Pulis - third year contract option taken up?

[Chez]

So did he or we take up the third year option on his contract? He signed on 29th August two years ago.

[JustMike]

better not have!

[Appy]

I expect Man City will go for him now Robinho has left.

[SaintRichmond]

So did he or we take up the third year option on his contract? He signed on 29th August two years ago.

 

YES ..... and that counts as Cortese's NEW Squad signing

[Matthew Le God]

When a contract is signed and it says it is a 2 year or 3 year deal - it does NOT mean it is 2 or 3 years to the day.

 

Football contracts in England end on 30th June.

[SaintRichmond]

When a contract is signed and it says it is a 2 year or 3 year deal - it does NOT mean it is 2 or 3 years to the day.

 

Football contracts in England end on 30th June.

 

So, as it is now End August .............. we are stuck with him then ??

[Chez]

looks that way. I don't understand why we signed Pulis on a three year deal. Madness.

[Whitey Grandad]

I think it was so that Stoke would buy Davies.

[Saint Fan CaM]

Please, please, someone tell me that we have got shot of Pulis. Surely nobody in their right mind would give that lad another deal?!?!?

[OldNick]

after taking his lad you'd think Pulis would not help our rivals as much as he does

[david in sweden]

maybe AP took up the third year option on Pulis, and thats why he got sacked ..can't think of any worse reason...!

[Ivan Katalinic's 'tache]

Maybe EITHER party could activate the deal, which I believe could've been the case with Michail Antonio & Reading. If so, please shoot whoever inserted that clause.

[Chez]

Maybe EITHER party could activate the deal' date=' which I believe could've been the case with Michail Antonio & Reading. If so, please shoot whoever inserted that clause.[/quote']

 

you can remove the word maybe from that sentence.

[Super_Uwe]

I have no idea what the deal was, but my assumption (and that's all it is) is that we were so strapped for cash at the time that this clause was added in as a bit of a "sweetener" for Stoke. Tony Pulis must have known that his son wasn't going to make it in the Premier League so perhaps it was a case of "I'll scratch your back and you scratch mine". Before anyone says anything, I have zero evidence and am just trying to make sense of it all.

 

It's got to be one of the most ridiculous transfer deals ever, who on earth buys a player that is never going to get a look in and then keeps him for not one, not two, but three years!

 

The fact he says absolutely nothing in the media really grates with me; I wonder if that was also another clause added into the deal that he had to keep shtum about it?

 

One word - joke!

[Toomer]

looks that way. I don't understand why we signed Pulis on a three year deal. Madness.

 

I hope Lowe put sell on terms in his contract, would hate for us to miss out on 0% of nothing.