The Mirror are reporting it. A few stories up from "Nani could be part of new Sneijder bid." 
They finish their excellent "piece" with:
They finish their excellent "piece" with:
Explosive stuff.
Phil Jones to United | Transfer to Champions complete
- Thread starter mubarak
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
- Status
How good is he in midfield? Could be a useful addition if he can provide a decent option in midfield as well as defence.
I doubt Rovers will be succesful myself, but these things are often as governed by common practise as they are by the details of the law.
It wouldn't be a great surprise if someone not accustomed to this practise read the details of it rather differently.
Question is if their interpretation will hold up.
..Guardian said:
All they will succeed in doing, is making other clubs reluctant to deal with them either in a buying or selling capacity.
Last minute screwing you for more money is not really the British Football thing to do. This is unprecedented, utterly ridiculous and I look forward to the player handing in a transfer request. A big move for a youngster, but to be honest, he will probably spend the rest of his days being an Old Trafford legend.
So who cares?
So, seemingly a weak attempt at extricating more money... 
Couple of second rate con men thinking they can extort United, disgrace.
You lot need to take a look at yourself letting B9 dictate the thread with his obvious Wumming, even a thick scouser like him obviously knows this is a bullshit story and is just making himself feel better at your expense! Wake the feck up!
The bit this morning i find most amusing is Venkys Advisers trying to explain to them they dont have a leg to stand on, maybe their advisers should be the ones running the club??
Saw that too. It sounds like the Venkys just dont understand how contracts work in the UK.
You need to read further back!!
Of course the other side to this legally is that Jones signed a contract extension 6 months ago on the understanding that he could move if a club offered the amount specified in the release clause.
If this is true, then in this extension it doubled the amount in the release clause.
If Blackburn are now going back on this, he could legally null & void the contract extension (or at least threaten to) and United could pick him up for £8m!
If this is true, then in this extension it doubled the amount in the release clause.
If Blackburn are now going back on this, he could legally null & void the contract extension (or at least threaten to) and United could pick him up for £8m!
Including the rag that got wind of the United deal ahead of everyone else...
It will be pretty funny when this goes through without a hitch, and people like B9 are left gutted. Again.
If I was Venky, i'd be be very weary of what I do and say because if they deny the move, then Jones can argue that they've broken the terms of the contract, and he can walk on a free.
Yeah, that's not even remotely true, but anyway...
There should be a Pay Per View on RAWK if that ever happens.
No - clubs speak to agents all the time. Speaking to the agent cannot be defined as 'tapping up'. This is the reason the agent was there. So United can say to Sanchez's agent for instance - if another club makes an offer/bid for him let us know - is this tapping up? No of course not.
Or
"Do you know if Sanchez would like to play for United?" Is this tapping up? No. it is tapping up if you approach the player directly while he is still under contract.
Nothing to see here follks.
It is in Blackburn's interest to sell. Jones has agreed terms with United and has even completed a medical - he won't be going anywhere else. It seems they are testing the water in relation to the release clause, although why they didn't do this before they allowed Jones to have a medical and agree terms with his new club I don't know.
Something doesn't add up.
One thing is for sure though, if Blackburn decide to play hardball, United will be quite prepared to sit it out for a while and wait for their stance to change.
It is in Blackburn's interest to sell. Jones has agreed terms with United and has even completed a medical - he won't be going anywhere else. It seems they are testing the water in relation to the release clause, although why they didn't do this before they allowed Jones to have a medical and agree terms with his new club I don't know.
Something doesn't add up.
One thing is for sure though, if Blackburn decide to play hardball, United will be quite prepared to sit it out for a while and wait for their stance to change.
Yes i agree with that. I heard on talksport this morning that all this possibly stemmed from another club indicating to Blackburn that they would have been prepared to pay more than the £16m release clause.
I don't believe Jones will end up anywhere but OT, but this new development has probably encouraged the owners to see if there was any way they could force Utd to pay a higher price.
Straw clutching opportunism if you ask me, and shows the owners up for what they really are. Untrustworthy, as well as naive.
You would hope that clauses inserted into contracts by lawyers in a legally a binding document would prevent this kind of confusion. However the owners probably don't understand this hence the confusion on their part.
Let’s say Rovers turn down the offer and Jones turns down any other move. How do they (Rovers) think that they will get more money? United could decide to pay extra but why would they when the other bids don't matter because he is rejecting a move elsewhere, which he is perfectly entitled to do.
Let’s say Rovers turn down the offer and Jones turns down any other move. How do they (Rovers) think that they will get more money? United could decide to pay extra but why would they when the other bids don't matter because he is rejecting a move elsewhere, which he is perfectly entitled to do.
They did exactly that, which makes them look even worse. According to some reports Jones originally had an £8m release clause in his contract, which was then renegotiated just five months ago in January, where the release clause was apparently doubled to £16m.
I am obviously speculating, but all evidence suggests that the owners leave most of the day-to-day work to the professional staff who work at the club. Whether they even knew about the release clause, and if they did, whether they gave it much thought at the time, it appears that now that it has been activated they're unhappy that it has prevented a bidding war between several big clubs, which would explain the rather unsavory attempts to find loopholes in the arrangement.
I agree.
They have been told other clubs would have paid more than the 16m and now they are trying to get United to pay more to make up for it.
The problem Blackburn have is that they have allowed Jones to agree terms and pass his medical with United, now they are trying to go back to the start and negotiate on a price.
The club going back on its initial acceptance is not going to do them any favours whatsoever.
Isn't it? Surely if they do breach the terms of a contract then it becomes null and void?
I am not sure they can turn it down as they have already accepted it by allowing United to agree personal terms with Jones and letting him have his medical at the club.
In relation to the last bit, I agree. Jones is set for his switch to United now. It doesn't matter how much other clubs offer.
Firstly they'd have to prove a fundamental breach, which this isn't, IMO.
Then they would simply show that they had cause to refuse to comply with the term, which would be their argument that there was ambiguity in the wording of the clause.
And then if they got past all that the Judge would take into account whether allowing one party to rescind the contract would either impose undue hardship or allow for unjust enrichment.
Oh right. I wasn't saying this is a breach BTW, just thought should there be a breach it would mean a termination.
Normally I'd say I can't see this going to court or a tribunal. Even if Blackburn are fishing for extra money, it's in their interest to end this quickly. It won't be worth the extra few quid if it harms their preperation, the manager knows he lost the player but can't spend the money, etc. But who knows with those owners.
I suppose the club failed realise his potential, and at the time thought 17 Million was ample security for the club.
What's more, I imagine Jones will tell them that he's determined to sign for United whatever happens. That should settle things sharpish.
Everything about the way they have gone about running the club is cost savings. I don't know if they fully realise the consequences if the club dropped out of the Premiership. Samba, and Hoilett will also be on other clubs radar. Blackburn fans need to be very worried.
In any case I'm not concerned and I doubt that the powers that be at OT are either.
We wanted to come in for him in 1 years time anyway. So we can play the waiting game and keep the £16 spondoolies in our pockets for now.
If they want to play the waiting game then fine.
We wanted to come in for him in 1 years time anyway. So we can play the waiting game and keep the £16 spondoolies in our pockets for now.
If they want to play the waiting game then fine.
please enlighten us how we did not do things by the book with those players.
My understanding was we tapped up both these players!
We tapped Stam up. With Ruud it was just a visit from Fergie when he was injured
We don't do things by the letter of the law. No club does. But we're OK, we aren't worse than anyone else.
Stam claimed in his book we tapped him up.
Dont know what you've heard about ruud.
there were such accusations. never proven of course. otherwise we would have been fined by UEFA or banned.
but like all clubs we do get close to the line.
we are not angels but a club like ours is run legally.
now if you want an example of a club that uses thugs to retain players...look no further than Chelsea and the mikel saga.
- Status