Babylon Posted 3 February 2025 Posted 3 February 2025 (edited) 1 hour ago, st albans fox said: There’s no criteria on an obligation ……. its an obligation if it’s an obligation based on criteria being met then it’s an option that becomes an obligation They are the obligated if promoted and not obligated if they aren’t. Not sure what people are arguing here. They would have no option, the contract would stipulate if they go up they must buy him. Hence an obligation Obligation just means legally bound to do something. There could be any number of stipulations in a legally binding contract. Edited 3 February 2025 by Babylon 2 1
Babylon Posted 3 February 2025 Posted 3 February 2025 2 hours ago, SecretPro said: What do we need a replacement for? He shouldn't be anywhere near the first team this season? But he is isn’t he though. Having already lost one winger to injury, another injury and he’s going to be involved more than he already has been.
Babylon Posted 3 February 2025 Posted 3 February 2025 1 hour ago, ACF said: Not sure you know what an obligation means fella! Obligation: Morally or legally bound to do something… They would be legally bound to purchase them if promoted at that price. It’s the very definition of an obligation
st albans fox Posted 3 February 2025 Posted 3 February 2025 36 minutes ago, Babylon said: But he is isn’t he though. Having already lost one winger to injury, another injury and he’s going to be involved more than he already has been. 7 minutes ago, Babylon said: Obligation: Morally or legally bound to do something… They would be legally bound to purchase them if promoted at that price. It’s the very definition of an obligation You know no more than anyone else does There’s no deal agreed so we wont find out 1
Nods Posted 3 February 2025 Posted 3 February 2025 (edited) 1 hour ago, Babylon said: Kasey has played 16 games this year in some capacity. So that would suggest we do need him; even if it’s just as back up. It’s not even an obligation either, it’s based on promotion apparently. So we could weaken ourselves and get nothing. We also are hardly blessed with options at full back. We’re an injury away from either of them needing to play more than we’d probably want them to be. And I've used a knackered, old Srixon Soft Feel for my last few rounds of golf, but if someone offered me a tenner for it, I'd gnaw their arm off. We don't need anybody, least of all somebody as devoid of quality as Kasey McAteer. Edited 3 February 2025 by Nods 2
ACF Posted 3 February 2025 Posted 3 February 2025 20 minutes ago, Babylon said: Obligation: Morally or legally bound to do something… They would be legally bound to purchase them if promoted at that price. It’s the very definition of an obligation Was unaware it was a promotion based obligation - I hadn’t read that.
TheGoldenGod Posted 3 February 2025 Posted 3 February 2025 3 hours ago, SecretPro said: What do we need a replacement for? He shouldn't be anywhere near the first team this season? Because the guy wants to argue with people for the sake of it. Everyone's tired of him being contrarian.🤣 1
Angus Scott Posted 3 February 2025 Posted 3 February 2025 For christ's sake just take any offer for the likes of Mcateer, Thomas, Choudary & plenty of others. Just get rid of them, they are terrible players & any money is a bonus. They are all Division 1 at best 1 1
Sly Posted 3 February 2025 Posted 3 February 2025 Surely the fact we’ve rejected this, tells its own story? He’s needed here. He’s okay in the Championship. Some will disagree. He’s not going to set the world alight but he’s got fight. Similar to Choudhury, in that he cares but ability just isn’t at the level we aspire to be at.
-sodapop Posted 3 February 2025 Posted 3 February 2025 Transfer team were probably home with their feet up when this one came in - only reason I can think that we rejected that is they couldn't be ****ed to head back into the office
st albans fox Posted 3 February 2025 Posted 3 February 2025 15 minutes ago, ACF said: Was unaware it was a promotion based obligation - I hadn’t read that. There’s no evidence that it was there’s more evidence that it isn’t - as in it wasn’t mentioned by ornstein. an obligation based on meeting criteria isn’t an obligation is it !
SouthStandUpperTier Posted 3 February 2025 Posted 3 February 2025 1 minute ago, st albans fox said: an obligation based on meeting criteria isn’t an obligation is it ! They are very common. Both Fatawu and Akgun were criteria driven obligations last season. Fatawu's was triggered (promotion), Akgun's wasn't (appearances). 1
filbertway Posted 3 February 2025 Posted 3 February 2025 Wild that this was rejected Unless something is announced later then fair play. Nobody will ever offer that kind of money for him again 4
Leicesterpool Posted 4 February 2025 Posted 4 February 2025 He missed most of last season due to injury and the glimpses weve seen of him this year aint exactly set the world alight. I don't think he makes any difference to the team if hes there or not. Premier League is not his level at present. I'd rather have Sunderlands jobe bellingham.
Bluearmyfox28 Posted 4 February 2025 Posted 4 February 2025 The master of negotiating Jon Rudkin in action once again.
EastAnglianFox Posted 4 February 2025 Posted 4 February 2025 This lad will leave for nothing once his contract is up…yet another one 1
st albans fox Posted 4 February 2025 Posted 4 February 2025 8 hours ago, SouthStandUpperTier said: They are very common. Both Fatawu and Akgun were criteria driven obligations last season. Fatawu's was triggered (promotion), Akgun's wasn't (appearances). Yes I know that they’re common but people are assuming that this deal was like that and we have no evidence whatsoever that this is the case I’ve seen plenty of deals like this described as ‘option to buy which becomes an obligation on promotion or no of games played’. Usually if it’s loan with straight obligation (which is more than possible here as that’s all we’ve had via ornstein) then that means the buying club want to stick the fee into their next financial year. That’s perhaps what made us reject.
Foxmeister Posted 7 February 2025 Posted 7 February 2025 On 03/02/2025 at 22:02, Babylon said: Obligation: Morally or legally bound to do something… They would be legally bound to purchase them if promoted at that price. It’s the very definition of an obligation What if he didn't agree his terms?
Bptiger Posted 8 February 2025 Posted 8 February 2025 I seen him come on but he was missing in action , can’t see what the manager sees in him , he is not up to this grade
richardsfoxes Posted 8 February 2025 Posted 8 February 2025 He's great and getting into amazing positions which sometimes is half the battle but doesn't have the ability to take advantage of it where as cannon has lots of ability but doesn't get into great positions.
Tielemans63 Posted 9 February 2025 Posted 9 February 2025 I doubt will ever get an offer that good for him again. Should have accepted that bid from Sunderland.
AyewJoking Posted 10 February 2025 Posted 10 February 2025 i reckon we'd have happily sold Thomas and McAteer if the squad was stronger and we had players coming in. Despite being a bit shit, we need them
Recommended Posts