Jump to content

Calum Chambers

Leicestersaint

By Leicestersaint
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted
Why keep asking this? There is no proof absolutely anywhere that a release clause ever existed.

If there was a release clause it would not have 30m or whatever we got

OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted
What does that mean in English
if there was a release clause, it would not have been 30m in the contract at that level. Clubs or agents would not be putting such high levels in an 18year olds contract.

If there was a release clause saying if a club like Man U came along, they would know that we were stuffed and so we wouldn't have been able to negotiate such a high fee. Therefore Iam doubtful there was a release clause

Gemmel

Gemmel

Posted
Posted
if there was a release clause, it would not have been 30m in the contract at that level. Clubs or agents would not be putting such high levels in an 18year olds contract.

If there was a release clause saying if a club like Man U came along, they would know that we were stuffed and so we wouldn't have been able to negotiate such a high fee. Therefore Iam doubtful there was a release clause

 

You do know this thread is about Chambers right ?

SarniaSaint

SarniaSaint

Posted
Posted

Was the biggest loss of the sell off IMO just what use LES thought he was doing

who know but suspect he was lying when he made that statement about no bids received for players

doddisalegend

doddisalegend

Posted
Posted
Was the biggest loss of the sell off IMO just what use LES thought he was doing

who know but suspect he was lying when he made that statement about no bids received for players

 

I know people are still upset about Chambers going but biggest loss? Hardly every other player we lost, including Lambert, was a bigger loss than Chambers.

SarniaSaint

SarniaSaint

Posted
Posted
I know people are still upset about Chambers going but biggest loss? Hardly every other player we lost, including Lambert, was a bigger loss than Chambers.

 

Not for future potential, again IMO

 

seems thats my limit for posts today the c**s that run the site take your renewal money but don't acknowledge, should be a message for anyone wanting to contribute their 5 quid.

CB Fry

CB Fry

Posted
Posted
Chambers knew of Arsenal's interest and said he wanted to leave and didn't see his future at Saints.

Yes, I am aware of that. My point is Koeman could have intervened and demanded he stay, like we are with Morgan. He's a kid with 20 games to his name, he couldn't really kick off like Lovren did. We could, if we really wanted to, have kept him.

 

Basically for the money we got, it looks like we thought it wasn't worth the fight, and I like to think Koeman led this thinking.

sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
Im not the one with 8 posts on the Chambers thread (more than anyone else).

 

Slightly odd then to tell others not to post about Chambers.

 

Dude, the point was to let go. I have, have you?

Dan Johnson

Dan Johnson

Posted
Posted
My point is Koeman could have intervened and demanded he stay, like we are with Morgan. He's a kid with 20 games to his name, he couldn't really kick off

 

He shouldn't kick off, but he might of. Morgan did, Lovern did, by all accounts so did Lallana.

 

Demanding players stays is futile, every ones mentioning what the sell off has done for squad harmony, what do we think it would be like with 3-4 players in the squad that don't want to play for the club? Do we think we'd get the same level of performance out of chambers if he didn't want to be here?

 

Everyone mentions he's one for the future, he has potential. That would suggest we'd be keeping against his will for a number of seasons, do we feel that a disillusioned player would improve over 2-3 seasons if he didn't want to be here?

 

It's easy to demand players stay, the reality is allot more complex & I think although it does hurt seeing a player of chambers potential at another club performing in a position we're short but the club are pushed into a corner in that respect.

david in sweden

david in sweden

Posted
Posted
You do know this thread is about Chambers right ?

 

apparantly they don't.

 

Shouldn't we have a special site for posters who go " off pist " and start having unconnected personal arguements with each other.....?

Toon Saint

Toon Saint

Posted
Posted
You do know this thread is about Chambers right ?

Didn't you introduce Shaw into the debate and then ask questions about his release clause? Strange that the subject is now off-limits.

St_Tel49

St_Tel49

Posted
Posted
apparantly they don't.

 

Shouldn't we have a special site for posters who go " off pist " and start having unconnected personal arguements with each other.....?

 

The Mods should create permanent thread called "The Black Hole" and transfer such posts into it.

Smirking_Saint

Smirking_Saint

Posted
Posted
Look, follow me round insulting me all you like, but please learn to use punctuation. It's lazy and shows someone with a lack of even basic standards.

 

If you're going to worry about a missing comma on a message board Id suggest you have too much time on your hands

The9

The9

Posted
Posted
the selling of everything that moves was an expression of the situation as it unfolded. it never stopped for tactical reasons, it stopped due to the poor press and fan reaction (if you believe KK)

 

Newsflash, this has been bloody obvious since it happened.

 

Also, as I'm on page 3 of this thread and I've only seen one reference to it (from Olallana), Chambers played right sided centre back, we had one of those and still have. And he's Arsenal's THIRD MOST EXPENSIVE PLAYER OF ALL-TIME, FFS! Calum Chambers! Take the money!

The9

The9

Posted
Posted
Was at the game today and he was exceptional. Could have been a fantastic Lovren replacement. Oh well, onwards and upwards!

 

All we'd have to do is completely change his predominant kicking foot, easy. :D

 

Isgrove on Saturday showed how difficult it is to play on the "wrong side" when you're being asked to do something which puts you in a position which necessitates you using your weaker foot more often. Clyne at left back doesn't have the same threat either for this reason. It's less pronounced at CB but the left/right side CB issue can't be ignored, unless Chambers suddenly pops up as a LCB rather than the RCB he was yesterday (or Fonte becomes a LCB) it's really not a comparison.

brmbrm

brmbrm

Posted
Posted
Waaaaahhh! Waaaaaaahh!

What a bunch of f*cking babies.

Grow up you colossal bunch of c*nts

 

Says a lot for this forum that this is the most erudite comment!

 

Jeez "he got do what I say he do or else!!!!". Errr, the world just does not work that way. If you cn make it work that way, get a job instead of wasting everyone's time on here

The9

The9

Posted
Posted
I don't know -a Beeb article vaguely mentioned that if Cortese left, Shaw could go; but it felt like a throwaway comment, typical Cortese bull**** and self-aggrandisement a la AC Milan variety. VFTT said that Shaw had spoken to Chelsea, arguing that was proof of a release clause; but even if true, such a statement is also perfectly consistent with there being no automatic release clause -perhaps we were happy/willing to sell Shaw; perhaps there was an informal understanding -as is suggested is the case with Morgan- that Shaw could go at the end of the season if an acceptable bid came in.

 

Did it? I haven't seen it. I saw a BBC article saying "at least one Saints player had a provision in his contract should Cortese leave" but they've never in any of the articles I've reread in the past couple of weeks stated it was Shaw, that came from someone saying it on here. Anyway, that's an aside, you're right that their situations were different, one was a starter and known to be wanted, the other was a squad member who we all assumed wasn't going anywhere, and for whom we got GREAT money.

The9

The9

Posted
Posted

Simple fact is, if we hadn't sold anyone else this summer, selling our vaguely promising backup right back for £16m would look like a fantastic piece of business.

Lallana's Left Peg

Lallana's Left Peg

Posted
Posted
Simple fact is, if we hadn't sold anyone else this summer, selling our vaguely promising backup right back for £16m would look like a fantastic piece of business.

 

He is far better than vaguely promising, as he has already shown for his new club. He could have been one of our best players for years to come.

The9

The9

Posted
Posted
He is far better than vaguely promising' date=' as he has already shown for his new club. He could have been one of our best players for years to come.[/quote']

 

As Arsenal's third most expensive player in the history of football (he cost £5m more than Thierry Henry), I'd hope the expectations for him at Arsenal would be higher. He hadn't, however, shown that he was anything other than a defensively good - but conservative - right back for Saints in the Prem, with a bit of midfield nous from his Academy days.

DrZuess1979 the 2nd

DrZuess1979 the 2nd

Posted
Posted
He is far better than vaguely promising' date=' as he has already shown for his new club. He could have been one of our best players for years to come.[/quote']

 

Am I missing something here

I know that I am only judging him for arsenal in a center back role,

But I thought he look out of his depth.

He was constantly behind Koscielny, playing people on, got skinned on a number of occasions, last ditch lunges because he was so far away from the attacker,

And for most of the game it look as if he was playing right back.

I am playing devils advocate here,but 16m atm is a bargain as he would be behind clyne IMO, and in no way a stand in for lovren.

Toon Saint

Toon Saint

Posted
Posted
Did it? I haven't seen it. I saw a BBC article saying "at least one Saints player had a provision in his contract should Cortese leave" but they've never in any of the articles I've reread in the past couple of weeks stated it was Shaw, that came from someone saying it on here. Anyway, that's an aside, you're right that their situations were different, one was a starter and known to be wanted, the other was a squad member who we all assumed wasn't going anywhere, and for whom we got GREAT money.

 

Don't think it was ever formalised in the contract, but a couple of articles referred to Shaw's agent trying to get the clause inserted:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2466013/Southampton-flying-high-Premier-League-manager-Mauricio-Pochettino-chairman-Nicola-Cortese.html

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/nicola-corteses-southampton-departure-like-3028224#.U-iZZ2PEaSo

Lallana's Left Peg

Lallana's Left Peg

Posted
Posted
As Arsenal's third most expensive player in the history of football (he cost £5m more than Thierry Henry), I'd hope the expectations for him at Arsenal would be higher. He hadn't, however, shown that he was anything other than a defensively good - but conservative - right back for Saints in the Prem, with a bit of midfield nous from his Academy days.

 

19 years old, Captain of England U19's, ousted Clyne as right-back in half our league games and part of a team that finished 8th in the league with a record points total. Already shown he can play centre-half as well. He is not as good right now as the fee we got for him but only an idiot would suggest he's going to be anything but a bargain for Arsenal. His loss hurts more than any other because we lost him after just one season of service when there was so much more to come. Absolutely gutted.

  • 2 weeks later...
Mr X

Mr X

Posted
Posted
Just why did we let him go? How desperately did he seek a move?

The chambers transfer is the one I really cant understand, a young player with so much potential he could easily be as good as shaw and is a certain england player, we didnt need the money yet we couldnt refuse a 16 million bid? chambers must have chucked more than his toys out the pram!

Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Posted
Posted
Just why did we let him go? How desperately did he seek a move?

 

Twitter tonight...

Chambers left because he had a clause in his contract regarding CL teams bidding for him. Not a lot #saintsfc could have done.

8:57pm - 19 Aug 14

 

Not sure if true or not, but wouldnt rule it out

hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
Twitter tonight...

Chambers left because he had a clause in his contract regarding CL teams bidding for him. Not a lot #saintsfc could have done.

8:57pm - 19 Aug 14

 

Not sure if true or not, but wouldnt rule it out

 

Rubbish. We would have made a huge deal out of that if it was the case.

Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Posted
Posted

40% sell on? Gives me some happiness if true + more people reporting the CL release clause. Have no idea whose ITK on here and even less on that twitter thing

 

CL clause in contract always likely to be a problem for club, 40% sell on condition written in put of most clubs, #saintsfc

9:54pm - 19 Aug 14

shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted

Just surprised that Jeff and Glasgow's six fingered, web-footed friends and family know how to use Twitter.

 

40% sell-on as if that wouldn't be reported.

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...