PDA

View Full Version : Clyne to Brum?


bigwiz
16-06-2010, 09:07 AM
SSN report Birmingham in advanced talks in the transfer of clyne !

GreatGonzo
16-06-2010, 09:08 AM
Who have they negotiated a transfer fee with?

Woosie
16-06-2010, 09:11 AM
Bollox :( Hope this isn't true/doesn't happen.

Psychokiller
16-06-2010, 09:13 AM
Sounds like a few coked up wankers have sat round a table and said something along the lines of "Ok, so he won't go to Wolves, let's link him with a slightly bigger team this time. But who? Fulham? Naah, they've got Kelly and Pantsil. I know, let's link him with Brum. Yeah. That works". Then they report it as fact.

LeeH
16-06-2010, 09:16 AM
There's a piece on IMScouting with no quotes so until there's something concreate to back it up I guess it's watch this space, or rather, don't watch this space

http://www.imscouting.com/global-news-article/Birmingham-City-close-in-on-Crystal-Palace-youngster-Clyne/8354/

GreatGonzo
16-06-2010, 09:26 AM
Given that 2010 are still trying to get to the point where we can sell ST again and get things rolling for the new season with teh fixtures out tomorrow would they be spending ages driving hard transfer negotiations?

On top of that they hope to appoint a manager by the end of this week, next week at the latest i would guess. What sort of message is it to send out to the new boss that welcome, and by the way we just sold our best prospect?

I would be surprised if this is true.

Big Blue Eagle
16-06-2010, 09:27 AM
Why on earth would our new owners be "keen on a deal"? They have stated repeatedly that they want to build a club based on home grown talent. And a sum of 750k is just laughable. I know he is a rightback and less glamorous but with our changed circumstances he would command a fee moving towards that got for Moses.

Justin
16-06-2010, 09:28 AM
Sounds like a few coked up wankers have sat round a table and said something along the lines of "Ok, so he won't go to Wolves, let's link him with a slightly bigger team this time. But who? Fulham? Naah, they've got Kelly and Pantsil. I know, let's link him with Brum. Yeah. That works". Then they report it as fact.

I don't have a clue if Brum have spoken to anyone at Palace but they are interested and have been getting references, so to speak.

With that said this was a few weeks ago and pre takeover when a fee of 1m was being muted.

Baldy
16-06-2010, 09:28 AM
A load of b0llocks. Ignore

sydnsteve
16-06-2010, 09:30 AM
Total horse shit. There are no definite owners till the CVA, no manager, and the sum is a laugh. What a waste of space.

Son of Ron
16-06-2010, 09:35 AM
2m plus I'd let him go, otherwise the best move for him personally and for us has to be to play another season of 30 odd games in the Championship rather than half a dozen sub appearances in the Premiershit.

CPFC_DAVE77
16-06-2010, 09:35 AM
Before people totally right it off, Brum have spent big money already, who's to say following the (imminent) onwership of CPFC2010 they didn't say 'name your price' and we did?

GreatGonzo
16-06-2010, 09:39 AM
Before people totally right it off, Brum have spent big money already, who's to say following the (imminent) onwership of CPFC2010 they didn't say 'name your price' and we did?

Because the relationship with any incoming manager, unless they were consulted on it, would be damaged before it has even started.

We have a rebuilding job to do and selling Clyne would increase that dramatically. Yes the money may be useful but the manager needs to input into who stay, who goes and who comes in, otherwise we will be on teh manager merry-go-round again.

CPFC_DAVE77
16-06-2010, 09:45 AM
We have a rebuilding job to do and selling Clyne would increase that dramatically.

Right back is replacable. I would love to keep all our players, especially Clyne as a local lad and a real prospect. But a RB is replacable Gonzo.

FraserH
16-06-2010, 09:48 AM
I can see this happening, seems like the kind of player brum would buy, i would not have a problem with him going if we get the right price.

and whose to say the potential new manager has said he doesn't want to keep clyne?

GreatGonzo
16-06-2010, 09:50 AM
Dave who would you replace him with?

Butterfield may well have already signed a deal elsewhere, if not he is getting slower and at the wrong end of his career. From the academy can we find someone to just step up or are we having to look in the transfer market?

In the transfer market are CCC quality right backs any easier to replace at the moment than other positions?

EVERYONE is replaceable, just a matter of how easy it is and how expensive. I would be seriously disappointed in 2010 if they do a deal before a manager comes on board.

sw16girl
16-06-2010, 09:52 AM
I don't have a clue if Brum have spoken to anyone at Palace but they are interested and have been getting references, so to speak.

With that said this was a few weeks ago and pre takeover when a fee of 1m was being muted.

Then maybe we should hope that this is just reheated old news

Dingle
16-06-2010, 10:12 AM
I doubt this is true but if it is, :sob:

Absolution
16-06-2010, 10:18 AM
Price quoted seems extremely low.

NateEagle
16-06-2010, 10:22 AM
I thought CPFC2010 said they wouldnt do any trading until a new manager was employed??? If he does go it will be a huge disappointment but if he goes for less than 2million it will be a disgrace...IMHO he is our most promising youth in a long long time, and thats including moses and bostock

tomario
16-06-2010, 10:25 AM
Hope its not true, we need Clyne to stay. If he was to leave, rather it be to a better top flight team than the bluenoses.

mushroom
16-06-2010, 10:40 AM
If he does go, I hope we are now in a position to negotiate a decent price, with sell ons, appearances (prem/country) etc

sw16girl
16-06-2010, 10:46 AM
It has crossed my mind - the wages have been paid in full - that means that the advance made by CPFC 2010 as per the CVA papers will have already been spent. The wages for June are either going to have to be deferred or paid from player sales or 2010 are going to have to put in more money before the sale has been finalised.

GreatGonzo
16-06-2010, 10:55 AM
Deferred by what? a week? The CVA would go through next Friday, wages are due to be paid the following Wednesday i guess - even that timetable could be met.

Once agreed, there is only a very small chance that the sale wuold not proceed, i doubt the payment would be a very risky one.

Also when do we recieve our first TV payment for the coming season? The club should also get a burst of ST sales in the next few weeks, 3,000 more ST sales (low estimate) at 400 each, even allowing for some concessions and some at higher prices would bring in over 1m. I expect the consortium will be hoping for close to double that.

Not sure they would sell players unless they really had to with reasonably large revenue streams about to come in. The Chelsea friendly will go a long way to pay July's wages as well.

Shipp Ahoy!
16-06-2010, 11:09 AM
Besides at this point even if the CVA doesn't go through it won't affect the takeover. CPFC2010 have already said that even if it went pear shaped all it would mean would be they started the season on -17 points.

sw16girl
16-06-2010, 11:18 AM
Deferred by what? a week? The CVA would go through next Friday, wages are due to be paid the following Wednesday i guess - even that timetable could be met.

Once agreed, there is only a very small chance that the sale would not proceed, i doubt the payment would be a very risky one.

Also when do we recieve our first TV payment for the coming season? The club should also get a burst of ST sales in the next few weeks, 3,000 more ST sales (low estimate) at 400 each, even allowing for some concessions and some at higher prices would bring in over 1m. I expect the consortium will be hoping for close to double that.

Not sure they would sell players unless they really had to with reasonably large revenue streams about to come in. The Chelsea friendly will go a long way to pay July's wages as well.

The deal will not go through until mid July at the earliest. After the CVA there is a 28 day period in which appeals can be made and the FL has to approve the transfer which will happen at the first available Committee meeting which I think is mid to late July.

The ST money will be ring fenced (because legally it has to be) until the deal actually goes through (that has been confirmed) however the Chelsea money will be available once the game has been played so you are right on that.

The first TV payment from the League turns up sometime in August.

The June wages are massive because they include both the monthly wages and an additional 750k of deferred bonuses which have been accumulated over the year so about 1.5m will be needed.

I am aware what CPFC 2010 have said on here - that is not of course the official stance (which is a much better negotiating one) that they will walk if it doesn't happen. On the whole it would be better if that is what anyone who could scupper the deal thought, and it may actually be the case as despite what CPFC 2010 said on here the actual penalty for not exiting via a CVA is not fixed and it might well be 17 points but it might be something else entirely. However if they do pour in additional money then it would be clear that they did intend to proceed regardless. That has not been how they have proceeded to date and even the 550k they have put in has been carefully safeguarded as far as possible in the event the matter did not go ahead.

GreatGonzo
16-06-2010, 11:38 AM
Are they not already on the hook for the Agilo money having bought their debt?

IMO they are already in this for the long haul no matter what.

The Gerry Queen
16-06-2010, 11:48 AM
I guess this might have been one of the proposed deals the Administrator set up via the agency he has been using in the event of CPFC2010 not coming through as they have. As with Ambrose, there is no compulsion for CPFC2010 to follow through as the knock down fee's will be uncompetitve and only reflect a fraction of the player's worth anyway. There may be a few more of these filtering through but if the fans respond well enough with ST purchases there shouldn't be much pressure on us to sell.

sw16girl
16-06-2010, 12:13 PM
Are they not already on the hook for the Agilo money having bought their debt?

IMO they are already in this for the long haul no matter what.

They have bought Agilo's debt - however Agilo's debt is secured which was why Agilo were in a strong bargaining postion anyway. I am only poiinting out that the deal as set out in the CVA agreement has a shortfall - that could be met various ways of which a player sale is one. That said there may be other possibilities.

GreatGonzo
16-06-2010, 12:16 PM
They have bought Agilo's debt - however Agilo's debt is secured which was why Agilo were in a strong bargaining postion anyway. I am only poiinting out that the deal as set out in the CVA agreement has a shortfall - that could be met various ways of which a player sale is one. That said there may be other possibilities.

My point about buying Agilo's debt is that should they not proceed without a CVA or if the CVA is challenged then as they are 'the only horse in town' a fire sale of the players and liquidation of the club would probably not see them get all the money back that they have paid for that debt.

Therefore they are already on the hook for a certain amount of money and i think it will strengthen the case that they will follow this through all the way now.

KungFuCharlie
16-06-2010, 12:17 PM
It could be that the new manager has said 'I'd rather have 6m to spend than the league's best right back.'

Not that ridiculous.

I simply cannot believe that he would be sold to pay wages - it makes absolutely not sense whatsoever.

baldini1
16-06-2010, 12:22 PM
If we needed a quick fix to pay wages etc then surely Ambrose would be more likely to be sold than Clyne seeing as a deal has already been agreed with QPR?

zuper zalace
16-06-2010, 12:24 PM
If it's for a decent fee, ie 3.5-5m then i'd take it

Scoot
16-06-2010, 12:48 PM
It could be that the new manager has said 'I'd rather have 6m to spend than Englands future best right back.'

.

Get it right :p

Gladalloverrob
16-06-2010, 01:36 PM
The deal will not go through until mid July at the earliest. After the CVA there is a 28 day period in which appeals can be made and the FL has to approve the transfer which will happen at the first available Committee meeting which I think is mid to late July.

The ST money will be ring fenced (because legally it has to be) until the deal actually goes through (that has been confirmed) however the Chelsea money will be available once the game has been played so you are right on that.

The first TV payment from the League turns up sometime in August.

The June wages are massive because they include both the monthly wages and an additional 750k of deferred bonuses which have been accumulated over the year so about 1.5m will be needed.

I am aware what CPFC 2010 have said on here - that is not of course the official stance (which is a much better negotiating one) that they will walk if it doesn't happen. On the whole it would be better if that is what anyone who could scupper the deal thought, and it may actually be the case as despite what CPFC 2010 said on here the actual penalty for not exiting via a CVA is not fixed and it might well be 17 points but it might be something else entirely. However if they do pour in additional money then it would be clear that they did intend to proceed regardless. That has not been how they have proceeded to date and even the 550k they have put in has been carefully safeguarded as far as possible in the event the matter did not go ahead.


CPFC 2010 have already staed in the Season Ticket Sales that if the CVA has failed, Palace will still be in the Championship with Minus 17.

"14-06-2010, 02:01 PM
CPFC2010
Registered User Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 54


Yes there will be a student concession as usual.

In the highly unlikely event that the cva doesn't proceed we'll still be playing football just on minus 17 points. But whatever happens Crystal Palace FC is going to playing in the Championship next season.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by CPFC2010 : 14-06-2010 at 02:03 PM."

jobiinthelastmi
16-06-2010, 01:43 PM
Dear Birmingham

FOAD

Thanks.....

sw16girl
16-06-2010, 01:46 PM
CPFC 2010 have already staed in the Season Ticket Sales that if the CVA has failed, Palace will still be in the Championship with Minus 17.

"14-06-2010, 02:01 PM
CPFC2010
Registered User Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 54


Yes there will be a student concession as usual.

In the highly unlikely event that the cva doesn't proceed we'll still be playing football just on minus 17 points. But whatever happens Crystal Palace FC is going to playing in the Championship next season.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by CPFC2010 : 14-06-2010 at 02:03 PM."

I know he said that but he cannot actually know that. The penalty is down to the FL and it is discretionary - that is the most likely result but no one can be certain as the FL make the decision.

I would say that I have spoken to a member of the consortium about that in the past and discussed the position and I am sure they will have been advised by their professional advisors as well. It is very clear in the FL rules - going into Administration and the penalty is fixed - coming out it is discretionary so no one can say definitely what it would be, even a member of the consortium as it is not within the consortiums say so - it is down to the FL.

Gladalloverrob
16-06-2010, 01:55 PM
I know he said that but he cannot actually know that. The penalty is down to the FL and it is discretionary - that is the most likely result but no one can be certain as the FL make the decision.

I would say that I have spoken to a member of the consortium about that in the past and discussed the position and I am sure they will have been advised by their professional advisors as well. It is very clear in the FL rules - going into Administration and the penalty is fixed - coming out it is discretionary so no one can say definitely what it would be, even a member of the consortium as it is not within the consortiums say so - it is down to the FL.

I know that, but they have changed what they are saying now, instead of saying we'll walk if the CVA doesn't go through they are now saying well no matter what we'll still be here even if we end up with - points at the start. Which I assume is down to the fact that a lot of things are in place i.e. deal for ground and the Agilo debt belongs to them.

Beanie
16-06-2010, 02:17 PM
The deal will not go through until mid July at the earliest. After the CVA there is a 28 day period in which appeals can be made and the FL has to approve the transfer which will happen at the first available Committee meeting which I think is mid to late July.

The ST money will be ring fenced (because legally it has to be) until the deal actually goes through (that has been confirmed) however the Chelsea money will be available once the game has been played so you are right on that.

The first TV payment from the League turns up sometime in August.

The June wages are massive because they include both the monthly wages and an additional 750k of deferred bonuses which have been accumulated over the year so about 1.5m will be needed.

I am aware what CPFC 2010 have said on here - that is not of course the official stance (which is a much better negotiating one) that they will walk if it doesn't happen. On the whole it would be better if that is what anyone who could scupper the deal thought, and it may actually be the case as despite what CPFC 2010 said on here the actual penalty for not exiting via a CVA is not fixed and it might well be 17 points but it might be something else entirely. However if they do pour in additional money then it would be clear that they did intend to proceed regardless. That has not been how they have proceeded to date and even the 550k they have put in has been carefully safeguarded as far as possible in the event the matter did not go ahead.
And of course all of this is going to take CPFC2010 by surprise isn't it. I don't expect they realised that wages need to be paid in June as well as in May, good job somebody has told them.:rolleyes:

sw16girl
16-06-2010, 04:14 PM
And of course all of this is going to take CPFC2010 by surprise isn't it. I don't expect they realised that wages need to be paid in June as well as in May, good job somebody has told them.:rolleyes:

I do not think for a moment it has taken them by surprise - don't be quite so desperate to pretend that I'm trying to look like I'm telling them something - it does you no favours - I expect they know about it but some people on here don't.

In fact it is precisely because I am sure they know about it that I suggested that may be why there is a possibility of selling Clyne to deal with it - which is where I cam in on this :rolleyes:

jcreedy
16-06-2010, 04:28 PM
I do not think for a moment it has taken them by surprise - don't be quite so desperate to pretend that I'm trying to look like I'm telling them something - it does you no favours - I expect they know about it but some people on here don't.

In fact it is precisely because I am sure they know about it that I suggested that may be why there is a possibility of selling Clyne to deal with it - which is where I cam in on this :rolleyes:

They've said on here that the wage bill as it stands is manageable. They also stopped all player sales as soon as they came in. They haven't been able to make decisions on player's contracts, because a new manager might have a different view on the matter, so I can't see them selling our most promising player for peanuts without an incredibly good explanation.

sw16girl
16-06-2010, 04:33 PM
They've said on here that the wage bill as it stands is manageable. They also stopped all player sales as soon as they came in. They haven't been able to make decisions on player's contracts, because a new manager might have a different view on the matter, so I can't see them selling our most promising player for peanuts without an incredibly good explanation.

I am not saying they will (and who is saying it would be for peanuts - for all we know it might be a good offer) only that it is a possible sale with a possible reason.

Big Blue Eagle
17-06-2010, 12:33 PM
SLP is reporting the deal is "close" but no fee agreed and implying that Brum & 2010 have been talking. As usual, it is "SLP understands" etc etc

The Gerry Queen
17-06-2010, 12:40 PM
Surely this would now be an issue for the new manager to make decisions on ? It seems strange that you are negotiating a key players sale at the same time as you are appointing a new manager whose brief is to deal with precisely these issues. Maybe the SLP are just ahead of themselves here. Didn'tt hink that they could go the whole way on Palace's best good news day without finding something to piss on our parade with.

TheCharmer
17-06-2010, 12:42 PM
unfortunately not a surprise......But disappointing we re shedding our top young talent

Matt_Hep
17-06-2010, 12:46 PM
Will be very fvcking sad if we lose him...

Two top academy prospects going for next to nothing; without us ever properly enjoying seeing locally raised lads wearing the red & blue..fvcks sake.

cpfcfan1
17-06-2010, 01:36 PM
Was hoping Clyne would be a regular starter.

Pathetic if we lose him before we even start

Dingle
17-06-2010, 02:40 PM
After loosing Bostock and Moses for roughly 3 million up front, I was hoping the days of being royally scr*wed over by Premiership clubs was over. Seems like that might not be the case :(

Still, I suppose CPFC2010 put a lot of money in to save the club and probably want to recuperate some of that money back which is only fair enough. Let's hope we have some more academy lads to step up and fill the gap left by Watson, Moses, Clyne et al.

Baldy
17-06-2010, 02:42 PM
After loosing Bostock and Moses


LOSING

Beanie
17-06-2010, 03:24 PM
They've said on here that the wage bill as it stands is manageable. They also stopped all player sales as soon as they came in. They haven't been able to make decisions on player's contracts, because a new manager might have a different view on the matter, so I can't see them selling our most promising player for peanuts without an incredibly good explanation.
Exactly - there is no way they'd make statements like "no need to sell" if they know they need to sell to pay the wages, and today isn't the first time they've said it. So, either they mean it or they've been taken by surprise by the wage bill. Take your choice!

sw16girl
17-06-2010, 03:46 PM
Exactly - there is no way they'd make statements like "no need to sell" if they know they need to sell to pay the wages, and today isn't the first time they've said it. So, either they mean it or they've been taken by surprise by the wage bill. Take your choice!

But they are not paying the wages atm, only making a contribution towards them - obviously if that changes then they will not need to sell - as I said it might change but the informaton is in the CVA. It isn't anything to argue about. The money set out in the CVA as having been loaned into the club is not enough to pay the wages.

So either the administrator may have to sell or they may pay in more - we do not know which it is but banging on about what was said and when is irrelevent when the figures are set out and unarguable. You were exactly the same when trying to prove that SJ was not in the slightest bit in any financial difficulties at all last year.

GreatGonzo
17-06-2010, 03:52 PM
The money set out in the CVA as having been loaned into the club is not enough to pay the wages.

How much was it and what is the wage bill? The administrator said that only half of May's wages woudl be paid a few weeks ago. Therefore they only needed to cover 50% surely. We were told that the bill was 800k many months ago but having shed a few staff off that i would suspect it was somewhat lower.

If 2010 put in 350k that would be about right for May. We are yet to get to the June payment and i guess they will wait till next Fridays vote before confirming what they do then.

sw16girl
17-06-2010, 04:32 PM
How much was it and what is the wage bill? The administrator said that only half of May's wages woudl be paid a few weeks ago. Therefore they only needed to cover 50% surely. We were told that the bill was 800k many months ago but having shed a few staff off that i would suspect it was somewhat lower.

If 2010 put in 350k that would be about right for May. We are yet to get to the June payment and i guess they will wait till next Fridays vote before confirming what they do then.

The full report is herre of course http://195.171.95.190/panda/reportreg/showReport.asp?reportId=795

The relevant clause is 3.7 which says that CPFC 2010 have made a loan to the Administrator called the Close Season Loan to meet the clubs running expenses - the deferred wages are specifically excluded from being included in that loan sum - it is page 17 of the document. It does not say how much the loan is but makes it clear that it gets preferred status for repayment if the CVA does not go ahead - which is standard.

It could be that additional money has been loaned but if so then that is something that has happened after the CVA documents have been sent out, as the paperwork stands they are not paying the deferred wages which is why all the stuff about whether it was a surprise or not is just so much white noise.

adrenalin john
17-06-2010, 05:01 PM
I would hope that if there is one manager who could improve a talented young full back it would be George Burley. He was genuinely outstanding in that position.

I also hope we get another season at the very least out of Clynne, he will improve quickest with us and in the future he would also be better off moving for 5million and being played than for 750k as 'one for the future'

He should go to Arsenal in a few years for 7.5 mill

gold76
17-06-2010, 08:38 PM
Clyne will be a first team regular this season, I love Danny B & hope he stays but now is the time for Nathaniel to nail down the right back slot.

Extreme folly to let him go just yet

jj62255
17-06-2010, 09:59 PM
750k is an insult. I can't believe they would even think about selling him at that price. He is exactly the kind of player we should be be building our team around and tie down to a longer contract, at least to get some decent compensation when he eventually goes on to bigger things. He even seems to have a level headed agent (there's a first), seing as he rejected Wolves this winter.

DaveP
18-06-2010, 10:28 AM
Daily Mail is reporting that Birmingham are close to signing Nathaniel Clyne for 1.2 million!

Please that cannot be true!

Jordan's Jacket
18-06-2010, 10:32 AM
That price is an insult

David of Kent
18-06-2010, 10:35 AM
I would really hope that our new owners are playing much more "hardball" than letting Clyne go for 1.2M.

He is contracted and not, from what we've read, threatening to want to leave. Given the figures for Walker and Naugthon of Sheffield United last year, I'd be shocked to see him go for less than 3m.

Jimmy Eagle
18-06-2010, 10:41 AM
After loosing Bostock and Moses for roughly 3 million up front, I was hoping the days of being royally scr*wed over by Premiership clubs was over. Seems like that might not be the case :(

Still, I suppose CPFC2010 put a lot of money in to save the club and probably want to recuperate some of that money back which is only fair enough. Let's hope we have some more academy lads to step up and fill the gap left by Watson, Moses, Clyne et al.

What are you basing this on? What fee has been mentioned? For all we know, it could be a very reasonable amount. As we have learned, CPFC2010 will not be taken for ride, and I am sure this applies to transfer fees too.

Jimmy Eagle
18-06-2010, 10:44 AM
Oops, should have read all of the thread

Woosie
18-06-2010, 01:27 PM
But they are not paying the wages atm, only making a contribution towards them - obviously if that changes then they will not need to sell - as I said it might change but the informaton is in the CVA. It isn't anything to argue about. The money set out in the CVA as having been loaned into the club is not enough to pay the wages.


Not saying that you are wrong, as you probably aren't, but Guilfoyle said this: At first it seemed that 2010 were only offering enough for 50% of the salaries, at least until their takeover was finalised, but I think they made a commercial decision to pay the wages in full.

Presumably he must only be talking about the wages for May then, and not for the following months?

For anyone wondering about the 29 people made redundant, Guilfoyle believes that they will not be re-employed by the club As far as I'm aware that won't change... they were real redundancies. All we can hope is that they find work elsewhere.

Beanie
18-06-2010, 02:12 PM
It could be that additional money has been loaned but if so then that is something that has happened after the CVA documents have been sent out, as the paperwork stands they are not paying the deferred wages which is why all the stuff about whether it was a surprise or not is just so much white noise.
Of course the "taken by surprise" was a touch of sarcasm, and not aimed at them, of course they knew, but it doesn't alter the basic point (in fact it reinforces it). CPFC2010 know the time scales of the CVA and they know the money needed during that period. Knowing this they have said that Burley has no need to sell and if he does he gets to keep the money. Therefore, whatever the documents says, there must be a way to cover the costs without selling players.

Beanie
18-06-2010, 02:14 PM
After loosing Bostock and Moses for roughly 3 million up front, I was hoping the days of being royally scr*wed over by Premiership clubs was over. Seems like that might not be the case :(

Still, I suppose CPFC2010 put a lot of money in to save the club and probably want to recuperate some of that money back which is only fair enough. Let's hope we have some more academy lads to step up and fill the gap left by Watson, Moses, Clyne et al.
According to SP any money on sales goes into the pot for Burley to spend.

orp pisshead1
19-06-2010, 09:07 PM
Will be very fvcking sad if we lose him...

Two top academy prospects going for next to nothing; without us ever properly enjoying seeing locally raised lads wearing the red & blue..fvcks sake.
Well said mate, as i've said earlier in thread he's worth 7 mill + of anyones money, further cemented by a 3rd div pikey joining boro for 1.4 mill:-o!.

BulletEagle
20-06-2010, 11:44 AM
From tribalfootball:

Birmingham City will continue talks this week for Crystal Palace fullback Nathaniel Clyne.

The Sunday Mercury says Brum boss Alex McLeish will continue to press for Crystal Palace defender Clyne.

Palace want around 2 million and Blues have put a new bid in.

http://www.tribalfootball.com/birmingham-maintain-palace-talks-clyne-920461?

chatham_eagle
20-06-2010, 11:47 AM
4M up front, none of this installments business + loan back (Brum paying wages) + Future appearance add ons or **** off.

The Gerry Queen
20-06-2010, 11:52 AM
Since when was 'Tribal Football' a reliable information source ? Even though the SLP have also reported this, I think that this is the tale end of one of the contingency sales set up by an agency on behalf of the Administrator when we needed to sell to pay wages for May. Brum have probably upped their offer from 750k but they would need to think in terms of 3.5m , with 2m up front , to get talks going again and this time they aren't dealing with and agency speaking for CPFC.

Psychokiller
20-06-2010, 11:54 AM
He doesn't want to leave, CPFC2010 do not need to sell him and I would imagine that George Burley, having been a right back himself, will look at his quality and want to keep him.

He will move on eventually, but to a much bigger and better club than that shithouse of a place.

Vince Hilaire's Afro
20-06-2010, 01:54 PM
Until a packet of crisps is mentioned as part of the deal, I won't be believing a word of it.

Jay_Palace
20-06-2010, 04:27 PM
2 mill is too cheap.

bern5161
20-06-2010, 04:48 PM
tribalfootball trawl around football fora, such as this one, and present harry monk type speculation as fact. move along please

cpfcfan1
20-06-2010, 04:52 PM
Please please do not sell Clyne, such a good tallent

All_Fired_Up
21-06-2010, 02:10 AM
Clyne will not go, as already said, Burnley will have him looking forward to wearing the Red & Blue.

Madden
21-06-2010, 02:34 AM
Clyne will not go, as already said, Burnley will have him looking forward to wearing the Red & Blue.

Aren't they claret and blue?

All_Fired_Up
21-06-2010, 02:50 AM
Aren't they claret and blue?



We are currently Red & Blue

cpfcfan1
22-06-2010, 03:17 PM
NEW Palace manager George Burley is hoping to persuade highly rated youngster Nathaniel Clyne that his future lies at Selhurst Park.

The talented young full back has been strongly linked with a move to the Premier League, with Alex McLeish's Birmingham leading the race for his signature.

However, Burley has a major reputation for developing young players and is optimistic he can persuade the 19-year-old to stay.

The Eagles new boss has spent the first seven days of his reign on a previously booked holiday, but his number two Dougie Feedman told the Advertiser that he and Burley are big fans of Clyne and are desperate for him to commit his future to Palace.

"Nathaniel is a fantastic young player, and we both feel that he is still nowhere near his full potential," he said.

"We've spoken with him and told him that he's already at the right club to develop and become an even better player.

"George will sit down with all the players next week and have a face-to-face chat with them. We want Nathaniel to stay and hopefully he will see that's the right decision."

*See Friday's Croydon Advertiser for all the latest Palace news

http://www.sportcroydon.co.uk/palacenews/Burley-keen-Clyne-Palace/article-2334144-detail/article.html

DaveP
22-06-2010, 03:21 PM
Nathan is a player very much with his head screwed on, hence why he stayed last season and i think with the likely guarantee of 1st team football regularly next season he will again opt to stay with Palace.

GreatGonzo
22-06-2010, 04:48 PM
If he will get the 1st team football.

He only played in 6 of the 14 games under Hart, he would have felt no doubt that given his show of loyalty in January that was a bit disappointing.

I am sure Burley will play him a lot more but lots of people said Hart was good with youngsters, as was Peter Taylor but when push came to shove teh experience pros made the teamsheet.

I think it will be important how the meeting with Burley goes.

All_Fired_Up
22-06-2010, 05:01 PM
I am sure under Burley he will start alot more games this coming season.

TheCharmer
22-06-2010, 06:03 PM
dougie doesnt sound all together convinced they can persuade him to stay. As already mentioned, he turned down the premiership to stay with us in Jan and wasnt rewarded for that loyalty by NW or Hart

The Gerry Queen
22-06-2010, 06:11 PM
dougie doesnt sound all together convinced they can persuade him to stay. As already mentioned, he turned down the premiership to stay with us in Jan and wasnt rewarded for that loyalty by NW or Hart

Clyne was injured in the run in to the end of last season and was never 100% fit. If Hart had played him any more he would have risked more serious injury. A fit Butterfield was always a safer bet than a half fit Clyne ( wouldn't have said that at half time at Hillsborough though !)

I think Dougie has been clear enough. The first admin based bid has been rejected by the Consortium. If they come back it won't be high enough for us I am sure. When he goes he will be able to do a lot better than playing for a relegation bound Birmingham City.

TheCharmer
22-06-2010, 06:22 PM
i dont think Clyne will be allowed to leave unless he really pushes it. It flys in the face of what the consortium are all about, they seem to be putting all their stock on the youngsters, so to let our best one doesnt make sense.

Derry was more logical he was a high earner in his 30's, and some more of that age group might follow, but not the youngsters i wouldnt have thought.

cpfcfan1
22-06-2010, 06:23 PM
If he really wants to go then Burley will not want him, he said he wants players here who want to play for Palace

Clyne seems a sensible lad anyway, hope he stays

gold76
22-06-2010, 09:06 PM
I think he's a definite starter come Leicester home & will be a regular this season. Danny B could play the midfield holding role..

Owngoal
22-06-2010, 11:19 PM
Clyne can play either full back position, him and Butts to start with Hills injured. He knows he will do well with us and will not sit in the reserves

Gerry from Sussex
23-06-2010, 07:34 AM
I think he's a definite starter come Leicester home & will be a regular this season. Danny B could play the midfield holding role..

I was rather hoping we would play Danny B up front - he has a few goals in him you know!!

Seriously though, I really hope we can keep Nat Clyne. He is already a good player and likely to become a very good player. But, most importantly, it would be a sign that the new owners are going to be able to meet their aspiration for us to keep the best of our young players. That's not completely in their hands though (unless you force a player to stay, which never works in the long run) so, if he does go, I hope that they can deliver on their plan B and get a good price for our young players. I have no doubts at all that their intentions are genuine but we all know how easy it is to get stiched up by bigger clubs picking up our young talent on the cheap when the FA do nothing to protect the selling clubs. So, how this works out will be a good litmus test.

Excowboy
28-06-2010, 08:27 AM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1290141/Birmingham-turn-attention-Hearts-defender-Wallace-Fulham-reject-Konchesky-bid.html

1m is a joke for the young footballer of the year. Surely we'll reject that. I hope he still wants to stay after we've signed Wright. Was hoping we would tie up the current squad to deals before we got other people in.

Latvian
28-06-2010, 08:39 AM
f off 1mil Brum! Triple that at least......

How much was paid for Kyle Naughton?

Big Blue Eagle
28-06-2010, 08:47 AM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1290141/Birmingham-turn-attention-Hearts-defender-Wallace-Fulham-reject-Konchesky-bid.html

1m is a joke for the young footballer of the year. Surely we'll reject that. I hope he still wants to stay after we've signed Wright. Was hoping we would tie up the current squad to deals before we got other people in.

Wright is a utility defender replacing Lawrence & Hill. Remember that at present we have just McCarthy, Davis & Clyne on the books as fit defenders with any senior team experience, plus Hills when he gets back to fitness.

There are not that many of the current squad who NEED new deals - Derry, Ertl and seemingly Hill have gone. Flahaven will as well. That really only leaves Lawrence & Butts to sort out of the senior out of contract players I think? 3 youngsters have been offered contracts, I guess Mann will be as well.

cpfcben
28-06-2010, 09:06 AM
Disgraceful offer.

st albans
28-06-2010, 09:26 AM
after the way Johnson played for England recently and i was Clyne i'd think there's a good chance of playing for England one day

keep your head down, play a full season or two and then we'll see

Big Fella
28-06-2010, 10:14 AM
If they offered us 1 mil plus O'Connor or Murray (the left back), then maybe we can talk.

Kirby
28-06-2010, 10:48 AM
If they offered us 1 mil plus O'Connor or Murray (the left back), then maybe we can talk.

Yep, 1m plus O'Connor would be a very good deal for us, IMO.

It would be a shame to lose Clyne, but Wright is a very solid Championship full-back, and O'Connor is exactly what we need upfront.

Seaside Eagle
28-06-2010, 11:13 AM
Yep, 1m plus O'Connor would be a very good deal for us, IMO.

It would be a shame to lose Clyne, but Wright is a very solid Championship full-back, and O'Connor is exactly what we need upfront.

This. O'Connor would bang them in, if he could stay uninjured for a season.

JamTheEagle
28-06-2010, 11:15 AM
Yep, 1m plus O'Connor would be a very good deal for us, IMO.

It would be a shame to lose Clyne, but Wright is a very solid Championship full-back, and O'Connor is exactly what we need upfront.

Agree with the part exchange - still disagree with the starting price.

Beanie
28-06-2010, 11:18 AM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1290141/Birmingham-turn-attention-Hearts-defender-Wallace-Fulham-reject-Konchesky-bid.html

1m is a joke for the young footballer of the year. Surely we'll reject that. I hope he still wants to stay after we've signed Wright. Was hoping we would tie up the current squad to deals before we got other people in.
Why spend time now on players already under contract? It won't stop bids, won't stop a player who is so minded to push for a move and we can reject whether the contract is one year or five if we don't think bids are high enough. We need to sort out the out of contract players, bring in the necessary new faces then we can take a look at the players who we already have under contract, starting with the ones entering their last year. There's probably two or three years of catching up to be done in this area, it all takes time, rush it and all of a sudden the budget is spent and the squad isn't right.

rainbow_child
28-06-2010, 11:20 AM
1 mil wouldn't buy Clyne's boot laces :veryangry

CPFC2010 may be new to the running of a football club but they are not bloody mugs! 3mil + add ons

Sleeping Giant
28-06-2010, 11:26 AM
He doesn't want to leave, CPFC2010 do not need to sell him and I would imagine that George Burley, having been a right back himself, will look at his quality and want to keep him.



Didn't Herbert Chapman once say something along the lines of "show me a good keeper, centre half, midfielder, winger and goalscorer and I'll show you a good football team". Whether he did or not, I agree with the sentiments, even today. Full back is not a priority in the grand scheme of things. It's a "nice to have" if you've quality in those other areas. I'd suggest that we haven't in most so it would be sensible to ensure we are competitive there first. That means "sell" but only for the right price, admittedly.

orp pisshead1
28-06-2010, 12:07 PM
Yep, 1m plus O'Connor would be a very good deal for us, IMO.

It would be a shame to lose Clyne, but Wright is a very solid Championship full-back, and O'Connor is exactly what we need upfront.
Lol 1 million plus yet another injury prone player. We should tell all clubs(if we were indeed to sell) bidding starts at 5 mill NO LESS!. Other wise it'll be speroni 1 mill, ambrose 8 golden syrup sponges etc etc.

jj62255
28-06-2010, 12:47 PM
Dear Birmingham,

Please go f*** yourselves.

Sincerely CPFC

Beanie
28-06-2010, 02:09 PM
Didn't Herbert Chapman once say something along the lines of "show me a good keeper, centre half, midfielder, winger and goalscorer and I'll show you a good football team". Whether he did or not, I agree with the sentiments, even today. Full back is not a priority in the grand scheme of things. It's a "nice to have" if you've quality in those other areas. I'd suggest that we haven't in most so it would be sensible to ensure we are competitive there first. That means "sell" but only for the right price, admittedly.
Was the term "midfielder" even invented in the 30's? Any way, splitting hairs. It's a big mistake to under estimate any position on the pitch. If Chapman did indeed want a good winger, who would it be trying to stop them? The full back. Many teams are easy to turn, wingers get behind the defence and put across good balls, yes that makes a good team, but equally one of the best ways to beat that good team is to stop the winger, because that can also starve the goalscorer. It's very easy to see when a team has poor full backs,

hamge
28-06-2010, 02:55 PM
Monday, 28 June 2010

By Richard Cawley
CRYSTAL Palace boss George Burley says he wants to keep Darren Ambrose and Nathaniel Clyne at Selhurst Park.
QPR are chasing Ambrose, who scored 20 goals for the Eagles last season, while Birmingham want England U19 international Clyne.
Burley is due to speak to the duo this week and he told the South London Press: “I know Darren well - I brought him through as a kid at Ipswich. These days there is so much speculation and you can get your head turned with the promise of x, y or z. But I want both of them to stay and they are both under contract - that’s in our favour.”
Don't miss tomorrow's South London Press for the full story.

Jordan's Jacket
28-06-2010, 03:06 PM
Good luck George. Keep those two and things will look promising

spt1978
28-06-2010, 03:08 PM
Really hope we keep Clyne for a couple more seasons.

chav_hater
28-06-2010, 03:24 PM
Monday, 28 June 2010

I know Darren well - I brought him through as a kid at Ipswich."

That sounds like a good start.

davemorris04
28-06-2010, 03:33 PM
If we lose Clyne for the reported 1m now that the takeover has happened I'd be as surprised as I would disappointed

Jimbocpfc
28-06-2010, 09:49 PM
To the tune of "this city is ours" sung by Man U......

Nathaniel is ours
Nathaniel is ooours...
**** off u vultures
Nathaniel's ours!!!