Olé Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 I think someone else on here suggested this a few weeks ago (so credit to them) and I didn't give it a second thought, but is it possible that Chelsea have a recall clause on Tammy if the manager goes? It would certainly be a very logical termination right for a contract that allowed a highly prized player to go out on loan with no general recall. And in the circumstances (both LJ's claimed role in securing him, and the form and reputation Tammy has developed this season) you would have to imagine they would be only too quick to take him back and get him involved higher up the league or even at a Premiership side - they've shown themselves to be very ready to recall and re-loan. So, if we see nothing this week, is it possible this is influencing our decision making? I can't think of any other major mitigating circumstances that could explain SL/MA inaction given this record run. Presumably if LJ is still in charge on Feb 1st, there is no longer scope for Chelsea to send Tammy anywhere else, so that may be the earliest? If such a clause (and risk of Tammy being recalled) did exist - would it change your mind on LJ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 I bloody hope not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotswoldRed Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 I suggested the idea a week or two back, but MA was quite clear there is no recall. I'm still worried about it though. Still sack him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ploppy Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 If you're right then I would not sack LJ despite everything. I feel like only an in form Tammy would save us this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olé Posted January 22, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 2 minutes ago, CotswoldRed said: I suggested the idea a week or two back, but MA was quite clear there is no recall. I'm still worried about it though. Where was that mate? I might be imagining it but I could have sworn MA said something at the start of the season about there being some conditions, and some very throwaway comment that implied that he was not envisaging any circumstances where those conditions were not met. I remember thinking at the time, it can't be a number of games/goals condition because you wouldn't be so casually confident about that, and assumed it was something structural. Now I think about it, it's ringing all sorts of alarms. It would be an obvious criteria for right to recall if you weren't going to have a general right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Red Hat Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 Is it worth mentioning again that MA stated "There is NO recall clause'. Stop fussing about nothing, just 'cuz everything is shit at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotswoldRed Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 Just now, Olé said: Where was that mate? I might be imagining it but I could have sworn MA said something at the start of the season about there being some conditions, and some very throwaway comment that implied that he was not envisaging any circumstances where those conditions were not met. I remember thinking at the time, it can't be a number of games/goals condition because you wouldn't be so casually confident about that, and assumed it was something structural. Now I think about it, it's ringing all sorts of alarms. It would be an obvious criteria for right to recall if you weren't going to have a general right. I'm positive he said that so long as we played him Chelsea could not have him back. Something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotswoldRed Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 Just now, Roger Red Hat said: Is it worth mentioning again that MA stated "There is NO recall clause'. Stop fussing about nothing, just 'cuz everything is shit at the moment. It would be a clause that MA wouldn't have been in the slightest bit worried about, so would be easy to gloss over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinman85 Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 8 minutes ago, ploppy said: If you're right then I would not sack LJ despite everything. I feel like only an in form Tammy would save us this season. Once LJ leaves Engvall will become our saviour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordy62 Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 If sacrificing Tammy is what gets rid of LJ then so be it. Man that hurts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portland Bill Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 I would still sack him now, if it meant TA going back to Chelsea then so be it. A new manager would have a week to bring another striker in, using the obvious bottomless pit of money SL has been happy to hand out to the current manager. We do have other strikers, a tactically astute manager may even be able to get us a few 1-0 wins, by actually sending the team out with plan. At the moment TA's goals are actually winning us no points whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formerly known as ivan Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 Would be quite a strange clause to put in a contract... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 And what if LJ resigns? That wouldn`t be the club`s fault would it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Horsman Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 However much Tammy offers and he's clearly a major asset, he's not City's asset and barring a miracle, he wont be a City player after May. Keeping a failing Head Coach because there is a possibility that a player may be recalled 4 months early doesn't make any sense (Not that I can believe a club that replaces managers with a regularity like Chelsea has, would insist on such an odd clause). Given the downward trajectory our team is on, we could end up with a future England player among the top goalscorers in the Championship, whilst our HC steers us back to the murky waters of League One!!! Unthinkable, in my view!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Hunt-Hertz Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 24 minutes ago, Olé said: I think someone else on here suggested this a few weeks ago (so credit to them) and I didn't give it a second thought, but is it possible that Chelsea have a recall clause on Tammy if the manager goes? It would certainly be a very logical termination right for a contract that allowed a highly prized player to go out on loan with no general recall. And in the circumstances (both LJ's claimed role in securing him, and the form and reputation Tammy has developed this season) you would have to imagine they would be only too quick to take him back and get him involved higher up the league or even at a Premiership side - they've shown themselves to be very ready to recall and re-loan. So, if we see nothing this week, is it possible this is influencing our decision making? I can't think of any other major mitigating circumstances that could explain SL/MA inaction given this record run. Presumably if LJ is still in charge on Feb 1st, there is no longer scope for Chelsea to send Tammy anywhere else, so that may be the earliest? If such a clause (and risk of Tammy being recalled) did exist - would it change your mind on LJ? Give him a little hat/ toadstool and fishing rod and put him on gardening leave? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrahamC Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 Tammy is immense but in our last 8 league games he has scored 6 times and yet we have still lost every single one of them. I'm of the opinion that if we had a competent head coach instead he could find a way of securing more than 0 points from the last 24 available, even if that meant he had to do so without Tammy... I don't want him back for one moment, but even Russell Osman could do that, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olé Posted January 22, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 11 minutes ago, formerly known as ivan said: Would be quite a strange clause to put in a contract... I don't think so - if there is no general recall clause for a highly prized asset, there must be specific ones, because I'm certain Chelsea don't send out players with absolutely zero right to recall. Any contract I've ever seen has termination clauses, even if they are complex and specific. Just a question of under what circumstances Chelsea's legal team would consider all bets are off and we are undermining the reasons they sent the player to us. I feel the same way as most of the responses by the way, it just has me wondering if we may not see anything happen this week after all - waiting for the transfer window to close would reduce the scope to recall and re-loan the player, if such a term existed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Chris Posted January 22, 2017 Admin Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 1 minute ago, Olé said: waiting for the transfer window to close would reduce the scope to recall and re-loan the player, if such a term existed. The cynic in me thinks you're on to something here,. Time will tell and not too long to find out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exAtyeoMax Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 I think the only clause is that Tammy has to play every game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotswoldRed Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 Just now, exAtyeoMax said: I think the only clause is that Tammy has to play every game. He hasn't, has he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shtanley Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 I think it's over half of the games he has to play, seem to recall hearing the word majority used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 4 minutes ago, Shtanley said: I think it's over half of the games he has to play, seem to recall hearing the word majority used. Got to be something like that. He was an un-tried 18 year old going to a club with a 20 goal striker and an experienced old pro. None if us expected him to do what he has and even play as much as he has, partly causing the sell of Kodjia. No way was it 'play every game'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 1 minute ago, Davefevs said: Got to be something like that. He was an un-tried 18 year old going to a club with a 20 goal striker and an experienced old pro. None if us expected him to do what he has and even play as much as he has, partly causing the sell of Kodjia. No way was it 'play every game'. I doubt we`d have taken him on those terms either. We (and Chelsea) both know that even the best players need a rest every now and again for one thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View from the Dolman Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 The deal was announced as having "no standard recall". There may or may not be a number of non-standard recalls. http://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/2016-17/city-loan-in-chelsea-and-england-u19-forward-3226667.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Red Hat Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 I fail to see what the fuss is about. Tammy's playing regularly, constantly. The fact that we're in a shit situation will do no harm to his progression, in fact it's all part of life's rich tapestry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJW Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 Tammy has been great but remember he has played in all those games we have lost , Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portland Bill Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 31 minutes ago, Davefevs said: Got to be something like that. He was an un-tried 18 year old going to a club with a 20 goal striker and an experienced old pro. None if us expected him to do what he has and even play as much as he has, partly causing the sell of Kodjia. No way was it 'play every game'. I think it was a case of he must play as a centre forward. Why else would LJ have put a 20 goal striker ( Kodjia ) on the left or right wing at the start of the season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 3 minutes ago, Portland Bill said: I think it was a case of he must play as a centre forward. Why else would LJ have put a 20 goal striker ( Kodjia ) on the left or right wing at the start of the season? Who knows, but a lot of his Chelsea u21 games looked like he played left forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exAtyeoMax Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 53 minutes ago, CotswoldRed said: He hasn't, has he? more or less - in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Hankey Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 An extremely bizzare clause to put in any contract/loan and one i dont believe would have been discussed even for a second. One that is more likely i would believe is if we are in the bottom 3 halfway through the season, much like why Izzy Brown was recalled from Rotherham and sent to a team chasing promo in Hudds.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.