Yes, my mistake.
Luka Modric / Signs for Real Madrid
- Thread starter Sassy Colin
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Levy is just playing the game and making sure that Modric is the bad guy.
Modric doesn't want to be there, he wants to play for Chelsea.
Modric doesn't want to be there, he wants to play for Chelsea.
Explain.
So what do you think will happen if Modric hands in the transfer request?
if a player wants to leave, he will leave. no manager will want a player that is not committed 100%.
How much Modric leaves for is all that is left.
How much Modric leaves for is all that is left.
I'm not sure but maybe someone can help if I have missed something.
1. Modric want's to be sold.
2. Tottenham say's no.
3. The player sends in a transfer request.
4. The club neglect the request and ask the player to fulfill his contract.
5. The player refuse to play for the club.
6. The club refuse to pay any wages.
7. The player want to terminate his contract
8. According EU law the contract will be terminated.
Here is the key question.
9. Do the club still holds his registration or is he free to play for another club?
1. Modric want's to be sold.
2. Tottenham say's no.
3. The player sends in a transfer request.
4. The club neglect the request and ask the player to fulfill his contract.
5. The player refuse to play for the club.
6. The club refuse to pay any wages.
7. The player want to terminate his contract
8. According EU law the contract will be terminated.
Here is the key question.
9. Do the club still holds his registration or is he free to play for another club?
He's tied to the club for the next 5 years. And no one forced him to sign a 6 year contract last summer. To agitate for a move so soon is beyond the pale and Levy won't stand for it.
He could stick him him on boot-cleaning duty for the next year and then still sell him for loads of cash the following year (or wait further). And in my view he'll do just that if necessary.
Levy is quite prepared to shove the notion of "player power" down Modric's throat if push comes to shove. But I don't expect it will.
Feel free to be sceptical ...
I do expect Tottenham to be stubborn beyond measure in any offers for Modric, but if he wants to go, which he does apparently, then there is little Tottenham can do, they got a good few seasons out of him in fairness and it was nearly always a fore-gone conclusion he'd move on to the big boy's eventually.
um.....wut. when has 6-8 ever happened to anyone major?
It'd actually make a refreshing change to see this happening, but I just can't see it being the case. Letting one of your best players rot in the reserves will affect how the team performs on the pitch, and I think in the end he'll be pragmatic and take the money so that they can get new players in and improve the squad. Be interesting to see how it pans out, whatever happens.
Spurs are a feeder club for the big 4 in the premiership
If he sticks him on boot-cleaning duty for the next year he won't be worth loads of cash the following year.
You're just making yourself look silly now.
Funny, but unfortunely true for them, Tottenham will always be seen as the level below the 'big four', unless a City like revolution happens there, and unfortunely for them, big club's will always have the uperhand in attracting their player's, thats the reason Chelsea's bid was low I think, to turn the player's head, cheap move but it has worked, apparently.
He'd still be sellable for far more than the 16.5m paid for him.
And it would make the next player think twice before choosing to kick up a fuss. I reckon Levy now sees that as worth more to the club in the longer run. And he'd be right to make that assessment.
Not after a year of cleaning boots he wouldn't.
I don't understand leaving Modric out in the cold for a season to prove a point, he's your best player and will need replacing, Van Der Vaart could probaly do a job but I don't think to the same extent, if anything it makes sense to sell him now for the highest fee you can get, invest the fee in new player's and finally concentrate on cracking into the top four.
Will it though? Part of football is that players move on, even at the top clubs when they'd prefer to keep them.
If your chairman thinks so strongly against that, he is in the wrong business and any players would think twice about joining you if he takes the hardline with Modric as you suggest.
Sorry Glaston but you're talking from your heart now, not your head. The theory of a club standing firm is a wonderful, romantic one and I would genuinely love to see a club do it.
But, it's business. If Modric gets his back up and refuses to play then Spurs have to get the maximum return on him. However, I would say that I can see Spurs offering him to other clubs away from London and perhaps taking a slightly lower transfer fee so they can gazump Chelski out of principle.
But, it's business. If Modric gets his back up and refuses to play then Spurs have to get the maximum return on him. However, I would say that I can see Spurs offering him to other clubs away from London and perhaps taking a slightly lower transfer fee so they can gazump Chelski out of principle.
Nicely summarised.
The last part assumes that his heart isn't set on Chelsea of course.
The "big 4"?
The club-makeup of the top 4 league finishes has changed twice in the last two seasons. It's far from inconceivable that it changes again this next time around.
I will just say for those saying that once a player wants to leave, that's it: Rooney, Tevez, Fabregas, Ronaldo, Gerrard, Barry etc. More often than not, its true but its not a 100% scenario, especially if the feeling is that the player will continue to do their job anyway.
Important to note that 5 onwards won't happen, but if his contract is terminated then he's free to play for another club. The problem for him would be that Tottenham would likely sue him for his transfer value, as Chelsea did with Mutu after they terminated his contract.
It'd also make other players reluctant to sign for Tottenham because they'll be locked in, and existing players reluctant to sign new contracts because Levy is dishonest in negotiations.
The big four have nothing to do with league position.
Levi's statement today is a concession that they will lose Modric this summer. Its just posturing to the naive fans: look we did everything we could but he wanted to leave. That and hopefully add a few million to the fee.
Spurs are a feeder club that can't really compete year in year out.
The Big 4 doesn't correlate to league position, the basic premise is to sustain a position within the top four teams in the country over a certain period of time, not once every decade or so.
The big 4, no matter what happens, are always going to be Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal and Chelsea.
In that order too.
Good businessmen are sometimes able to take a longer-term view. A continued cycle of selling the best players - at the first instance of a desire to leave - is damaging to the club in many ways.
One of those damages is potentially financial - because re-qualifying for the CL would bring in far more cash than a quick profit on transfer sales, unless silly money is offered.
"Always" is a long time ... far too long for this pompous statement to hold water.
I would say in the transfer market Man City have displaced Arsenal out of the big four. Lets face it if City really decide they want a player they'll most likely land him.
Always, in football terms, to break into it Glaston you would need to start winning the league alot more often than you currently do and you'd also need a European Cup or 4 to break into the top 2 teams in England, regardless of how Liverpool are faring currently.
It's not pompous, it's true.
Tottenham are on the tier below the top 4, just behind Chelsea, just above Villa, I'd say you're better than City but they would argue they're on par with you.
but the point being made is a player that is not committed 100% will not be a valuable asset.
Modric is not irreplaceable. Surely as a supporter you want players there who want to play for Spurs.
for every Modric there will be many others who do want to play for Spurs. Invest in them. Spurs are a very good club and always produce or bring in quality players.
you are not being realistic if you think any club can keep a player that wants out.
I don't think it has anything to do with money, the big four money wise is a totally different thing.
We're talking about status and prestige within English football and the consequent attraction and power to lure players, not buy them outright with a gazillion quid.
Fair comment.
Modric has stated in the media that he wants to go to Chelsea and talks between him and the club are said to be at an advanced stage.
How is seeking to hold a player under contract dishonest?
In any case, new top-class players will be more willing to come to Spurs if Modric is still there than if he isn't.
You shirked the bet I proposed to you.
You said it would take a bid upwards of £50m for Spurs to sell.
I bet you £20 if Spurs sell, it won't be for £50m or over.
Chelsea bought into the top 4, before them it was us, Liverpool, Arsenal and L**ds, now City are attempting to buy in too.
Laugh all you want, you're in denial.
I do like the sound of Daniel Levy's Boot Room though.
Chelsea had a little prestige before the money take over, not tons, but an FA cup here and there, a league once every fifty years or so.
Leeds cocked it up big time in hindsight, really fecking did themselves in.
City are in a different league, a 6 pin league.
No-one can compete with that.