Sounds just what we need. He has to be better than Beattie and Moore that's for sure!! (Then again most players are!!).
He'll do well. He's an extremely hard worker, a good finisher most of the time (though his composure needs to be worked on), his movement is good, he's reasonably quick, he's strong and can use both feet... ... Can we have him back? :sad1:
What in God's name you were thinking buying Beattie I don't know. I watched him a fair amount when he went on loan to Sheff and my God he was awful.
i thought it was a good piece of business for you Maybe Graham had an amazing season, which might not have been repeated for many seasons to come? I also believe you have a 15% clause on his next transfer? I dont think he'll cut it in the PL .. like Jay Bothroyd But on the other hand Graham is twice as good as him in my opinion
exactly you summed it up in your first two sentances. danny was never going to score another 27 goals next season, and his value would undoubtedly fall over the next year. good business sense all round i reckon.
I agree. And i hope he has a terrible season, him going to swansea sort of tells you why :biggrin::sign13:
hehe. to be fair i think danny will struggle in the premiership. for what its worth i hope he does brilliantly. as for cardiff i think next year will probs be much the same as this year and the last. i dont doubt the new managers ability but im sure your squad will be quite as capable. still all the best, never have a problem with fans who dont come on to brag.
Cheers mate, i wish you hornets the best too. I cant say where id expect you to finish because at the moment, yourselves dont even know whats going on. We have experienced that also, we thought we was going into admin, but these investors came to the rescue and we havnt looked back since. Us cardiff fans have nothing to brag about, we have bottled it every season for the past 3 years. :doh:
If only there were some money bags on the horizon -_- oh well, back to cutting out cloth and getting very very down about things.
We was very fortunate mind Peter Risdale was ruining us :doh: We really thought there would be no club if he carried on
Your record signing at the time wasn't he too? A mighty £700k or so? If I had been drinking tea when I saw that I would have spat it out. Hilariously awful piece of business. Now of course you can spend £700k on the tea lady! How quickly things change. Good luck next season matey.
Looks like Carlisle aren't too happy: http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/sport/9124661.Carlisle_call_on_Watford_to_reveal_transfer_details/
IMO it is a bloody travesty that they are entitled to any sell on fee at all. Danny was only a few weeks short of 24, and out of contract (I think?) Also, they had very little, if anything, to do with his development in the first place!!! Most of it was done by Middlesbro :rant::rant::rant:
Reading that article, there was 1 thing that stood out to me, and that was the bit at the end regarding the sell on clause we have in place for Danny Graham if he should leave Swansea for any transfer fee during his time there. I fail to see how, once we have paid Carlisle what we owe them courtesy of that ridiculous tribunal for his transfer to Swansea, that we should have anything to do with Carlisle & any future sale of Danny Graham. Why should they be entitled to a further 15% of the 20% (however much £££), that we may one day make on the potential transfer of Danny Graham away from Swansea. Surely this means, if a player moves club once, with a sell-on clause in place, and proceeds to make a chain of, for example, 4 further moves, all involving sell-on clauses - then does this mean that the club at the start of the chain gets money from all the future sales of the player? If so, then quite frankly, how bl00dy ridiculous. Still, I get the feeling Carlisle won't be our biggest fans at this rate if we're not paying them - though, Swansea didn't pay Ipswich for part of the Priskin loan, so we might not have received the full amount yet anyway for the DG deal.
I agree that everything about the tribunal and Cardiff getting compensation for Graham is completely ridiculous. But as it stands, they are entitled to 15% of whatever money we made on him. So that's 15% of £3m + 15% of whatever we get on a sell-on clause... Surely, this means that we're entitled to 15% of whatever sell-on clause Villa have negotiated for Young. I'm rooting for an £80m move to Madrid next summer :sign15:
Ermmmm Do you think so? Shane Long is valued at £10mill by Reading,we should have sent the same message out as they have done.Ok they will def not get £10mill for him but it would make them think that they ain't gonna have the p!ss taken out of them.
They don't need the money..from what I hear we did pretty quickly but I tend to agree we could've got more.
So, you think we should have slapped a £10m price tag on his head, virtually forcing him to activate his £2.5m release clause at the first opportunity? That makes sense ..
I can understand to a point that we need the money badly,it's common knowledge,but we don't have to be suckers and except such low bids and act desperate.Swansea will net around £65mill plus for reaching the prem,we could have said match £5mill or go away.Simple's...
You haven't been paying attention, have you? Read this, and think about it: http://www.wfcforums.com/showthread.php?p=612845
The Watford Observer UNDERSTANDS..which is wrong,as if the 1st bid from swansea was £2.5mill they would not of had it turned down because it would have released the clause,and they would not have had to pay £3.5mill.
In Football Manager yes, the clause would have been activated instantly. But in the real world, DG chose to keep quiet about the clause until we got a better offer. But if you're convinced that the WO are just making this up, so be it. Your choice I guess..
There was a clause, but not a minimum fee release clause. The clause was such, that if a club offered £2.5m, then we were obliged to let Danny talk to the club if he wanted to. DG knew there would be numerous bidders, and that he would be on his way over the summer - he just didn't want to force a move too soon and put the club in a tight spot. Why cause a disturbance by raising the issue over such a clause, if he knew he'd probably be off at some point anyway.
Yes he did,and if the club receive a bid that activates it the club has to inform the player or the club are in breach of the contract written into his contract,for which a player then can sue the club.The wobbly were guessing at his clause and everyone jumped on to it as it being gospel..I am also surprised that the club didn't say an Undisclosed fee..Like Mackill-smith from Peterborough to Brighton,but everyone knows that Smith went for more than £3mill,infact it was near on £4mill with apps..Which is more than we got for a top scorer in this league which is why I think it is a very poor fee we got for Danny.
Coming from Peterborough I know they have a history of talking up the bids they've received until a player eventually leaves for much less.
