Rooney not signing a new contract?

steps_3314

The Muppet wrote: »

It's highly unlikley suppose we'll just buy torres with a chunk of the money we get from city.

We need torres like we need a bullet in the head.

Injury prone. Hargreaves all over again.

niallo27

#15 wrote: »

The Glazers have owned the club since 2005. Those signings were in 2007 and 2008. It's not hard to understand Niallo.

There was plenty of money floating around then, credit was easy to get, money was flowing, times have changed no one is imune from it, the party can't last forever

SuperStarHoney

#15 wrote: »

The Glazers have owned the club since 2005. Those signings were in 2007 and 2008. It's not hard to understand Niallo.

You mightn't have noticed but things have changed somewhat in the financial world since then.

The Muppet

niallo27 wrote: »

Yes but ye were able to buy your way out of it before, 30 million for berbatov 15 for Anderson 15 for nani, cant see ye doing that anymore, money makes the world go round

I thought they were all flops up to this season?

If money guarenteed success the table would look a lot different than it does each season. I believe united have had less new investment than quite a few clubs over this period yet have won 3 title One CL another final and a few others as well.

Ordinary man

If anyone would consider torres(michael owen the second:rolleyes:) as a good buy, they must expect united to be a mid table team:rolleyes:

Barcelona have the same buying power as blackpool these days, so their out

That only leaves real, city and chelsea who can afford him:mad:

niallo27

The Muppet wrote: »

I thought they were all flops up to this season?

If money guarenteed success the table would look a lot different than it does each season. I believe united have had less new investment than quite a few clubs over this period yet have won 3 title One CL another final and a few others as well.

Utd need serious investment if they want to continue winning leagues, like or not it's the truth, they haven't got the cash that's why I think they are in decline, scholes giggs Neville van set sar all need to be replaced

Seaneh

Ordinary man wrote: »

If anyone would consider torres(michael owen the second:rolleyes:) as a good buy, they must expect united to be a mid table team:rolleyes:

Barcelona have the same buying power as blackpool these days, so their out

That only leaves real, city and chelsea who can afford him:mad:

Inter could afford him.

killwill

niallo27 wrote: »

Utd need serious investment if they want to continue winning leagues, like or not it's the truth, they haven't got the cash that's why I think they are in decline, scholes giggs Neville van set sar all need to be replaced

Van Der Dar does not need to be replaced yet, Neville has been replaced by O'Shea and Rafael. Scholes needs to be playing week in week out IMO as he is still class. Giggs yes needs to be replaced. United are not nearly as badly off as you make them out to be. We ideally need 2 midfielders and we are ok.
What you need to do is look at your own club. To avoid relegation you need to buy 2 midfielders, 2 strikers, a centre back, a left back and teach your right back to defend.

Lukker-

Seaneh wrote: »

Inter could afford him.

I doubt he'd go to Italy and I doubt Inter would move for him, sure aren't they getting Messi :pac:

niallo27

killwill wrote: »

Van Der Dar does not need to be replaced yet, Neville has been replaced by O'Shea and Rafael. Scholes needs to be playing week in week out IMO as he is still class. Giggs yes needs to be replaced. United are not nearly as badly off as you make them out to be. We ideally need 2 midfielders and we are ok.
What you need to do is look at your own club. To avoid relegation you need to buy 2 midfielders, 2 strikers, a centre back, a left back and teach your right back to defend.

Yes I'm resigned to the fact that we are in trouble and changes need to be made, scholes can't play every week, at the moment your manager is getting the most out of your squad which in my opinion is utds weakest in a long time

Mister men

Ordinary man wrote: »

If anyone would consider torres(michael owen the second:rolleyes:) as a good buy, they must expect united to be a mid table team:rolleyes:

Barcelona have the same buying power as blackpool these days, so their out

That only leaves real, city and chelsea who can afford him:mad:

Oh sweet jesus.

#15

niallo27 wrote: »

There was plenty of money floating around then, credit was easy to get, money was flowing, times have changed no one is imune from it, the party can't last forever

No one saying it can.
It's just amusing to see your ilk continue to write off Utd after 20 years of success.

The problems (ie a decline) will come when it's time to replace Ferguson, not before.

syngindub

#15 wrote: »

No one saying it can.
It's just amusing to see your ilk continue to write off Utd after 20 years of success.

The problems (ie a decline) will come when it's time to replace Ferguson, not before.

Agreed. This crowd have been calling this decline for the past 10 years. Just because their success after the 80's came to an abrupt end they are assuming the same dramatic fall for utd.

The Muppet

Ordinary man wrote: »

If anyone would consider torres(michael owen the second:rolleyes:) as a good buy, they must expect united to be a mid table team:rolleyes:

Ha Ha Torres a Second Michael Owen, I've seen some clueless things posted here but thats one of the better ones. Torres is just coming into his prime, don't let the mediorcrity he is playing with cloud your judgement, When he gets the service he's a top top player. His injury record would eb a worry but I suspect that with proper management/rotation that wouldn 't be the issue it has been to date.

Super-Rush

Ordinary man wrote: »

If anyone would consider torres(michael owen the second:rolleyes:) as a good buy, they must expect united to be a mid table team:rolleyes:

Barcelona have the same buying power as blackpool these days, so their out

That only leaves real, city and chelsea who can afford him:mad:

When you finish talking sh1t have a read.

3hn2givr7mx1sc

super-rush wrote: »

When you finish talking sh1t have a read.

Reading that makes me want to punch something.:mad:

Super-Rush

baz2009 wrote: »

Reading that makes me want to punch something.:mad:

I wouldn't be too happy about it myself if i were you. Somethings not right there if it happens.

Paleface

super-rush wrote: »

When you finish talking sh1t have a read.

Not looking good. Gill's comment suggests they are unprepared for whatever is going on.

Where are they getting their info from Rooneys side though?

mike65

So then are we about the see the first Utd star player get the better of Fergie? Could be cobblers could be the transfer sensation of the last decade. Yes bigger than Sol Campbell!

jank

This story has legs! I would be still surprised to see Ronney at City but there is something definately going on at United behind the scenes. Wendnesday night will tell a lot. Rooney out of the squad? On the bench?

kryogen

Since he got rested for the game at West Brom I would assume he will be starting the Champions League game that he was rested for

Mr.Nice Guy

This story makes for grim reading if you're a United fan:

£5million will trigger Wayne Rooney’s release from Manchester United

Wayne Rooney can terminate his Manchester United contract next summer under Fifa transfer regulations that would see the club receive only £5m in return.

Under the Webster ruling — named after the former Hearts player Andy Webster who set the precedent — Rooney can buy out the final year of his contract for his current annual salary of £5m plus a relatively small compensation figure.

As dictated by Article 17 of Fifa's transfer rules, it would dramatically reduce his current market value which is closer to £45m.

Rooney's qualification for a Webster ruling transfer has been checked by the Spain-based law firm Ruiz Huerta y Crespo, who have been involved in every major Article 17 case to date. They have confirmed that Rooney could leave United under the rules.

Rooney last entered into a new United contract in November 2006, when he agreed an extension to his existing deal to keep him at the club until the summer of 2012.

Under the ruling a player can walk away from his contract after what Fifa describes in its rules as the “protected period” of that deal has expired. The protected period varies according to a player's age.

If a player is under the age of 28 when signing the deal in question — as Rooney was — the protected period is three years of the contract.

Rooney was 21 in November 2006 when he signed his latest deal meaning that the protected period on his contract ran out in November 2009.

In the summer of this year he had the option to walk away in exchange for two year's salary. He could do the same next summer for one year's salary. The Webster ruling can only be activated in the summer and only after the provision of 15 days' notice in writing.

If United sell Rooney in January, the club would still be able to realise something close to his full value.

United's star player has already rejected an offer of a new contract on around £150,000 a week and holds the whip hand over a club who cannot afford to let him leave for free when his current deal expires in June 2012.

Yesterday the Chelsea manager Carlo Ancelotti said reporters would have to ask Roman Abramovich “directly” if they wanted to know whether his club were in the market for Rooney.

Real Madrid's sporting director Jorge Valdano said that his club did not have room among all their strikers.

The nightmare scenario for United is that Rooney goes to their neighbours City who, under the ownership of the Abu Dhabi prince Sheikh Mansour, are well capable of making him the highest paid player in the Premier League.

Even worse for United would be to lose their greatest asset for significantly less than his market value.

The complicating issue in Article 17 moves is the precise calculation of the compensation. The first player to invoke Article 17 was the Scotland defender Webster, who left Hearts for Wigan in 2006 after falling out with the Edinburgh club's chairman.

A legal battle ensued, first with Fifa and then in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), where a ruling set the precedent that a player could break a contract.

The ruling effectively set the amount of compensation to be paid as equal to the total amount of wages left on the player's contract when he walked out, plus a proportion of his original transfer fee, if still applicable.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/premiership/5million-will-trigger-wayne-rooneyrsquos-release-from-manchester-united-14980288.html

kryogen

The rule isnt new and is widely known about

They also tried to say Ronaldo was "very likely" to do it

Lukker-

I reckon he'll be on the bench at least. SAF mightn't want to put him in the starting line-up due to his poor form and recent comments. But leaving hime out entirely would send the completely wrong message at this point. Unless Rooney comes out tomorrow and says he wants to end his career at United I doubt he'll start.

niallo27

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

This story makes for grim reading if you're a United fan:

Could you imagine what wages city would offer him if this went through

Lukker-

kryogen wrote: »

The rule isnt new and is widely known about

They also tried to say Ronaldo was "very likely" to do it

But Ronaldo was under contract until 2012 so would had to wait 2 years? If it did go that far, it is would be worrying for United if they hadn't sold him by January and he still hadn't settled by the end of the season. It looks like tricky situation and Fergie and the board are gonna have some tough calls to make.

Mr.Nice Guy

kryogen wrote: »

The rule isnt new and is widely known about

They also tried to say Ronaldo was "very likely" to do it

Was Ronaldo entitled to do it? I wasn't actually aware of this ruling until now. The Independent have mentioned it too:

Rooney has options. His contract is up in June 2012 when he could walk away for free. The Fifa "Webster ruling" would permit him to buy out the last year of his contract for little more the equivalent of a year's salary, £5m. Rooney will not have to listen to the phone-ins over the next few days to know the rage and disbelief that will be expressed at his refusal to sign a new contract. He will already have realised what he is about to unleash. But he has spent most of his young life in the eye of one storm or another.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/rooneys-refusal-to-sign-new-deal-comes-down-to-one-thing-cash-2110323.html

This would be a disaster.

niallo27 wrote:

Could you imagine what wages city would offer him if this went through

He'd surely be the highest paid player in the league.

kryogen

Depends on your perspective i guess

Le King

Chucky the tree wrote: »

What is then?





There is, but it seems he doesn't want to sign that document. Not really, players who are at clubs they don't want to be tend to under perform.

Mr Alan wrote: »

Huh?! I'm not too up on finance, but common sense dictates that any business which is making huge losses and seemingly unable to reduce it's debt levels is not 'the best run' in the league. Also my brother, who is very clued in regards to financial matters has looked at your accounts and referred to the situation as dire.

Inquitus wrote: »

My Arse, I'd say Spurs are the best run business in the league. Sustainable relatively debt free growth and profitable too.

http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/pdfs/moneygame.pdf

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

You what?

What's the point in trying to debate this with you guys when clearly you haven't an clue what your talking about.


Manchester United is the best run business in the Premier League and we have been for 20+ years now.

There is not a chance we will go bust.

Mr Alan

If he goes it'll be the summer IMO. No ones gonna buy him in jan when he is cup tied and coming off/still on a horrendous run of form. So it'd be the summer, and I sense a fair few Utd fans would be very disappointed at the fee at that time too, one year left on his deal, tarnished reputation for marketing purposes, refusing to sign a new deal.... I think the price could be 'relatively' cheap.

Mr Alan

Le King wrote: »

What's the point in trying to debate this with you guys when clearly you haven't an clue what your talking about.


Manchester United is the best run business in the Premier League and we have been for 20+ years now.

There is not a chance we will go bust.

What are the chances of making a dent in your mountain of debt? Or making a profit? Commercially Utd are ran excellently, no doubt, however as a business you don't make a profit and have massive debts you can't afford to repay.

kryogen

Mr Alan wrote: »

What are the chances of making a dent in your mountain of debt? Or making a profit? Commercially Utd are ran excellently, no doubt, however as a business you don't make a profit and have massive debts you can't afford to repay.

Its not technically true though

As a business Manchester United Football Club is run brilliantly and makes a profit every year, the figures back this up (every year)

Whats this cant afford to repay **** actually?

We are repaying our debts, the debt has been reduced, and will continue to be reduced (slowly of course) until they are wiped once and for all

I am not in the least bit happy with the situation but dont try to paint pictures that arent accurate now

Le King

Mr Alan wrote: »

If he goes it'll be the summer IMO. No ones gonna buy him in jan when he is cup tied and coming off/still on a horrendous run of form. So it'd be the summer, and I sense a fair few Utd fans would be very disappointed at the fee at that time too, one year left on his deal, tarnished reputation for marketing purposes, refusing to sign a new deal.... I think the price could be 'relatively' cheap.

If all is lost United will sell him in January and Rooney, if he wants to go, would obviously prefer it to be settled.

Either way we'd fetch £50 Million for him IMO.


I still don't think he'll go at all.

PHB

Nor should you, unless you have some sort of magical strategy for dealing with the PIKs that nobody else knows about. A business which has a loan which is growing constantly and has no viable strategy to pay it off? Since when is that a good business, although in these economic times maybe that seems like good business to people. Nonetheless, there's a thread for this sort of thing.

Anyway, in relation to the Rooney situation, if this is all real, and if he does leave, who cares what he goes for? Ultimately it won't be re-invested in the squad and paying off an extra 5 or 15 million worth of debt doesn't really get my juices flowing. The only people that it will matter to are those who think that transfer values reflect a players ability and will want to use it in an argument. Ultimately, Rooney leaving will leave the football team worse off, as there is no way his replacement will be as good.

x in the city

Mr Alan wrote: »

If he goes it'll be the summer IMO. No ones gonna buy him in jan when he is cup tied and coming off/still on a horrendous run of form. So it'd be the summer, and I sense a fair few Utd fans would be very disappointed at the fee at that time too, one year left on his deal, tarnished reputation for marketing purposes, refusing to sign a new deal.... I think the price could be 'relatively' cheap.

and a passion for sultry whores wont increase his value much...

Yakult

Liverpool to make a sweeping bid for him in January to settle our goal problems..

Chucky the tree

Le King wrote: »

What's the point in trying to debate this with you guys when clearly you haven't an clue what your talking about.


Manchester United is the best run business in the Premier League and we have been for 20+ years now.

There is not a chance we will go bust.

I never asked to debate it, I asked you to explain it. Either you can or you can't.

Le King

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I never asked to debate it, I asked you to explain it. Either you can or you can't.

Are you seriously asking me if Net Profit is the deciding figure on a Balance sheet.


You can't be serious.

Chucky the tree

Le King wrote: »

Are you seriously asking me if Net Profit is the deciding figure on a Balance sheet.


You can't be serious.

I'm basically asking if net profit isn't the best way to see if a business is doing well then what is?What makes United the best run football club from a business perspective?

OPENROAD

kryogen wrote: »

Its not technically true though

As a business Manchester United Football Club is run brilliantly and makes a profit every year, the figures back this up (every year)

Whats this cant afford to repay **** actually?

We are repaying our debts, the debt has been reduced, and will continue to be reduced (slowly of course) until they are wiped once and for all

I am not in the least bit happy with the situation but dont try to paint pictures that arent accurate now

Is that not an operating profit?

thebullkf

United made 100m+ this year..... but they lost 140m or something similar in repayments.

liverpool made 60m+ this year....but lost 80m in repayments(approx)..


figures are prob. wrong but you get the jist.:essentially,if they don't get rid of their debt,they're fucked.... where's ronaldo's money gone>>>

>>>>servicing debt.

thebullkf

Le King wrote: »

What's the point in trying to debate this with you guys when clearly you haven't an clue what your talking about.


Manchester United is the best run business in the Premier League and we have been for 20+ years now.

There is not a chance we will go bust.

won't go bust....but a business which was the first in football to break the 100m barrier in a year and still record a loss does
equal a well run business.

johnnyjb

#15 wrote: »

Doubt Villa's fitness would have any effect.

Perfect for a high tempo system, intelligent player, good movement. Technique might let him down at times, but he has enough to make up for it.

Busquets-Xavi-Iniesta

Messi-Villa-Rooney

Is Rooney gonna match Pedro's 20 + goals a season out wide ?

Will play be directed to rooney who is slower than pedro , or messi who is even faster than pedro.

Looks good on a Fifa11 line up but not in real life imho

Liam O

thebullkf wrote: »

United made 100m+ this year..... but they lost 140m or something similar in repayments.

liverpool made 60m+ this year....but lost 80m in repayments(approx)..


figures are prob. wrong but you get the jist.:essentially,if they don't get rid of their debt,they're fucked.... where's ronaldo's money gone>>>

>>>>servicing debt.

it's in the bank actually, know what you're talking about before you start running your mouth.

Xavi6

Liam O wrote: »

it's in the bank actually, know what you're talking about before you start running your mouth.

If it's in the bank what's it doing there in terms of interest? Is it offsetting the debt or is it earning interest of its own?

NeoKubrick

johnnyjb wrote: »

Is Rooney gonna match Pedro's 20 + goals a season out wide ?

I don't think you've considered 'real life'.

Yes, Rooney would match Pedro's haul, because Rooney has played a similar position at United and has scored and assisted similar. The best player in that position for Barcelona was Henry, and Henry-Eto'o-Messi was a "FIFA line-up" and was that not one of the best and successful attacks ever in the modern game. And, similiarly to how Henry cuts in for a shot, Rooney prefers to cut-in from the left to set-up a shot or cross for his right foot - it's goal-time if a defender encourages Rooney to cut-in.

Rooney's best position is through the middle, but he'll do a better job than Pedro on the left-flank.

Most papers reporting he's off to City :eek:

"once a blue,always a blue"

springs to mind

Xavi6

Do not want tbh

DOC09UNAM

I don't think he'd do it tbh.

The Gauardian reckon if he goes it will be to another English club as his wife has a sick sister and would be unwilling to move.

Only 2 clubs could afford him in England.