Maguire | he stays!

croadyman said:
Not bothered are you actually kidding me when we are desperate for sales to fund signings
Click to expand...

Not really. As I said it was a longshot to get him sold given his age wages and performances (or lack thereof). That we even agreed a sale prior to it going south was a miracle.
 
I think United are right to hold firm on the payment to Maguire. Getting essentially £23M for Maguire is simply not worth it and it sets a dangerous precedent. Why exactly should we pay off a player to leave who has shown they aren't good enough? Given that most players that leave the club move downwards, you'll have everyone wanting a handout to leave the club.

Maguire has a lot to lose here. Its the Euros next year, he'll easily keep his place if he's playing every week but midtable, but if he's sat on the bench all season at United apart from away games vs Leyton Orient in the cup or whatever, he may not. So he may well yet change his mind.
 
Kaos said:
Because he was owed that in deferred wages. Maguire is just being a greedy little git thinking he's entitled to millions to leave because no other club would be stupid enough to give him the ridiculous wages we have (thanks Ed).
Click to expand...
He's literally entitled to it by the contract.

He might be completely lacking anything that would inspire a fan, but he does have a contract.
 
I’ve given Maguire the time of day, but if this is true then he can get fecked.

Fire him into the U18s and let him rot there.
 
quadrant said:
I think United are right to hold firm on the payment to Maguire. Getting essentially £23M for Maguire is simply not worth it and it sets a dangerous precedent. Why exactly should we pay off a player to leave who has shown they aren't good enough? Given that most players that leave the club move downwards, you'll have everyone wanting a handout to leave the club.

Maguire has a lot to lose here. Its the Euros next year, he'll easily keep his place if he's playing every week but midtable, but if he's sat on the bench all season at United apart from away games vs Leyton Orient in the cup or whatever, he may not. So he may well yet change his mind.
Click to expand...

They are not right at all we are SKINT and need to sign two midfielders before the rest are over the hills and away in this league
 
ScarleyUtd said:
You're arguing about what you would want now. The other poster has a point – he 'traded down' so to speak. Sure Maguire won't be putting in less hours, but the expectations would be far lower at West Ham, much less pressure. So the two situations are similar.

If Harry wants to be a total mercenary and play it by the letter of his contract he can, doesn't mean people can't see that for what it is – greed over self-respect and legacy.
Click to expand...
I made a comment on what I would do, that doesn't render any of this - And for a northerner, with a young family, settled not too far from their own families, moving to London probably is a huge downgrade in terms of his life comfortability - any less accurate. I just don't see how you people seem to be holding this against him, he's essentially being sold without really wanting to go and offered a huge pay decrease by the new club, he is perfectly entitled to expect a pay-off from United (it's very common for players to receive pay-offs when leaving clubs, it's just not usually newsworthy). This is on United and their previous ridiculous wage policy.
 
While I'd loathe to pay off Maguire, lets be honest £23 million for him is decent and we can finally close this chapter.
 
m1tch said:
Schweinsteiger him
Click to expand...

He was much more professional than Maguire ever has been. Jose chose to axe him, he then trained his way back into the squad and had decent performances...granted the competition for places at the time weren't the best, but he grafted. Schweinsteiger was much more past his prime than Harry is now....just that Harry doesn't want to accept that he's not good enough for the highest end of football and leaving it means he'll never get back to it.

It's a hard truth that is being magnified because he is English and plays for United.
 
Wilt said:
De Jong wasn’t wanted at Barcelona. He refused to leave because he was owed £15m.

Whats the difference? (other than one being a very good footballer)
Click to expand...

One is deferred wages.

The other are future earnings contingent on you still being employed by the club. Earnings that don't apply if you're bought out of said contract.
 
Kag said:
I’ve given Maguire the time of day, but if this is true then he can get fecked.

Fire him into the U18s and let him rot there.
Click to expand...
Doubt his contract would allow him to be played in the U18’s, reseves etc.
 
spiriticon said:
While I'd loathe to pay off Maguire, lets be honest £23 million for him is decent and we can finally close this chapter.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's the smart thing to do and get Todibo/Pavard with the money. Sadly doesn't solve the two midfield issues but there you go
 
I still think this will get done by the end of the week and he’ll go to West Ham after all this silly drama, especially when we are probably going to sign Pavard
 
TheLord said:
There is no point lashing out at Maguire. He is entitled to receive whatever is mentioned in the contract. Clubs happily sign contracts and then try to shove players away when they’re not good enough.

The new West Ham contract, if he signs it, will be final one before he retires. He is being forced to play for West Ham where he has no chance of winning anything and has been asked to take a paycut on top of that. All that for the increased chance of playing in the Euros! Doesn't sound interesting. Pay him the 7m and get done with it.
Click to expand...
He is being 'forced' to play for West Ham because he has been crap when he has tried to play as the manager wants him to , nothing more and nothing less.

The chance of losing his England place might change his mind, although Southgate seems to pick any old shite as long as he likes them, whether they are playing regularly or not.
 
croadyman said:
They are not right at all we are SKINT and need to sign two midfielders before the rest are over the hills and away in this league
Click to expand...

As I understand it he still has a book value of £26.6M so if we only recoup £23M on his sale, we actually make a loss and have less to spend, due to FFP limitaitons.
 
quadrant said:
As I understand it he still has a book value of £26.6M so if we only recoup £23M on his sale, we actually make a loss and have less to spend, due to FFP limitaitons.
Click to expand...

To hell with the loss we need to sign players
 
Wilt said:
De Jong wasn’t wanted at Barcelona. He refused to leave because he was owed £15m.

Whats the difference? (other than one being a very good footballer)
Click to expand...
Probably explained 200 times in this thread but in case of De Jong it was money Barca owned him from previous years. A bit like if Maguire got just 100k/week in the previous 4 years despite being in 190k/week with an understanding that he will get the other 90k/week as a lump sum in some future date.

So in case of De Jong it was a debt that Barca owned him. In case of Maguire, it is future earnings that he will get if he plays here. Of course he is completely on the right to demand it (or just say that he won’t move). United is also completely on the right to make clear to him that he won’t play a single minute for us. But we are a soft club lead by soft people, he will probably be reintegrated in the team, cost us goals while fans chant his name.
 
If West Ham are willing to pay Maguire something around what Zouma makes (supposedly 120k p/w), he'd lose around...what? 6-8m (depending on how much he's actually at currently, at United, the lowest and highest estimates are quite a bit apart) over the next two years (he's got two years left on his current contract).

ETA Point being that it seems about right if he's actually said that he wants a compensation package worth 7m.

Whether United should agree to this is another question altogether.

For me, I say - do it. I can't see it being anything but detrimental to keep him around as a "potentially okay" backup player who a) doesn't fit the system/is not fancied by ETH and b) happens to be a high-profile player/a starter for England.
 
Last edited:
quadrant said:
As I understand it he still has a book value of £26.6M so if we only recoup £23M on his sale, we actually make a loss and have less to spend, due to FFP limitaitons.
Click to expand...

Selling McTominay would've solved all that, the club should've accepted both offers from WHU.
 
quadrant said:
As I understand it he still has a book value of £26.6M so if we only recoup £23M on his sale, we actually make a loss and have less to spend, due to FFP limitaitons.
Click to expand...
We made profits on Elanga, it’s ok to lose a bit here.
 
He's entitled to his money thats the contract he signed.

The company has to pay hi,

He's also going to sit on the bench - the manager doesn't have to play him

Its now purely commercial for the company.
 
We need to wake up on this....

the dangerous precedent has already been set with paying 80m for Maguire, making him captain and giving him a wage.

Maguire is worthless to us. He is a liability and if it costs us 6/7 million out of the 30 fee so be it.

Thats 23m we can put to good use. Its 23m more than we received for Jones, Lingard, Martial or any other player we mismanaged.

Take the hit, get him gone and learn how to manage a football club
 
Very sad to hear this. Maguire is really making it difficult for us to continue supporting him.

All his interviews where he is talking about the importance of playing time and play for England just seems nonsense

I hope this do not change our strategy in targeting Pavard or a similar CB and also extend the Evans contract. In this case Maguire is of course, legally, allowed to stay and fight for his position but, hopefully all the other 5 CBS would be in front of him…
 
For those saying just get rid - I'm pretty sure there will be big FFP repercussions for selling him at a much lower value than he was bought.
 
led_scholes said:
I don't understand why we don't pay him. He is a limited player with no use, no ambition and bad mentality (by rejecting WH, he just accepts his demotion and don't want to fight for his career).

I m sure his agent advised him to stay on his contract. He will be semi retired in 2 years with no football and I doubt he will be able to find a contract over 20k. Does he believe that the Saudis will give him a grant contract?
Click to expand...
Who said he rejected WH? All reports say that he hasn’t spoken with them yet because United didn’t progress the sell quickly enough
 
Beans said:
He's literally entitled to it by the contract.

He might be completely lacking anything that would inspire a fan, but he does have a contract.
Click to expand...

He is entitled to it by the contract if he stays here for the length of the contract, he won't be. It isn't the clubs fault he can't justify a team giving him those wages.

A payoff shouldn't be an option and I'm glad the club are standing firm. Let him go without a payoff or have him rot in the reserves.

The nerve of the guy to be so poor that his only option is West Ham and then demand a payoff to go there.
 
JB7 said:
I made a comment on what I would do, that doesn't render any of this - And for a northerner, with a young family, settled not too far from their own families, moving to London probably is a huge downgrade in terms of his life comfortability - any less accurate. I just don't see how you people seem to be holding this against him, he's essentially being sold without really wanting to go and offered a huge pay decrease by the new club, he is perfectly entitled to expect a pay-off from United (it's very common for players to receive pay-offs when leaving clubs, it's just not usually newsworthy). This is on United and their previous ridiculous wage policy.
Click to expand...
The latest mistake was accepting a fee bid from West Ham without knowing how much Maguire wants. If they talked to each other he could have told them and then we could have nudged WH up a smidge to cover a bit more of his pay off.

The other way to do it would be for Maguire to make a signing on fee part of his package from West Ham so they could factor that into their fee bid.

We can put it down to poor communication but it’s pretty amateur.
 
It’s obvious…. Pay him the difference in wages from the transfer fee, get him off the books and buy another defender.

The alternative being he stays at Utd and walks out on a free.
 
McGrathsipan said:
He's entitled to his money thats the contract he signed.

The company has to pay hi,

He's also going to sit on the bench - the manager doesn't have to play him

Its now purely commercial for the company.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Not sure why everyone is lashing out at him. I still think he will move before the end of the window, possibly on loan. With all the ACL injuries, there could be a more of them in the next two weeks and who knows what club will need an emergency England CB (for now).
 
lilcurt said:
He is entitled to it by the contract if he stays here for the length of the contract, he won't be. It isn't the clubs fault he can't justify a team giving him those wages.

A payoff shouldn't be an option and I'm glad the club are standing firm. Let him go without a payoff or have him rot in the reserves.

The nerve of the guy to be so poor that his only option is West Ham and then demand a payoff to go there.
Click to expand...
His contract is not performance related. The club took a risk giving him the contract. It doesn’t matter if he hasn’t played for the five years or not. As far as Harry is concerned, he hasn’t violated the contract and it’s a fixed-term contract, so he is owed that money.
 
AndySmith1990 said:
How can anyone rationalise paying him the remainder of his contract? You get paid the entirity of a contract when you see out the entire contract by being an employee and doing your job for the full length of it. If we sell him then he's no longer an employee and he'll have already have been paid what he's owed by United up until that point of leaving. Paying him off means he'll get paid wages he's not earned here on top of additional wages he'll be earning at his new club. It's pure fecking greed. If he wants to stay and be a backup player fine. If he wants to leave then he should accept a wage decrease befitting of his status and value to his new employer. He'll still be richer than 99% of the population ffs
Click to expand...


Your maths is way off. He loses money by not getting paid off. Why would anyone expect him to lose money?
 
peridigm said:
Exactly. Not sure why everyone is lashing out at him. I still think he will move before the end of the window, possibly on loan. With all the ACL injuries, there could be a more of them in the next two weeks and who knows what club will need an emergency England CB (for now).
Click to expand...

It's the same as the lashing out at Phil Jones for having the audacity to try and get fit while still under contract.
 
JB7 said:
I made a comment on what I would do, that doesn't render any of this - And for a northerner, with a young family, settled not too far from their own families, moving to London probably is a huge downgrade in terms of his life comfortability - any less accurate. I just don't see how you people seem to be holding this against him, he's essentially being sold without really wanting to go and offered a huge pay decrease by the new club, he is perfectly entitled to expect a pay-off from United (it's very common for players to receive pay-offs when leaving clubs, it's just not usually newsworthy). This is on United and their previous ridiculous wage policy.
Click to expand...

People are entitled to hold it against him, just as many are saying he's entitled to everything he can get his mitts on. I'm sure pretty most of us have had redundancy payments (which is what this would be) at some point you should just want to be somewhere that wants you, for your own sense of self-respect. Move on, and worse, don't look like some sort of grasping failure.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.