david in sweden Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 ....looks to be the latest target for HR at Spuds, now that they have been priced out of the market for Tevez, BUT the big question is : ..Was there one of the famous Rupert Lowe type " sell-on " clauses in KJ's move to Sunderland ? If so ... ...what is the % of a deal that might be £10-15 million ? He was sold for £6m. ...thats always assuming that there is still an SFC around to collect the fee ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 ....looks to be the latest target for HR at Spuds, now that they have been priced out of the market for Tevez, BUT the big question is : ..Was there one of the famous Rupert Lowe type " sell-on " clauses in KJ's move to Sunderland ? If so ... ...what is the % of a deal that might be £10-15 million ? He was sold for £6m. ...thats always assuming that there is still an SFC around to collect the fee ! No, as we got John in part exchange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 ....looks to be the latest target for HR at Spuds, now that they have been priced out of the market for Tevez, BUT the big question is : ..Was there one of the famous Rupert Lowe type " sell-on " clauses in KJ's move to Sunderland ? If so ... ...what is the % of a deal that might be £10-15 million ? He was sold for £6m. ...thats always assuming that there is still an SFC around to collect the fee !don,t think rupert was around at the time. burley was manager and the club was loseing money bigtime and k jones was refuseing to play alledgley ,makes you wonder now if that stagemanaged for the fans so they could sell him. but at least we got stern in . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alanh Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 It would be good if the board at the time had the foresight to include that clause - it's pretty standard practice after all. To those that claim Stern coming would make this impossible, wasn't it clearly stated at the time that they were two seperate transfer deals and that we paid for Stern? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 20 May, 2009 Author Share Posted 20 May, 2009 It would be good if the board at the time had the foresight to include that clause - it's pretty standard practice after all. To those that claim Stern coming would make this impossible, wasn't it clearly stated at the time that they were two seperate transfer deals and that we paid for Stern? Yes that was my thoughts too, Alanh It seemed at the time that the two deals weren't dependent on each other. It certainly would have been the most sensible thing to do. Did anyone do it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedAndWhite91 Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 Would Sunderland really want to have a sell-on clause included on a deal worth £6million AND Stern John? I hope there is one, but I reckon it's unlikely... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Stripe Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 Does anyone else think that Kenwyne is just a big lump with very little skill? Tin hat has just been buckled up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skintsaint Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 watch him go on strike to get his move. he isnt PL standards at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheff Saint Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 I think £6mil was a very good deal at the time. Certinaly with John coming the other way (don't know if they were two deals but we didn't pay a fee for him) It's sort of broad as it is long. Ideally it would be wonderful to have an extra £1.5 mil coming this summer. But we were where we were at that time and that deal suited us best then, rather than no John or £1mil less on the up-front payment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 watch him go on strike to get his move. he isnt PL standards at all. but did he really go on strike or was he pushed out to raise cash at the time ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctoroncall Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 How much of the fee did Saints actually get as there was a sell-on clause from the team (in T&T?) we bought him from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthieu Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 He didn't go on strike whilst he was here and sunderland came in for him. He was reported as to failing to turn up for training one day (a reporter from the BBC was watching us train and noticed Kenwyne wasn't there and put 2 and 2 together and got 5) whilst Kenwyne was up in Sunderland undergoing a medical as a fee had already been agreed between the 2 clubs. I very much doubt there would have been a sell-on-clause as we got Stern John as part of the deal and Lowe wasn't in charge at the time. As many have alredy pointed out on this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Bizzle Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 People, i know for a fact that Stern John was not part of the Deal, we bought him seperately. Coincidental that they both went opposite directions at the same time. However i don't know whether or not there is a sell on clause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 Would any sell-on clause be valid if one of the parties were no longer trading? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribbo Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 Harrys going to be linked to everyone from now until the transfer window closes, Jones should goto someone like everton or villa, that would be a better fit for him. Hope we get a few bob though, the club sure needs it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 No, we don't. The John and Jones deal may have been separate, but there was no way Sunderland let us have John on a free - no doubt we enquired about him after they bid for Jones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 Does anyone else think that Kenwyne is just a big lump with very little skill? Tin hat has just been buckled up! Nope. Well, I don't, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 (edited) He didn't go on strike whilst he was here and sunderland came in for him. He was reported as to failing to turn up for training one day (a reporter from the BBC was watching us train and noticed Kenwyne wasn't there and put 2 and 2 together and got 5) whilst Kenwyne was up in Sunderland undergoing a medical as a fee had already been agreed between the 2 clubs. I very much doubt there would have been a sell-on-clause as we got Stern John as part of the deal and Lowe wasn't in charge at the time. As many have alredy pointed out on this thread. Interesting that your "he didn't go on strike" comment isn't in line with about a week's worth of OS reporting on the situation : 22nd indicates we were intending on keeping Kenwyne and weren't selling him to Derby in exchange for Darren Moore. http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=8898 24th August 2007 "Jones Wants to Go" indicates a Transfer Request http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=8908 25th August 2007 Saints v Stoke match report begins "With Kenwyne Jones refusing to play"... http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=8912 29th August 2007 "Transfer News" inc the line that "Jones refused to play against Stoke" : http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=8922 Now yes he might have been negotiating with Sunderland once we'd realised he was going to force a move, but he clearly DIDN'T play against Stoke, nor was he injured, and too much of that OS reporting is logical and supported by what we know to be true for it to be completely fabricated. Rumour from BBC on Sunday 26th August about Jones to Sunderland and John to Saints though, that's pretty early in the process considering the Transfer Request was only 24th... http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/gossip_and_transfers/6964361.stm Long and short of it was that we rushed a sale as the player was making himself unavailable, and in that situation with our arm forced we weren't in any position to be adding resale clauses. Edited 20 May, 2009 by The9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mack rill Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 After watching him against us the other day i would say a move to Stoke could turn him into a hero, The missiles Rory Can throw would be right down his ally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 It's not like there's no evidence of him trying to agitate a move either : Today : http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/s/sunderland/8059012.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 After watching him against us the other day i would say a move to Stoke could turn him into a hero, The missiles Rory Can throw would be right down his ally. You mean a move BACK to Stoke ? : http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/s/stoke_city/4114830.stm Shall I stop Googling now ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyb1 Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 "His club are uncertain what is going to happen with their main strikers, Peter Crouch and Kevin Phillips." People that could score. Depressing..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mack rill Posted 20 May, 2009 Share Posted 20 May, 2009 You mean a move BACK to Stoke ? : http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/s/stoke_city/4114830.stm Shall I stop Googling now ? FFS! thats fekin spooky;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planetcory Posted 21 May, 2009 Share Posted 21 May, 2009 Interesting that your "he didn't go on strike" comment isn't in line with about a week's worth of OS reporting on the situation : 22nd indicates we were intending on keeping Kenwyne and weren't selling him to Derby in exchange for Darren Moore. http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=8898 24th August 2007 "Jones Wants to Go" indicates a Transfer Request http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=8908 25th August 2007 Saints v Stoke match report begins "With Kenwyne Jones refusing to play"... http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=8912 29th August 2007 "Transfer News" inc the line that "Jones refused to play against Stoke" : http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=8922 Now yes he might have been negotiating with Sunderland once we'd realised he was going to force a move, but he clearly DIDN'T play against Stoke, nor was he injured, and too much of that OS reporting is logical and supported by what we know to be true for it to be completely fabricated. Rumour from BBC on Sunday 26th August about Jones to Sunderland and John to Saints though, that's pretty early in the process considering the Transfer Request was only 24th... http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/gossip_and_transfers/6964361.stm Long and short of it was that we rushed a sale as the player was making himself unavailable, and in that situation with our arm forced we weren't in any position to be adding resale clauses. He was promised he could talk to Premiership clubs, but the Derby bid was blocked and the Sunderland bid was hidden from him. That's why he went on strike. Childish, maybe. But it was because he felt he was lied to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southamptonfclegend Posted 21 May, 2009 Share Posted 21 May, 2009 He didn't go on strike whilst he was here and sunderland came in for him. He was reported as to failing to turn up for training one day (a reporter from the BBC was watching us train and noticed Kenwyne wasn't there and put 2 and 2 together and got 5) whilst Kenwyne was up in Sunderland undergoing a medical as a fee had already been agreed between the 2 clubs. I very much doubt there would have been a sell-on-clause as we got Stern John as part of the deal and Lowe wasn't in charge at the time. As many have alredy pointed out on this thread. unless i'm mistaken, it was put on the Saints website etc? so if it was just a bbc reporter why would it have been on the saints website? and why did he not play? and why did he not deny it? :smt117 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dicko Posted 21 May, 2009 Share Posted 21 May, 2009 I'd be surprised if Spurs bought him He doesn't score enough goals & if Tottenham want to break into the top 4 or 5 next year, Kenwyne will need to bag 15-20 goals Can't see it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rooney Posted 22 May, 2009 Share Posted 22 May, 2009 He is the sort of loyal player everybody wants in a team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 24 May, 2009 Author Share Posted 24 May, 2009 I'd be surprised if Spurs bought him He doesn't score enough goals & if Tottenham want to break into the top 4 or 5 next year, Kenwyne will need to bag 15-20 goals Can't see it I see your point, but both at Saints and Sunderland he lacked the service and midfield support. Spurs are a stronger side in midfield and with Lennon on the wing , KJ could get a hatful next season, besides which HR likes to buy back his "old " players from other clubs, and he may recall KJs time at Saints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now