by Skin » 20 Jun 2008 00:21
by The 17 Bus » 20 Jun 2008 04:18
by The 17 Bus » 20 Jun 2008 04:21
The 17 Bus I must be missing something here, there is no way that Chelsea will pay Sidwell for another year when he goes, they will almost certainly make up the difference is wages for a year but no more.
by Stranded » 20 Jun 2008 08:56
by West Stand Man » 20 Jun 2008 08:58
The 17 BusThe 17 Bus I must be missing something here, there is no way that Chelsea will pay Sidwell for another year when he goes, they will almost certainly make up the difference is wages for a year but no more.
If this gem is correct then we must have been paying Halford for last season???? And this coming season as he was on a 3 year deal here, and presumably Sunderland will also keep paying him if he goes to Charlton, he must be raking it in.
by Uke » 20 Jun 2008 09:20
West Stand ManThe 17 BusThe 17 Bus I must be missing something here, there is no way that Chelsea will pay Sidwell for another year when he goes, they will almost certainly make up the difference is wages for a year but no more.
If this gem is correct then we must have been paying Halford for last season???? And this coming season as he was on a 3 year deal here, and presumably Sunderland will also keep paying him if he goes to Charlton, he must be raking it in.
???? The reason that Chelsea are 'offering' (as part of the deal) to cover the gap in Sidwell's wages is because he has a contract and they have sold him 'without his request'. IF Halford went to Sunderland on a deal that saw his salary drop in comparison with what we were paying then maybe he did get a bit of a payback from here - but I suspect that Sunderland matched what we were paying. Also, he was obviously keen to leave here and so he probably took whatever was goinmg just to get out quickly? Now that he has gone to Charlton it is Sunderland's problem to resolve any contractual issues with them.
by Royalwaster » 20 Jun 2008 09:23
by Dirk Gently » 20 Jun 2008 10:36
by RG30 » 20 Jun 2008 11:16
Royalwaster It's pretty depressing really that the main discussion thread on this site is this non-rumour or rather out-of-date non-rumour on Sidwell .... can't someone recycle a Matty Upson or Robbie Fowler rumour?
by Roger the Rabbit » 20 Jun 2008 11:51
Uke [
In Halford's case, we informed clubs that if they made an offer we would listen. Suderland made an offer, RFC informed Halford, and Halford accepted.
In Sidewell's case, Sidwell has been informed he is surplus to requirements, Chelse have put Sidwell up for sale, against his 'will'. Therefore compensation is required.
by Uke » 20 Jun 2008 15:05
Roger the RabbitUke In Halford's case, we informed clubs that if they made an offer we would listen. Suderland made an offer, RFC informed Halford, and Halford accepted.
In Sidewell's case, Sidwell has been informed he is surplus to requirements, Chelse have put Sidwell up for sale, against his 'will'. Therefore compensation is required.
Halford's case was even different to hat - didn;t Sunderland simply come in and ask if he was for sale ? We didn;t offer him to anyone. We could therefore stipulate as part of the deal that Sunderland agreed personal terms with him that included a wage that removed any commitment for us to pay him anything.
by 1871royals » 22 Mar 2009 16:20
by Deathy » 22 Mar 2009 18:02
by Smoking Kills Dancing Doe » 22 Mar 2009 20:27
Deathy
by loyalroyal4life » 23 Mar 2009 00:38
Deathy
by Deathy » 23 Mar 2009 20:20
Smoking Kills Dancing Doe
It's always a worry when Jay makes me lol.....
by Ozymandias » 24 Mar 2009 13:29
1871royals Sidders isnt in the Villa squad again. They have got Salifou (?) on the bench ahead of him, who's a youngster.
This suggests hes seriously out of favour.
Maybe SC could make a cheeky enquiry?
by heathrow royal » 24 Mar 2009 14:44
1871royals Sidders isnt in the Villa squad again. They have got Salifou (?) on the bench ahead of him, who's a youngster.
This suggests hes seriously out of favour.
Maybe SC could make a cheeky enquiry?
by Ian Royal » 24 Mar 2009 22:29
by Royal With Cheese » 25 Mar 2009 15:38
Ian Royal Is it me or are a large proportion of those who've joined HNA since 2005 retarded?
Edit: wow, he's been on here since 2004. I guess a large proportion has always been retarded.
Users browsing this forum: WillEOddie and 88 guests