shurlock

What's your point? Not interested in what other clubs pay for our players -if they overpay for them, all the better. Doesn't mean we have to. There isn't some unwritten code that you have to sell high and buy high.

By comparison, £800k for Fraizer Campbell was a great bit of business.

Would have taken Frazier Campbell for £800K.

Look on the bright side. Shane Long > Kevin Doyle > Dave Kitson

Come on, he had Shane Long in his pocket for the whole of the Hull game.

Pace - he never quite recovered that after Hutton's tackle. Workrate，I'll give you but would rather take a chance with a Champo player for what he brings and what they're allegedly asking.

IIRC Yoshida won mongboard man of the match for his performance against the deadly duo of Long and Jelavic. Says it all.

Corrected for you.

How much less?

All will be forgiven with Brett if we sign Long. Think he'd be a poor signing -a low scoring workhorse- someone else who, like Pelle, is only as good service as the service he gets. If we're playing in this part of the market, rather we put in a cheeky bid for Berahino.

A few clunky touches there.

Don't agree with dropping Artur, if that's what happens. He's nothing wrong and we finished the season strongly after he came back in - should be his job to lose till he f**ks up. Poor decision.

At least, its honest about its sources. The Echo could learn a thing or two.

No -he referred to 1 or 2 in a general, unqualified sense i.e. by the end of the window. Wont get too hung about it. One or two is as much as a colloquialism as a statement that needs to be understood literally.

Also said something about 1 or 2 more signings - hope that it was in a figurative sense.

It's a massive, massive ask expecting to him step in and be an automatic starting CB. On paper it's a downgrade on Lovren. Would be happy if we signed or took on loan a 2nd CB to be on the safe side.

Very easily as anyone who watched us will attest. From starting most games, JWP was gradually phased out and featured largely as a sub, not least because our bench was so threadbare. Cork ended the season starting more games (he started more games overall) and got the nod whenever there was an injury in midfield, so much so that MP preferred to play him out of position than start JWP (e.g. Everton (h) where he played further forward). Indeed, towards the end, Cork, Schneiderlin and Wanyama all started, even though it was claimed they could never play together. HTH.

In relation to the OP, one suggestion might be to set up a central pot to which all clubs contribute (perhaps it could be funded progressively, with the richer clubs contributing more). Whatever the formula, teams that field an English player for more than 60mins in a game are then paid a bonus out of this kitty.

No doubt, it's used for the simplest of tasks -to screen thousands of players by position/contractual status. Would be surprised if any half-decent club relied on its detailed player evaluations or anything other than initial donkey work.

Navas -) Dzeko -) Aguero Bish, Bash, Bosh.

What happens if Morgan goes and Wanyama gets injured? Cork is effectively our only one real DM. Taider can put his foot in but isn't a holding player in the same ilk.

I don't know -a Beeb article vaguely mentioned that if Cortese left, Shaw could go; but it felt like a throwaway comment, typical Cortese bull**** and self-aggrandisement a la AC Milan variety. VFTT said that Shaw had spoken to Chelsea, arguing that was proof of a release clause; but even if true, such a statement is also perfectly consistent with there being no automatic release clause -perhaps we were happy/willing to sell Shaw; perhaps there was an informal understanding -as is suggested is the case with Morgan- that Shaw could go at the end of the season if an acceptable bid came in. At the same time, it's odd that no media pointed to it -after all, they have dedicated reporters covering every minute detail of United's ongoings. Suggestions that we were able to negotiate on the fee is also inconsistent with a release clause. By definition, there is no room to hold out over the fee with such a clause. Either way, Shaw's situation is different from that of Chambers. And everything else I've said above stands.

Mights, coulds, woulds Your whole argument depends on the leap of faith that "this is the new age of football" with little or no evidence. Your reductio ad absurdum would imply that virtually every talented, savvy player would or should have one. Did Lovren have one too? Is that why he threatened to go on strike. Painfully tenuous is too much of a compliment. Never mind that release clauses are virtually unheard of in the English game and the players who have them enjoyed infinitely more bargaining power than Chambers. http://www.theguardian.com/football/charles-russell-sports-law-blog/2014/jan/20/rooney-cabaye-buy-out-contracts-premeier-league Never mind that we would have probably heard about them if they existed. Never mind that the club clearly and unanimously stated it's policy - that selling players was a choice, that keeping wantaway players would have been an insane risk, that Chambers was a 'present' from Koeman to the board. Never mind it would have been in the club's interests to come out and say that it's hands were tied by the existence of release clauses. Never mind that all the reports pointing to negotiations over price would have been a logical impossibility if a release clause existed. It's a whole new age of football, innit.

No you carry on pal. You're like the Hallmark cards equivalent of liberal truisms. They bring a smile to my face everyday.

Very few players in the premiership have release clauses full-stop.