Robin Koch- Signs pre contract with Eintracht Frankfurt

[andrewjohnsmith]

Did you see he made worst team. Those 11 players deemed to have been the worst by position in the Prem last season account according to sofa score

Pure BS

Struijk, Aaronson and Bamford also made the team

Hard to make a positive case for Bamford and Aaronson

But Koch? He had a good season for the most part

[andrewjohnsmith]

Phil Hay said today there is no chance Koch signs a new deal.

He's leaving.

There was some noise about Koch having to move this season to get his Germany place back. That's with us in the PL

So, as you/Phil say. No chance he's playing in the championship.

Just hope we can get a decent fee for him. Hearing 15 million. That's a minimum.

[DDB220]

Did you see he made worst team. Those 11 players deemed to have been the worst by position in the Prem last season account according to sofa score

Pure BS

Struijk, Aaronson and Bamford also made the team

Actually depending on which one you look at it was Firpo instead of Struijk. No surprise which one you chose.

[1964white]

Did you see he made worst team. Those 11 players deemed to have been the worst by position in the Prem last season account according to sofa score

Pure BS

Struijk, Aaronson and Bamford also made the team

No I didn't see it, a load of tosh imo!

Koch is our 2nd highest rated player in the Man of the Match polls, so Robin has been receiving lots of votes throughout the whole season from our members.

[1964white]

Spurs

Good
3 interceptions
3 blocks
2 decent passes
2 header passes
2 tackles
1 defensive header
1 defensive clearances
1 close control skill
1 header on target

Bad
2 lost possession
1 poor pass
1 non-challenge for their 4th goal
1 missed header off-target

Much more involved when playing in his natural CB position, was developing a decent partnership with Wober

5.5/10

[Cjay]

Didn't see that coming

[WhiteRose]

Didn't see that coming

Whilst he won’t be free to scum he will go for a nominal fee - you wonder how we put these clauses in contracts to sell players for next to nowt but then You remember we had an owner who thought relegation was impossible.

[Cjay]

Reliable as they come on the German side Florian.

Can't for the life of me understand this free stuff.

Unless it's his relegation release clause which would be insane for us to put in anx really does concern me regarding other players.

The Rodrigo able to effectively go for free rumour from Spain media for example

[whiteswan]

Reliable as they come on the German side Florian.

Can't for the life of me understand this free stuff.

Unless it's his relegation release clause which would be insane for us to put in anx really does concern me regarding other players.

The Rodrigo able to effectively go for free rumour from Spain media for example

Well, if those relegation release clauses are true, I make no wonder we didn't see hide nor hair of Radz the last few games and he couldn't wait to offload the club

[Cjay]

Well, if those relegation release clauses are true, I make no wonder we didn't see hide nor hair of Radz the last few games and he couldn't wait to offload the club

The theory going around is that some have relegation loan clauses in there contract.

So we are obliged to loan them out on pretty poor terms for us.

No loan fee, no obligation to buy (which is exactly what Marc Roca seems to be getting).

Phil Hay actually basically said this was the message from Koch's side.

Where the free aspect comes in is he is out of contract in 12months anyway.

[weasel]

So seems like some Robin Kochs will get our Robin Koch

[Irish Ian]

So who is saying he can leave for free?

[The Subhuman]

So who is saying he can leave for free?

He can't but he can ask to be loaned out and as he's in the last yr of contract it means he walks next season... It'll be a standard relegation clause for some that Luton et al will probably have to face. We were hot favourites to go back down remember so players could hold us to ransom a bit. I would imagine we tried to extend his contract when we extended Llorentes, probably for the same reason but he probably knocked us back.

It's just bad timing, had we been relegated last season we would have gotten a nice price on him either last year or this...

He only cost what? 10M, we got our monies worth imo but a fee would have been nice and it's not impossible as someone may step in and buy him outright. Don't forget any team loaning him for a year will face the same problem as us next year.

[Cjay]

He can't but he can ask to be loaned out and as he's in the last yr of contract it means he walks next season... It'll be a standard relegation clause for some that Luton et al will probably have to face. We were hot favourites to go back down remember so players could hold us to ransom a bit. I would imagine we tried to extend his contract when we extended Llorentes, probably for the same reason but he probably knocked us back.

It's just bad timing, had we been relegated last season we would have gotten a nice price on him either last year or this...

He only cost what? 10M, we got our monies worth imo but a fee would have been nice and it's not impossible as someone may step in and buy him outright. Don't forget any team loaning him for a year will face the same problem as us next year.

It's certainly not standard to include loan clauses, never heard that before.

It seems Roca has one as well and he was only signed last year.

Does Adams? Sinisterra? Rodrigo seems to as well possibly.

Even Charlie Cresswell has a release clause and its low (Phil Hay has confirmed it). That is again very odd.

If we have included obligation loan clauses with no benefit to us (obligation to buy, loan fee etc) then that is very stupid.

Wjy are we inserting low release clauses into youth players like Cresswell?

Very odd if that's the case.

Certainly not normal.

Transfer release clauses I've heard of.

Loan release clauses absolutely not because the seller club has no benefit.

No transfer fee, no loan fee, no obligation to buy if it goes wrong.

[The Subhuman]

It's certainly not standard to include loan clauses, never heard that before.

It seems Roca has one as well and he was only signed last year.

Does Adams? Sinisterra? Rodrigo seems to as well possibly.

Even Charlie Cresswell has a release clause and its low (Phil Hay has confirmed it). That is again very odd.

If we have included obligation loan clauses with no benefit to us (obligation to buy, loan fee etc) then that is very stupid.

Wjy are we inserting low release clauses into youth players like Cresswell?

Very odd if that's the case.

Certainly not normal.

Transfer release clauses I've heard of.

Loan release clauses absolutely not because the seller club has no benefit.

No transfer fee, no loan fee, no obligation to buy if it goes wrong.

It does if it's longer than a year .... It seems a common sense measure to me for players arriving at a club favoured for relegation that season... Wouldn't you want insurance?

[Cjay]

It does if it's longer than a year .... It seems a common sense measure to me for players arriving at a club favoured for relegation that season... Wouldn't you want insurance?

No.

It makes no sense.

Many relegated clubs need to sell assets to revamp there Championship squad.

If you include loan obligations you end up with no funds.

If Radz had stayed in charge we know we would have needed to sell to buy, that's how he works.

If all your assets have loan obligations which you can't reject then you are stuck.

Relegation transfer clauses tend to be lower than market value, they are bad enough losing your players for small fees but atleast you have some money to replace.

Loan obligations you got nothing.

It's senseless if we have done that.

[weasel]

I remember when Huddersfield got relegated and Aaron Mooy left on loan for a year. Huddersfield then didn't get promoted and sold him. I presume it is something that is actually quite common, with the hope that the relegated club gets promoted and then they have still kept hold of their player. The club then benefits as they still have the player and the player benefits as he has carried on playing in the premier league. Has happened a couple of other times but I can't think of the players. Possibly also occasions where the player has decided to stay and help the club get promoted rather than take up his loan option, or has agreed that he will give the club a year and if they don't get up they have to sell him. Likely also that a lot of the time clubs have decided to actually cash in and sell the player even though they could keep him by loaning him - probably has happened lots of times when the player has only had a year or two left on the contract.

No doubt loads of clauses in players contracts though we don't know of them.

[Cjay]

I remember when Huddersfield got relegated and Aaron Mooy left on loan for a year. Huddersfield then didn't get promoted and sold him. I presume it is something that is actually quite common, with the hope that the relegated club gets promoted and then they have still kept hold of their player. The club then benefits as they still have the player and the player benefits as he has carried on playing in the premier league. Has happened a couple of other times but I can't think of the players. Possibly also occasions where the player has decided to stay and help the club get promoted rather than take up his loan option, or has agreed that he will give the club a year and if they don't get up they have to sell him. Likely also that a lot of the time clubs have decided to actually cash in and sell the player even though they could keep him by loaning him - probably has happened lots of times when the player has only had a year or two left on the contract.

No doubt loads of clauses in players contracts though we don't know of them.

Mooy wasn't the same, was no clause.

Thought you may be right but the Huddersfield Chairman explained it to The Athletic after the move happened.

Mooy didn't want to play in the Championship.

The only offer they got was a loan from Brighton so they agreed to accept it on the condition Mooy sign a new contract (or they'd effectively be giving away for free as we seem to be doing).

We will see what happens.

But relegation loan obligation is totally new on me and Google as well it seems.

[weasel]

Mooy wasn't the same, was no clause.

Thought you may be right but the Huddersfield Chairman explained it to The Athletic after the move happened.

Mooy didn't want to play in the Championship.

The only offer they got was a loan from Brighton so they agreed to accept it on the condition Mooy sign a new contract (or they'd effectively be giving away for free as we seem to be doing).

We will see what happens.

But relegation loan obligation is totally new on me and Google as well it seems.

Interesting. It seemed to make a bit of sense if it was the sort of thing that happened regularly and you could understand something like that being in a contract but it would be absolutely idiotic that it would be in a contract without a get out for the club if it was the last year of the contract. You would think, if anyone doing the contracts had any sense, that if for example it was a 4 year deal that being allowed to leave on loan would only happen if the club was relegated after years 1 or 2 of the players contract. If relegated after year 3 then you could still have the contract in the player's favour by having a relegation release clause if a club paid a certain amount.

If the contract is as it would appear it is then whoever agreed to it at the club is an incompetent idiot. Sadly it wouldn't surprise me after the JKA contract that didn't have any safeguard in place such as JKA having to actually play a certain amount of minutes for the contract and transfer to triggered.

[Cjay]

Cracking work Victor