Jadon Sancho | Dortmund interest?

[Highlyevolved]

I have no idea what was offered but I'd be astonished if it wasn't many millions per year.

Chelsea wanted him, were prepared to pay the £25 mil but the player said no.

It wasn't as simple as "Chelsea paid £5 mil to get rid of him".

Yet they did pay £5 million to get rid of him as they didn’t believe he was worth what he wanted. He values himself too highly.

In addition Chelsea have a history of buying and selling as a quick turnaround. You’re not telling me they didn’t consider the £5 million loss as part of the reason to keep him as an asset and potentially resell?

It’s being reported today that Sancho has stated he is “not willing” to play for Man United on his return to the club and being paid around £300,000 per week.

Do any of the naysayers here have a solution as to how to handle these situations in future? Or is it a case of let’s do what we’ve always done, and get what we’ve always got?

Let’s not forget many thought Sancho was one of Europe’s best young talents when we signed him. This can happen again.

 

[duffer]

Yet they did pay £5 million to get rid of him as they didn’t believe he was worth what he wanted. He values himself too highly.

In addition Chelsea have a history of buying and selling. You’re not telling me they didn’t consider the £5 million loss as part of the reason to keep him as an asset and potentially resell?

It’s being reported today that Sancho has stated he is “not willing” to play for Man United on his return to the club and being paid around £300,000 per week.

Do any of the naysayers here have a solution as to how to handle these situations in future? Or is it a case of let’s do what we’ve always done, and get what we’ve always got?

Let’s not forget many thought Sancho was one of europes best young talents when we signed him. This can happen again.

I don't know if I'm a "naysayer" but these situations can be handled better by the manager and the player meeting up and talking to each other. How many 1 on 1 meetings do you think Sancho and ten Hag had after the incident with the press conference (and the players tweet about it}? How many meetings or even conversations do you think Sancho and Anorim have had?

If Sancho doesn't want to meet ten Hag or Anorim? Fine him.

 

[Highlyevolved]

I don't know if I'm a "naysayer" but these situations can be handled better by the manager and the player meeting up and talking to each other. How many 1 on 1 meetings do you think Sancho and ten Hag had after the incident with the press conference (and the players tweet about it}? How many meetings or even conversations do you think Sancho and Anorim have had?

If Sancho doesn't want to meet ten Hag or Anorim? Fine him.

The kid had a bad relationship with Dortmund, reported fines, with Ten Haag, with Amorim. I get what you’re saying but the point I was trying to make at the beginning is a mechanism to protect the club that’s more concrete than this.

Could you take a wage and simply refuse to work in your own role? If your role of course is employer and employee based?

 

[duffer]

The kid had a bad relationship with Dortmund, reported fines, with Ten Haag, with Amorim. I get what you’re saying but the point I was trying to make at the beginning is a mechanism to protect the club that’s more concrete than this.

Could you take a wage and simply refuse to work in your own role? If your role of course is employer and employee based?

No and I'd probably be sacked if I did. Just like Sancho would be if he refused to work in his role.

As for his relationship with Anorim, what makes you think it is "bad"? I bet they've never even had a single conversation.

 

[Highlyevolved]

No and I'd probably be sacked if I did. Just like Sancho would be if he refused to work in his role.

As for his relationship with Anorim, what makes you think it is "bad"? I bet they've never even had a single conversation.

The fact he’s saying he will refuse to play for United when he arrives back, reported in many places today, and that Amorim is reportedly planning to exclude him from the first team squad.

Let’s wait and see if they sack him in that case. You sound more confident than me.

 

[duffer]

The fact he’s saying he will refuse to play for United when he arrives back, reported in many places today, and that Amorim is reportedly planning to exclude him from the first team squad.

Let’s wait and see if they sack him in that case. You sound more confident than me.

That's not a fact though. It's some terrible online clickbait sources. If anything, he's probably told the club he wants a transfer.

If he genuinely refused to play/train then he'd be in breach of contract and would get terminated, just like I or any employee in the UK would. That won't happen because he won't do it.

 

[pratyush_utd]

We can realistically get 3-4m loan fee and we cover something like 20% of his salary. Thats the best i think we will get for him.. Not expecting anything more 10m recovery including Chelsea payment

 

[Jacob]

We can realistically get 3-4m loan fee and we cover something like 20% of his salary. Thats the best i think we will get for him.. Not expecting anything more 10m recovery including Chelsea payment

50 percent at least

 

[9 Stone Elvis]

Conspiracy theory incoming but it wouldn't shock me if Chelsea peddled the "couldn't agree personal terms" in agreement with Sancho, rather than come out and say "This guy is **** and we dont want him".

 

[TsuWave]

The fact he’s saying he will refuse to play for United when he arrives back, reported in many places today, and that Amorim is reportedly planning to exclude him from the first team squad.

Where has it been reported that “he’s saying he will refuse to play for United”?

Daily Mirror says he has no intention of pulling the United shirt again - which is consistent with wanting a move away and Fabrizio’s report that he’s not expected to stay at the club - but where are these tentative quotes about refusal to play, please?

 

[duffer]

Conspiracy theory incoming but it wouldn't shock me if Chelsea peddled the "couldn't agree personal terms" in agreement with Sancho, rather than come out and say "This guy is **** and we dont want him".

What would be the point of that?

 

[Daydreamer]

Of course a player who has “underwhelmed” couldn’t be treat like the example given. That would be ridiculous and clearly not the same as examples given.

In addition the contract would be valid with behaviour clauses, as is the case in many U.S. sports.

Disingenuous response in several areas, and I suspect you’re clever enough to have known that when you posted it.

I suspect you’re clever enough to know that Sancho hasn’t done anything even approaching what would be required to unilaterally terminate his contract.

You keep asking what could be done to avoid being in this situation again. The answer is the same as it is for every team… don’t offer giant contracts to the likes of Sancho.

Ozil, Aubameyang, Lacazette and Pepe all either saw out or were bought out of their contracts at Arsenal. None of them were wanted by the end. Aubameyang even had some of the same issues (poor time keeping) after coming from the same club (Dortmund) as Sancho. And, like Sancho, that was public knowledge before we signed him. And, like Sancho, we fined and left him out of the team.

So there are steps that can be taken to discipline players that contravene club rules. But you can’t rip up a contract unless there is gross misconduct, of which you’ve provided no evidence for.

It was a bad signing. These things happen on occasion. It’s pretty small-time to blame the player for seeing out the contract United offered him.

 

[terraloo]

Sorry I’ll go away and review the 128k examples.

I was asked for some examples and gave 10.

Ridiculous response.

I posed the question which players had their contracts cancelled unilaterally. Yes you gave a couple but certainly not 10. Some had their contracts cancelled by mutual consent .
The point about 128k players is that very very few get sacked that’s a fact.
You keep banging the drum about sacking players but the protection granted to players is far greater than just about any profession.
If Utd had a case to charge Sancho with gross misconduct would they ?

 

[Daydreamer]

I posed the question which players had their contracts cancelled unilaterally. Yes you gave a couple but certainly not 10. Some had their contracts cancelled by mutual consent .
The point about 128k players is that very very few get sacked that’s a fact.
You keep banging the drum about sacking players but the protection granted to players is far greater than just about any profession.
If Utd had a case to charge Sancho with gross misconduct would they ?

Absolutely correct. And the reason there is so much protection for players is because there is an even stronger protection for their employers, the clubs. In success, they can demand to be compensated for their employees being headhunted - often to the tune of 8 or even 9 figure sums.

Tearing up Sancho’s contract because he’s been disappointing would be like him demanding to leave on a free because United came 15th.

 

[Highlyevolved]

I posed the question which players had their contracts cancelled unilaterally. Yes you gave a couple but certainly not 10. Some had their contracts cancelled by mutual consent .
The point about 128k players is that very very few get sacked that’s a fact.
You keep banging the drum about sacking players but the protection granted to players is far greater than just about any profession.
If Utd had a case to charge Sancho with gross misconduct would they ?

That wasn’t the question I was posing. You seem to be going off track here. My original point was how to protect the club from behaviour like this in future, then I’ve given examples of US sports contracts, and some examples you asked for. How many do you need, 10 isn’t enough, but 128k seems a bit much, I’ve got a life outside of this forum thread.

Getting back to the main point. Today it’s being reported Sancho, getting paid £300k per week by United, is reportedly stating he will refuse to play for United.

Happy with that? Do you think when US Sports teams have better constructed contracts to protect franchises from this behaviour we can’t learn from it to protect ourselves in future?

 

[Highlyevolved]

I suspect you’re clever enough to know that Sancho hasn’t done anything even approaching what would be required to unilaterally terminate his contract.

You keep asking what could be done to avoid being in this situation again. The answer is the same as it is for every team… don’t offer giant contracts to the likes of Sancho.

Ozil, Aubameyang, Lacazette and Pepe all either saw out or were bought out of their contracts at Arsenal. None of them were wanted by the end. Aubameyang even had some of the same issues (poor time keeping) after coming from the same club (Dortmund) as Sancho. And, like Sancho, that was public knowledge before we signed him. And, like Sancho, we fined and left him out of the team.

So there are steps that can be taken to discipline players that contravene club rules. But you can’t rip up a contract unless there is gross misconduct, of which you’ve provided no evidence for.

It was a bad signing. These things happen on occasion. It’s pretty small-time to blame the player for seeing out the contract United offered him.

Yet in U.S. sports contracts which are constructed in a better way, they are protected, all while paying in some cases more than Sancho.

So it can be done.

 

[TsuWave]

“U.S. Sports”

does employment law apply and/or is it even the same?

 

[Highlyevolved]

Absolutely correct. And the reason there is so much protection for players is because there is an even stronger protection for their employers, the clubs. In success, they can demand to be compensated for their employees being headhunted - often to the tune of 8 or even 9 figure sums.

Tearing up Sancho’s contract because he’s been disappointing would be like him demanding to leave on a free because United came 15th.

Not at all the same, you seem to be confusing poor performance, with disciplinary issues.

 

[Lennon7]

We’d be lucky to get £20m for him to be honest, and he wouldn’t move for a wage cut. He’s just a shithouse with Spider-Man tattoos really

 

[Highlyevolved]

I suspect you’re clever enough to know that Sancho hasn’t done anything even approaching what would be required to unilaterally terminate his contract.

You keep asking what could be done to avoid being in this situation again. The answer is the same as it is for every team… don’t offer giant contracts to the likes of Sancho.

Ozil, Aubameyang, Lacazette and Pepe all either saw out or were bought out of their contracts at Arsenal. None of them were wanted by the end. Aubameyang even had some of the same issues (poor time keeping) after coming from the same club (Dortmund) as Sancho. And, like Sancho, that was public knowledge before we signed him. And, like Sancho, we fined and left him out of the team.

So there are steps that can be taken to discipline players that contravene club rules. But you can’t rip up a contract unless there is gross misconduct, of which you’ve provided no evidence for.

It was a bad signing. These things happen on occasion. It’s pretty small-time to blame the player for seeing out the contract United offered him.

A contract worth approx £45 MILLION over its duration, that a player in bad faith will probably run down, given his inflated wage demands unlikely to be met by another club is small time.

I didn’t realise I was speaking to Rockefeller himself!

 

[Highlyevolved]

We’d be lucky to get £20m for him to be honest, and he wouldn’t move for a wage cut. He’s just a shithouse with Spider-Man tattoos really

Exactly.

 

[Cathy Ferguson]

That's not a fact though. It's some terrible online clickbait sources. If anything, he's probably told the club he wants a transfer.

If he genuinely refused to play/train then he'd be in breach of contract and would get terminated, just like I or any employee in the UK would. That won't happen because he won't do it.

Can we make him train 01-05 am?

He wants to see out his contract and why would anyone pay even 15m now when they can have him for free in June next year?

 

[Highlyevolved]

“U.S. Sports”

does employment law apply and/or is it even the same?

Straw man example. We’re discussing construction of clauses in a contract, we also already know performance deductions can and are made in the premier league.

 

[Daydreamer]

Yet in U.S. sports contracts which are constructed in a better way, they are protected, all while paying in some cases more than Sancho.

So it can be done.

Better for who? And who is the “they” that is protected? Also, “U.S. sports” is incredibly broad, lots of sports are played there.

Many have drafts systems. Many don’t have transfer fees. When they do, sometimes the fee is actually paid to the league itself as opposed to the individual club. Many have collective bargaining, so the players have often threatened entire seasons by going on strike.

Nobody is saying “it can’t be done”. But you can’t cherry pick the parts you like about how “U.S. sports” contracts work without the system that they operate within.

 

[Daydreamer]

Not at all the same, you seem to be confusing poor performance, with disciplinary issues.

Not really…

Aubameyang even had some of the same issues (poor time keeping) after coming from the same club (Dortmund) as Sancho. And, like Sancho, that was public knowledge before we signed him. And, like Sancho, we fined and left him out of the team.

So there are steps that can be taken to discipline players that contravene club rules.

 

[Daydreamer]

A contract worth approx £45 MILLION over its duration, that a player in bad faith will probably run down, given his inflated wage demands unlikely to be met by another club is small time.

I didn’t realise I was speaking to Rockefeller himself!

What are you talking about? No one said the contract itself is small time, I explicitly said the blaming of the player for seeing out the contract was…

It’s pretty small-time to blame the player for seeing out the contract United offered him.

It’s pretty obvious that you’re intentionally misquoting me, so this feels like a waste of time.

 

[pratyush_utd]

We’d be lucky to get £20m for him to be honest, and he wouldn’t move for a wage cut. He’s just a shithouse with Spider-Man tattoos really

We would be lucky to find him a club who agrees to pay even 80% of his wage. Any money on top of it is bonus

 

[Highlyevolved]

Better for who? And who is the “they” that is protected? Also, “U.S. sports” is incredibly broad, lots of sports are played there.

Many have drafts systems. Many don’t have transfer fees. When they do, sometimes the fee is actually paid to the league itself as opposed to the individual club. Many have collective bargaining, so the players have often threatened entire seasons by going on strike.

Nobody is saying “it can’t be done”. But you can’t cherry pick the parts you like about how “U.S. sports” contracts work without the system that they operate within.

Try and stay on point. It wasn’t good enough that I didn’t provide analysis of 128k players earlier, but now you’re adding more variables about US sports and not addressing the direct point that we have legal wage deductions already in the premier league, and I was using franchise contracts that have been constructed in a better way to protect franchises as an example.

This is extending an already legal mechanism to reduce wages on performance to include behaviour.

Not that groundbreaking in world sport, but not something that is done at United, unless you think Sancho taking £45 million in wages and running down his contract with his unprofessional conduct is fine,

 

[Bright_Eyes]

Yet they did pay £5 million to get rid of him as they didn’t believe he was worth what he wanted. He values himself too highly.

In addition Chelsea have a history of buying and selling as a quick turnaround. You’re not telling me they didn’t consider the £5 million loss as part of the reason to keep him as an asset and potentially resell?

It’s being reported today that Sancho has stated he is “not willing” to play for Man United on his return to the club and being paid around £300,000 per week.

Do any of the naysayers here have a solution as to how to handle these situations in future? Or is it a case of let’s do what we’ve always done, and get what we’ve always got?

Let’s not forget many thought Sancho was one of Europe’s best young talents when we signed him. This can happen again.

If he refuses to play whilst he's under contract surely there's a breach in contract somewhere there..

 

[Highlyevolved]

What are you talking about? No one said the contract itself is small time, I explicitly said the blaming of the player for seeing out the contract was…

Rewind Daydreamer, the original point was about future contracts and their construction to protect from this behaviour. The whole point. Everyone is aware it doesn’t apply to Sancho, Sancho is the example, but you’re getting hung up on that and calling it small time not to honour it. Keep up.

 

[Highlyevolved]

If he refuses to play whilst he's under contract surely there's a breach in contract somewhere there..

I’d have hoped that was the case, but many on here seem to think he can just see out the contract. He can also unrealistically inflate his wage demands to other clubs and manufacture staying and claiming the huge wage.

The original point was can’t United in future insert mechanisms into contracts to protect from this, but many in response are fixated on debating the terms of his CURRENT contract.

 

[Vidooq]

Do any of the naysayers here have a solution as to how to handle these situations in future? Or is it a case of let’s do what we’ve always done, and get what we’ve always got?

Let’s not forget many thought Sancho was one of Europe’s best young talents when we signed him. This can happen again.

We should copy the new Chelsea structure in terms of wages, but not contract duration. Palmer, Enzo, Caicedo are on 130-180k per week max.

I'm mentioning Caicedo and Enzo on purpose because there seems to be quite a few posters here that belive that huge transfer fee = very high salary from the start. Chelsea have disproved that. What Chelsea has done is very smart. If the players proves himself over the course of the first 2 years, you are free to negotiate a new improved contract. By then, you have seen the player first hand, his habits, performances and you can estimate if he will drop down few levels in case he gets increased wages.

If the player does not work out in the first 2 years, he is still on wages where you can loan him out or sell him. But it's practically impossible to move a player like Sterling on 350k. Chelsea have figured that out and they have put a stop on it. We, on the other hand have few Sterlings in the mould of Sancho and Rashford. Casemiro was useful in Europa League, I'm not sure how well he will fare vs Premier League clubs. Cunha on 165-170k base seems like somewhat normal wage for United. Same for Mbeumo, I hope.

But we should never, ever give such contracts to young players from the get go. I don't mind us paying 300-350k for prime Kane. But young players, leave a bit of room to protect yourself.

 

[rimaldo]

Why are you lot arguing with Chelsea fans about how to deal with mercenary players that don’t really want to be here? They’ve nearly 3 decades of experience in that field.

 

[Daydreamer]

Try and stay on point. It wasn’t good enough that I didn’t provide analysis of 128k players earlier

I didn’t ask you for any analysis.

but now you’re adding more variables about US sports

You brought up US sports.

and not addressing the direct point that we have legal wage deductions already in the premier league.

I addressed it directly here...

Aubameyang even had some of the same issues (poor time keeping) after coming from the same club (Dortmund) as Sancho. And, like Sancho, that was public knowledge before we signed him. And, like Sancho, we fined and left him out of the team.

So there are steps that can be taken to discipline players that contravene club rules. But you can’t rip up a contract unless there is gross misconduct, of which you’ve provided no evidence for.

and I was using franchise contracts that have been constructed in a better way to protect franchises as an example.

That's great. Nobody is arguing that US sports don't have greater protections for their franchises in some senses. But seeing as they tend not to have transfer fees, it completely changes all of the incentive structures. Therefore, it's not as simple as just including some of the clauses they have in their contracts. That's leaving aside the fact that employment law in general is geared more towards employers in the US than it is in Europe.

This is extending an already legal mechanism to reduce wages on performance to include behaviour.

And depending on how far you extend that, it would no longer be legal in this country. What you or I as fans might might define as bad behaviour (once again, this is incredibly similar to Aubameyang) can be subjective and therefore unenforceable by law. Where there is a clear objective violation (such as poor punctuality or attendance) then action can - and often is - taken. This has been the case with Sancho.

Not that groundbreaking in world sport, but not something that is done at United, unless you think Sancho taking £45 million in wages and running down his contract with his unprofessional conduct is fine,

What is or isn't "groundbreaking in world sport" isn't all that relevant to UK employment law. The £45m in wages that Sancho is "taking" were what United decided to offer him. His "running down his contract" is merely what both parties agreed to when he signed the contract United offered him.

I don't condone unprofessional conduct, but what unprofessional conduct has Sancho displayed toward his employer recently? He's been on loan for 18 months.

 

[Daydreamer]

Rewind Daydreamer, the original point was about future contracts and their construction to protect from this behaviour. The whole point. Everyone is aware it doesn’t apply to Sancho, Sancho is the example, but you’re getting hung up on that and calling it small time not to honour it. Keep up.

I've been talking about "the original point" the entire time. Your suggestion for how to construct future contracts is overly simplistic and would fall foul of PFA, FA, and UEFA regulations specifically as well as UK employment law in general.

I did indeed tie these points to Sancho. Imagine talking about Sancho in the *checks notes* Jadon Sancho thread. What was I thinking?

It's cute you telling me "keep up", but it doesn't distract from your flawed arguments.

 

[Highlyevolved]

We should copy the new Chelsea structure in terms of wages, but not contract duration. Palmer, Enzo, Caicedo are on 130-180k per week max.

I'm mentioning Caicedo and Enzo on purpose because there seems to be quite a few posters here that belive that huge transfer fee = very high salary from the start. Chelsea have disproved that. What Chelsea has done is very smart. If the players proves himself over the course of the first 2 years, you are free to negotiate a new improved contract. By then, you have seen the player first hand, his habits, performances and you can estimate if he will drop down few levels in case he gets increased wages.

If the player does not work out in the first 2 years, he is still on wages where you can loan him out or sell him. But it's practically impossible to move a player like Sterling on 350k. Chelsea have figured that out and they have put a stop on it. We, on the other hand have few Sterlings in the mould of Sancho and Rashford. Casemiro was useful in Europa League, I'm not sure how well he will fare vs Premier League clubs. Cunha on 165-170k base seems like somewhat normal wage for United. Same for Mbeumo, I hope.

But we should never, ever give such contracts to young players from the get go. I don't mind us paying 300-350k for prime Kane. But young players, leave a bit of room to protect yourself.

Good points made.

 

[Highlyevolved]

I've been talking about "the original point" the entire time. Your suggestion for how to construct future contracts is overly simplistic and would fall foul of PFA, FA, and UEFA regulations specifically as well as UK employment law in general.

I did indeed tie these points to Sancho. Imagine talking about Sancho in the *checks notes* Jadon Sancho thread. What was I thinking?

It's cute you telling me "keep up", but it doesn't distract from your flawed arguments.

Not true, we already have legal wage deductions based on performance.

 

[Highlyevolved]

I didn’t ask you for any analysis.


You brought up US sports.


I addressed it directly here...



That's great. Nobody is arguing that US sports don't have greater protections for their franchises in some senses. But seeing as they tend not to have transfer fees, it completely changes all of the incentive structures. Therefore, it's not as simple as just including some of the clauses they have in their contracts. That's leaving aside the fact that employment law in general is geared more towards employers in the US than it is in Europe.


And depending on how far you extend that, it would no longer be legal in this country. What you or I as fans might might define as bad behaviour (once again, this is incredibly similar to Aubameyang) can be subjective and therefore unenforceable by law. Where there is a clear objective violation (such as poor punctuality or attendance) then action can - and often is - taken. This has been the case with Sancho.


What is or isn't "groundbreaking in world sport" isn't all that relevant to UK employment law. The £45m in wages that Sancho is "taking" were what United decided to offer him. His "running down his contract" is merely what both parties agreed to when he signed the contract United offered him.

I don't condone unprofessional conduct, but what unprofessional conduct has Sancho displayed toward his employer recently? He's been on loan for 18 months.

All moot, as it’s already legal to deduct wages based on performance in the premier league, discussion was around extending this to behaviour.

 

[Daydreamer]

All moot,

I honestly didn't expect you to engage with any of my points because doing so would require you to examine the flaws in your arguments.

as it’s already legal to deduct wages based on performance in the premier league, discussion was around extending this to behaviour.

Source? Players not earning individual bonuses (appearances, goals, assists, clean sheets etc) or team bonuses (match wins, competition participation / progression / wins) as part of their compensation are not deductions. Do you have many (or indeed any) examples of players having their wages deducted for playing poorly?

 

[Red00012]

Disappointing bump

May have to put this on ignore it’s just going to carry on until deadline day when someone takes him on loan and we end up paying 50% of his wages