I still cannot quite believe how low the release clause was, if it indeed it was 300k. Over a barrel or not, 300k is peanuts in this day and age, and we should've demanded it was set at 750k at least, surely!
Completely agree.
I know he was our top scorer for two seasons in a row,but he bent us over a table during the summer and he let the big boys have there way with us by adding a £300k release fee! We should had told him to sod off instead of agreeing to that low figure after he was messing us about during the summer - its our fault,not his.As he has shown everyone what a souless,disrespectful person he is.There's ways you improve yourself and your career/lifestyle, and then there's ways you don't.
Pretty sure Matty will soon discover that if you lie down with dogs you'll eventually end up with fleas.
We should just put our toys back in the pram and let this go now. One day he'll look back on this and realise how classless his behaviour was all by himself.
Part of me thinks we should let it go too. Then I think that if it were such common knowledge that he could be picked up by the first club to offer the 300k release fee provided he wanted to go, why were The Dark Side apparently the only club to make the offer we were 'powerless to prevent' - and not a penny more?
If I were a supporter of The Dark Side, I wouldn't be too quick to crow over this deal either and would be asking questions as well. I'd be wondering why, when their eleventh hour swoop was part of such a blatent attempt to blindside us, the management were even willing to take the tiniest gamble that the Football League would deduct much-needed points from the club or impose a stiff financial penalty in response. Neither of these scenarios are particularly likely, but they're not impossible either. And that was a risk that Lansdown was willing to take. Must feel good to have the club in such a safe pair of hands...
No, I don't think I'd let it go. On the strength of what little we know, I'd pursue it. Given the club obviously know more about what went on, if they think they're justified in making a complaint then I'm happy to get behind them on this one.
They think we have a good chance of getting some payback for being very shabbily treated.
Or
This is the club's way of telling the fans what happened. We got shafted by MT, 82 and agent.
If release clauses are supposed to be confidential and the club believe contract terms have been breached, in any other business we would have a case.
Doubt it in football, but Clarkes "£10M" comment takes on a new shine now. To me this was him taking the water as he knew they were going to come in and offer peanuts and get him. Perhaps.
They think we have a good chance of getting some payback for being very shabbily treated.
Or
This is the club's way of telling the fans what happened. We got shafted by MT, 82 and agent.
If release clauses are supposed to be confidential and the club believe contract terms have been breached, in any other business we would have a case.
Doubt it in football, but Clarkes "£10M" comment takes on a new shine now. To me this was him taking the p**s as he knew they were going to come in and offer peanuts and get him. Perhaps.
I think it's very likely that this is simply a way to let the fans know what actually happened. I doubt they genuinely believe there will be any viable follow-up or positive outcome from this.
If MT's contract contained a confidentiality clause (appropriately drafted) and it is broken then in contact law there would be a right to due for damages. Whether the breach could be proved is another matter and whether the club would want to go to court yet again is another question. Clearly someone has told the press and possibly others and as a consequence the club has lost possible transfer income or the players services without compensation. I suspect who spilled the beans we shall never know but what is clear is that someone broke silence and as a result we have lost money. Presumably not all clubs knew the amount of the release clause or may have assumed it was just press talk.
It seems to me if there has been a breach of a contractual arrangement the matter should be investigated with legal advice.
A contract that made us £300K better off than we would have been if he had not signed it. It is true the 300K figure has been rumoured for a while, much as I hate them I don't think any investigation will be suggesting the 82ers did anything wrong, more likely the player and/or his agent.
If this scenario is correct then damages could be perused against the party to the agreement in breach of its terms.
Its been common knowledge for ages about it being 300k. Non story.
I think there is a story here. If someone has breached an agreement that could have cost the club millions then the directors of the club would in my view have a fiduciary duty to investigate the breach and pursue damages if it were in the clubs best interests to do so.