• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Nabil Bentaleb

billyiddo said:
Yeah I still don't see why the player would agree a long term deal if he's going on loan initially
Click to expand...
its a loan with an option - he is playing for a permanent deal possibly with a wage increase, hence he is willing to commit.

Happens loads, if you are the buying club you may demand this and if you are the player and want the move you would agree.
 
r-u-s-x said:
its a loan with an option - he is playing for a permanent deal possibly with a wage increase, hence he is willing to commit.

Happens loads, if you are the buying club you may demand this and if you are the player and want the move you would agree.
Click to expand...

A loan with an option .. a bit like Alderweireld's deal with Southampton then? ;)
 
r-u-s-x said:
or Lanzini with west ham where he had no choice but to sign
Click to expand...

What makes you think he had no choice?

I think you're just misreading what the deal is - the deal will be between the two clubs and at that point the player can decide if he wants to make the permanent move - more often than not if the player has done well enough for the club to want to sign him then the player will have settled and not be opposed to the move being made permanent
 
Fair play with the quote but I wouldn't trust anything Gold says tbh- it just doesn't make any sense to me that a player would agree to a deal with out any kind of break clause on their part
 
The point is the player wants the move, he is probably going to be paid more if he makes it and the club have the power in this situation (sign or don't come at all). If the player is "bigger" than the club he will insist there is no clause.

Schalke may be offering 60K if they take the option while the next best is 40K, in this circumstance Betaleb may prefer the loan with Shalke even though the option is to their advantage.

In the real world its like going into a job on a 3 month probation, with a bump in wages if you get the job.

Anyway dragging it off topic, I am disappointed as I saw a lot in the player but that is good money for him.
 
Last edited:
r-u-s-x said:
The point is the player wants the move, he is probably going to be paid more if he makes it and the club have the power in this situation (sign or don't come at all). If the player is "bigger" than the club he will insist there is no clause.

Schalke may be offering 60K if they take the option while the next best is 40K, in this circumstance Betaleb may prefer the loan with Shalke even though the option is to their advantage.

In the real world its like going into a job on a 3 month probation, with a bump in wages if you get the job.

Anyway dragging it off topic, I am disappointed as I saw a lot in the player but that is good money for him.
Click to expand...

If he wants to move then he will agree terms with them (I'm sure it's probably already been discussed) my point was that if he didn't want to move then he wouldn't have to.

I'm sure he will, he has seemingly done well there and isn't likely to be be first choice here should he return
 
Why do you not think he has already agreed terms?
Salah's case http://www.football-italia.net/69717/roma-down-salah-details

This is not as clear as Lanzani which the Chairman outright states there was binding option for the player however the fact he states he had a separate Veto agreement implies that it was needed and not all loans are at the players discretion after the original deal.

"The Egyptian insists he had power of veto with a separate signed agreement, but Fiorentina claim it was not part of the original contract and was never registered with the authorities."
 
Because it seems totally illogical to agree a contract a year ahead of it starting without a get out clause
 
You are completely right in this case he did have final say,

billyiddo said:
Bentaleb will have to agree a contract with them still - the only thing activated will be the fee between the two clubs
Click to expand...

r-u-s-x01 said:
That's not always the case, he may have already agreed terms prior to the loan. You know anything about this one specifically
Click to expand...

billyiddo said:
Why would a player agree personal terms for a long term contract a year ahead of it starting? Wouldn't happen - If he's a huge success on loan he'd be in a position to negotiate a much better deal than at the beginning of his loan and what if after a year he hates it in Germany?
Click to expand...
 
German league just like the rest of europe 2 horse race filled with a lot of no hopers. European leagues produce better technical players than our league and it's partly due to less pressure in every game. I'm sure there are lots of aficionados of the game that love european football but the ones I've seen this year are either one sided or boring.
 
K.D.D.D.D.Soc said:
German league just like the rest of europe 2 horse race filled with a lot of no hopers. European leagues produce better technical players than our league and it's partly due to less pressure in every game. I'm sure there are lots of aficionados of the game that love european football but the ones I've seen this year are either one sided or boring.
Click to expand...

One of those supposed no hopers beat us and effectively knocked us out of the Champions League.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back