Mahrez to Man City shock

[lcfc sheff]

1 hour ago, Gerard said:

 

I don't mind it at all actually, it's just negotiating but in the public arena.

 

For me he's probably the greatest Leicester City player of all time and if not definitely the most skilful and easiest on the eye. I'll miss watching him but the more I think of it the more I've warmed to the idea of selling him. He's run his race here after 4.5 years and with him being 28 in February it's probably an ideal time to sell him whilst his value is at it's peak. He's done everything for this club in getting us out of the Championship and winning the Premier League to a QF Champions League place and is now leaving for the best part of a £75m profit.  We move on and perhaps we won't miss him that much with Pereria providing attacking width and Maddison and AN Other could prove to be £70m players in time?  I also think Gray looks far better on the right and this could be the making of him. The timing of Mahrez leaving is as good as it can be IMO.

This.

 

Make or break season for him, got the potential just needs some consistency.

[Gerard]

1 minute ago, mozartfox said:

If one good thing comes out of this, it should be that the Club will not, under any circumstances have dealings with Joorabchian ever again. 

 

That won't happen, needs must.

 

Joorabchian isn't the most popular person in the blue side of Manchester after the Tevez affair but if you want a player and he's their agent then you just have to grin and bare it. It's nice that we can back him into a corner and he has little ammunition to fire back with though as we have the whip hand on whether we decide to throw Mahrez a few quid or not. 

 

 

[mozartfox]

1 minute ago, Gerard said:

 

That won't happen, needs must.

 

Joorabchian isn't the most popular person in the blue side of Manchester after the Tevez affair but if you want a player and he's their agent then you just have to grin and bare it. It's nice that we can back him into a corner and he has little ammunition to fire back with though as we have the whip hand on whether we decide to throw Mahrez a few quid or not. 

 

 

Disagree Pal. LCFC just need to steer clear of his stable - simples.

[murphy]

44 minutes ago, Gerard said:

 

There will be no lawyers or court cases. It will be sorted out beforehand if he leaves.

 

Either we'll pay up, agree on a compromised figure or tell Mahrez and Joorabchian that they have to waive their right to a fee from Leicester.

I hope that you're right but I can see a third scenario where Pep decides that RM is more trouble than he is worth and pulls the plug.  I think that he would expect a mid table player to be prepared to crawl over broken glass to sign for the champions not drag his feet.

 

It was reported that he wasn't very impressed with Mahrez' behaviour in January.

[the fox]

 People actually think this can't make it in Man City  

 

 

[the fox]

People just need to look at Man City's wingers Sane isn't called up to the NT (granted, they have a great team) and Raheem looks so lethargic in this England side

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

13 minutes ago, the fox said:

 People actually think this can't make it in Man City  

 

 

Jeez, what a highlight reel.  He'll be ok

[That_Dude]

1 hour ago, mozartfox said:

If his Agent had done his job properly back in January, then Mahrez might be entitled to his loyalty Bonus.  Going on strike will not help his case if he is stupid enough to take King Power on in a Court of Law.   He breached his contract with LCFC by going AWOL, so effectively LCFC could argue their obligations have terminated as far as paying any Loyalty Bonus, which I would argue could not be reinstated anyway (unless agreed with LCFC) after asking for a Transfer.

 

Lawyers will paw over this for Years at a cost of Millions to the Club, Mahrez and his Agent.  Just go Mahrez please.

Going AWOL was certainly part of the plan, a way to definitely burn the bridges with the club and make a statement, since the price and conditions for his eventual transfer were never clearly defined. It's undoubtedly ugly from a supporter's point of view but certainly not as stupid as many think. He only was fined for it and the strategy seems to have paid.

 

As for this loyalty bonus if he's legally entitled to it then he should get it. If not, then he can go do one. I seriously don't see where the problem is.

[Mr Hanky]

1 hour ago, yorkie1999 said:

It's like reading something from an Enid Blyton story.

So Mahrez's agent has kidnapped Rudkin, and is holding him captive along with Uncle Quentin on Kirrin island until we pay him a loyalty bonus ?

 

NOW this thread makes sense

[Nick]

1 hour ago, murphy said:

I think that you are misunderstanding the feelings of many in here. 

 

Personally I am not remotely bitter at him leaving, I want him gone and you're confusing hate with irritation and the refusal to accept a player and his agent manipulating a deal to the detriment of the club.  I don't hate him in the least so please stop projecting these unfounded feelings on to others and telling us how we feel.

 

 

Alright touchy! ? 

 

You chose to respond to this and I didn’t reply directly to you. I’m not projecting **** all and I’m certainly not telling you how you are feeling and your response is a bit weird tbh. 

 

I was however responding to the children on here calling Mahrez names and demonstrating their complete lack of understanding of modern off field football.

 

 

 

 

[Finn Claw II]

2 hours ago, Gerard said:

 

There will be no lawyers or court cases. It will be sorted out beforehand if he leaves.

 

Either we'll pay up, agree on a compromised figure or tell Mahrez and Joorabchian that they have to waive their right to a fee from Leicester.

 

Well there will be lawyers because the player and club will have one looking at the contracts.  His entitlement to a loyalty bonus will all depend on the specifics of his contract and nothing more.

 

if the wording in the contract is unclear, then it gets a it more interesting legally but I agree it will all get sorted out in the next couple of weeks.

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

@Swan Lesta you can tell me how to feel if you want to. 

I'm sick of trying to work out what I feel for myself, too much confusion

Honestly would be simpler if someone else just told me and then I could end the internal conflict

 

[Gerard]

5 minutes ago, Finn Claw II said:

 

Well there will be lawyers because the player and club will have one looking at the contracts.  His entitlement to a loyalty bonus will all depend on the specifics of his contract and nothing more.

 

if the wording in the contract is unclear, then it gets a it more interesting legally but I agree it will all get sorted out in the next couple of weeks.

 

It doesn't matter if he's legally entitled or not.

 

The club can ask him to waive his right to any payment or force him to put another transfer request and threaten him with the deal won't get done without one. The £7m we don't pay Mahrez might be the difference of this deal being acceptable or not acceptable. 

 

It could come down to a battle of wills. Leicester on one side prepared to not sanction the sale of Mahrez unless he waives his right to the £7m and Mahrez on the other prepared to scuttle his move to Man City and the £50k a week wage rise that goes with it. If that's the scenario then Mahrez will almost certainly buckle first and there will be a huge time pressure from Man City saying either sort it out or we'll pull out the deal and look elsewhere.

[lcfc sheff]

He's staying put, European football will soon return 

[ozleicester]

2 hours ago, the fox said:

 People actually think this can't make it in Man City  

 

 

Will always be the genius... but, he does go left virtually EVERYTIME 

[KingsX]

I don’t get the “let him rot at Belvoir” or “don’t sell at any price” extremes of this argument.  The Wednesday forum has reached its hundredth page of meltdown over the Owls’ loss of 1M pounds when George Hirst walked at the end of his contract.  Caused in large part by the club’s refusal to play or loan him when he turned down a cheap renewal.  65M down the tubes would impact LCFC  every bit as much.

 

Last year, when the conventional wisdom was that a club our size would have to sell an unhappy player, I stated that was unlikely.  Our owners would take the longer view and refuse such stupid business.  But Mahrez was a year younger, had three years left, and the only offer on the table was a joke from AS Roma.

 

Oil City’s offer is no joke.  As others noted, it would be at the high end for two, age-28 and 29 contract years. 

 

Brass tacks, if he stays we will have to bump his wages.  And yet at best will see only “2016-17” level Mahrez.  At worst we will see a disruptive player. 

 

I’ll say again, this two year mark is the point where the interest of club and player most nearly converge -- on a move.  

[Countryfox]

3 minutes ago, KingsX said:

I don’t get the “let him rot at Belvoir” or “don’t sell at any price” extremes of this argument.  The Wednesday forum has reached its hundredth page of meltdown over the Owls’ loss of 1M pounds when George Hirst walked at the end of his contract.  Caused in large part by the club’s refusal to play or loan him when he turned down a cheap renewal.  65M down the tubes would impact LCFC  every bit as much.

 

Last year, when the conventional wisdom was that a club our size would have to sell an unhappy player, I stated that was unlikely.  Our owners would take the longer view and refuse such stupid business.  But Mahrez was a year younger, had three years left, and the only offer on the table was a joke from AS Roma.

 

Oil City’s offer is no joke.  As others noted, it would be at the high end for two, age-28 and 29 contract years. 

 

Brass tacks, if he stays we will have to bump his wages.  And yet at best will see only “2016-17” level Mahrez.  At worst we will see a disruptive player. 

 

I’ll say again, this two year mark is the point where the interest of club and player most nearly converge -- on a move.  

 Can’t disagree with a word you say but sometimes, when playing hardball, the short term loss is far outweighed by the long term gain ...   at the end of the day it’s down to the owners and I for one back whatever decision they make 100%.

[Al-aLondon-Foxile]

Anyone else only looking on the transfer forum to see if this is locked yet? 

[WigstonWanderer]

27 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

Touche.  

 

And just the comma required above but a massive improvement in the use of wit, full stops, spacing and capital letters.

 

 

I’d have used a full stop

[Buce]

45 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

I’d have used a full stop

 

Hmmm.

[Finn Claw II]

2 hours ago, Gerard said:

 

It doesn't matter if he's legally entitled or not.

 

The club can ask him to waive his right to any payment or force him to put another transfer request and threaten him with the deal won't get done without one. The £7m we don't pay Mahrez might be the difference of this deal being acceptable or not acceptable. 

 

It could come down to a battle of wills. Leicester on one side prepared to not sanction the sale of Mahrez unless he waives his right to the £7m and Mahrez on the other prepared to scuttle his move to Man City and the £50k a week wage rise that goes with it. If that's the scenario then Mahrez will almost certainly buckle first and there will be a huge time pressure from Man City saying either sort it out or we'll pull out the deal and look elsewhere.

I agree with most of this but it absolutely matters if he is legally entitled to it or not. If he isn’t entitled to it (because of the previous transfer request) then we won’t pay it.

 

£7m equates to about 70k a week over two years.  It is huge sum of money, even if he is already extremely wealthy. 

 

Put another way if we have accepted a bid and now we are saying to Man City it is too low because we hadn’t factored in a legally bound bonus to the player, then who looks bad us or Mahrez?  It’s not like his contract is a surprise to us.

 

 

 

[Gerard]

25 minutes ago, Finn Claw II said:

I agree with most of this but it absolutely matters if he is legally entitled to it or not. If he isn’t entitled to it (because of the previous transfer request) then we won’t pay it.

 

£7m equates to about 70k a week over two years.  It is huge sum of money, even if he is already extremely wealthy. 

 

Put another way if we have accepted a bid and now we are saying to Man City it is too low because we hadn’t factored in a legally bound bonus to the player, then who looks bad us or Mahrez?  It’s not like his contract is a surprise to us.

 

 

 

 

Technically you're almost certainly right but my point is it's irrelevant.

 

The powers that be might feel aggrieved with Mahrez and there might be plenty of bad blood. Leicester might refuse Mahrez his £7.5m "loyalty bonus" by saying that he has requested a transfer by proxy which is true. The decision to withdraw his transfer request was an obvious cynical one so he was still entitled to his "loyalty bonus".

 

Leicester may demand he legally waives his right to his "loyalty bonus" or puts in another transfer request rendering it invalid and thus not entitled to it. If Mahrez refuses then Leicester may refuse to sanction the transfer. If the club play hardball and insist on him doing this then they have his testicles in a vice like grip and will squeeze to his eyes water.

 

Mahrez can't afford to play hardball and stay at Leicester and watch his big move and £50k a week pay rise go down the pan. Would you trust our owners not to throw him to the wolves if they're severely pissed off? Personally I wouldn't put it past them as Mahrez can't afford not to leave this window but we can afford to not bend for Mahrez and Joorabchian. 

[mikey54]

I firmly believe this thread should be locked until we get a definitive quote from either club. All I’ve read is heresay and trading insults.

Edited 25 June 2018 by mikey54

[wurmer]

Whatever happens, he won't kick another ball for the club - it will either be his choice or ours, but the same net effect.

[mazarron fox]

This is leaving  a bad taste when we should be sending him on his way with our love and thanks. Truth is man in the street or multi million pound footballer can be a top bloke or a scroat. It seems his legacy is being watered down by all this sadly.