our assets in future.
Yeah, the cynic (realist?) in me thinks this. All a transfer fee will do is mean club losses (HSG/Tinks) will be less, not more investment in the club. Could sell him for $20m and that just ends up as cash back for HSG/Tinks.Quote:
Originally Posted by snake
Yeah, I hate the idea of investors getting a return too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimario
:ffs:
Shut up, gypo. That's not the point I am making. Everyone above is having a whinge about how the club is going to get ****ed out of a few million because of a clause. The club gets nothing either way, why is everyone having a whinge about it?Quote:
Originally Posted by pv4
If we sell for a price, the higher the price the better as our profile as a talent breeding club increases globally. Clubs all over the world will get wind of a transfer from some australian club to somewhere for $xxxxxx and a scout somewhere will think "wonder who else they have".
It's a positive move for the club, even if our budget doesn't increase from it IMO
You are confusing "talent breeding" for "schmucks we can rip off because they undervalue their talent".
If I was Tinkler, I would be livid that someone in my organisation signed a clause for a player that is going to rob me of potential millions.
And you are making the point that the HIGHER we sell someone for, the better it is for the club. How is that a good thing if we have a 400k clause and are getting ****ed out of millions????
Who exactly is paying millions for a 20year old Australian striker, particularly when you look at the track record of Australians heading overseas (how many are actually starting each week?)? Like I said - 400k is a massive transfer fee from the HAL.
If I was Tinkler I'd applaud that they re-signed Taggart, and got a transfer fee at all, as opposed to letting him go on a free.
Scum got a record $1.3m fee for a no talent plonker like Rostyn Griffiths. We have a fringe socceroo, potential world cup bolter who has just won the golden boot.
And don't forget that upcoming $2.5m for a 17yo from Perth.
did the member just make up this 400k figure?
i don't see it mentioned anywhere in the article.
I think it was Pico who mentioned it in an earlier post.Quote:
Originally Posted by parksey
Taggart is a gimp. Will end up in holland for sure.
Seeing as the FFA get a cut out of all transfer dealings overseas I can't imagine they have any interest in stopping clubs selling players for more money as they stand to gain more. The PFA have no leg to stand on if a club refuses to sell a contracted player anyway. Yes a club can stand in his way by refusing to agree a deal unless they are happy with the compensation. That's what a contract is for and it is a 2 way streetQuote:
Originally Posted by pv4
Assuming it is 400k with clauses like the De Silva deal has I can cope with that. Problem being is I see it happening that we sell a bloke of his talents for 400k and that's all with no clauses.
Can see many clubs in Europe taking a gamble on him at 400k cause worse case scenario it is a good investment cause if he fails and it ain't that much money down the drain for Euro Clubs.
IF he works out you polish him up get some on field value out of him and can then on sell him for a million or two or even more to a bigger club
I think there was something mentioned at the time of re-signing. I'd heard this figure before but can't remember the source.Quote:
Originally Posted by parksey
I hope Taggz does well if he goes overseas and am glad we will be getting something for him if so because we really weren't getting anything for him. The player in this instance had all the power in the negotiations. At the time I recall a lot of people saying his re-signing was only going to be until the end of the season anyway.
I just hope that IF he fails he returns to our team because they gave him the chance to play and get that overseas contract. That will be a big test of his loyalty.
seems legit
Quote:
Originally Posted by parksey
I am sure it was mentioned somewhere in the recent past by some Journo that Birraz and Taggz have buy out clauses but the Beard doesn't
$400,000 I guess allows people to come to the table. If there are a number of clubs interested then a bidding war may start. This is a best case scenario for us.