Twine

[KegCity]

Just now, Davefevs said:

Depends on whether you’re selling up or selling down to an extent. If Burnley want to keep him, selling down to us becomes their gift imho, not Twine’s…and it will mainly boil down to whether City pay the amount Burnley want.  That’s what happened in January.

City -we would like to sign Twine

Burnley - £5m

BC - how about £5m

BU- no, £5m

BC - how about a loan with £2.5m option to buy

BU - no, loan with £5m

Thats pretty much how it went I’m reliably informed.  Twine had no bargaining power.

 

If the player wants the move, the player wants the move. Up or down doesn’t matter. Obviously Twine can’t force their hand but if he really wants to go and will kick up a fuss at Burnley they’ll be more willing to negotiate. That’s how so many of our sales have been explained on here in the past, it doesn’t matter that we’re the ones buying rather than selling.

[TonyTonyTony]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 BC - how about £5m

BU- no, £5m

Bloody Burnley. Offered them exactly what they wanted and they still said no !

Edited March 29 by TonyTonyTony

[IAmNick]

4 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said:

Bloody Burnley. Offered them exactly what they wanted and they still said no !

Probably couldn't understand Tinnion's email

[Davefevs]

8 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said:

Bloody Burnley. Offered them exactly what they wanted and they still said no !

Ah, bollocks, edited!

[Davefevs]

9 minutes ago, KegCity said:

If the player wants the move, the player wants the move. Up or down doesn’t matter. Obviously Twine can’t force their hand but if he really wants to go and will kick up a fuss at Burnley they’ll be more willing to negotiate. That’s how so many of our sales have been explained on here in the past, it doesn’t matter that we’re the ones buying rather than selling.

Yeah maybe.  Maybe I’m biased knowing that Burnley see him as big part of their plans if they come down

[KegCity]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Yeah maybe.  Maybe I’m biased knowing that Burnley see him as big part of their plans if they come down

We desperately need a player who can break down those low blocks, that’s what’s holding us back. Whether Twine is the man is another conversation but the club are going to have to bite the bullet and invest properly in that player if they’re serious about making Manning a success and finishing in the top 6.

Edited March 29 by KegCity

[Scrumpty]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Depends on whether you’re selling up or selling down to an extent. If Burnley want to keep him, selling down to us becomes their gift imho, not Twine’s…and it will mainly boil down to whether City pay the amount Burnley want.  That’s what happened in January.

City -we would like to sign Twine

Burnley - £5m

BC - how about £2.5m

BU- no, £5m

BC - how about a loan with £2.5m option to buy

BU - no, loan with £5m

Thats pretty much how it went I’m reliably informed.  Twine had no bargaining power.

2 hours ago, KegCity said:

I’ve been told for the last however many years that players hold all the power and that a club can’t stop an unhappy player leaving when I’ve complained about us selling players. What’s changed now?

Keg has a point, but so does Fevs.

Summer will be interesting.

BC - Here’s £2.5m, we know he’s not happy 

BU - We need him now, so it’s still £5m

BC - We get it, but you’ve p1ssed him off and he wants out, so £2.5m it is.

Twine has a big influence on how this plays out. Burnley will need him, but do they want an unhappy player? 
 

So, how much does Twine influence this play? If he still indicates that he wants out, it’ll undermine Burnley’s stance, no matter how long his contract is. Will be interesting to see the outcome. I suspect compromise will be key.

[Shauntaylor85]

4 hours ago, RedM said:

I really like him, sadly he isn't ours or likely to be. I wonder how different the season would be (on and off the pitch) if we had him available for all matches since January?

Seems to want to stay

[Nuno Gomes]

Juries out from my perspective.  I watched him against us for Hull and was not impressed (having thought when he was at Burnley I would have bitten your hand off to sign him).  Thought today he took up some good postitions and was positive in the way he looked forward.  Felt though he was too easily knocked off the ball.

[watkins1983]

Won a few free kicks today, was like watching Alex Scott the way he initiates contact, very clever. 

[Lrrr]

7 hours ago, Old School B block said:

Can we also add Whittaker in the Summer also. 

You got a spare £12m lying around?

[Lrrr]

6 hours ago, KegCity said:

If the player wants the move, the player wants the move. Up or down doesn’t matter. Obviously Twine can’t force their hand but if he really wants to go and will kick up a fuss at Burnley they’ll be more willing to negotiate. That’s how so many of our sales have been explained on here in the past, it doesn’t matter that we’re the ones buying rather than selling.

The assumption is that Twine wouldn't be happy at Burnley though, he may want to play for City/Manning but that doesn't mean he'd be unhappy to go back to Burnley & play for Kompany

[Nugget]

How was he today? Worth trying to push for a deal? Forget where but Tinnion (I know ) mentioned there may be an unofficial agreement to sign him from Burnley.

Edited April 1 by Nugget

[Davefevs]

I thought he was on the periphery again, but grew into it. Looked better second half.  Unlucky first half when Cooper saved well,

[sunningdalered]

Looks like he's trying to force things a bit IMO. Even though he was getting the big one from the PAFC commentators, based on scoring 4 against them for MK Dons(?), there were a number of other players (on both sides) who influenced the game to a greater extent than ST IMO. I'd be interested to see what he can do when he relaxes into playing for city a bit more though. 

 

[Ashtongreight]

On the peripheral again imo. We look more balanced when he plays though, as it allows knight to play in his natural position.

Edited April 1 by Ashtongreight

[Hartleysbeard]

I don’t think he’s back to full match sharpness yet, but still think he adds quality and a desire to play forward that we need. If a deal can be done, he’ll be an excellent signing. 

[Dastardly and Muttley]

The next Tomlin. We’ll spend big on him to back Manning, and he’ll revert to L1 standard at best whilst being undroppable due to the fee and being Manning’s man.

[FNQ]

On 30/03/2024 at 09:23, Lrrr said:

You got a spare £12m lying around?

Well we have actually… Antoine’s sale would pretty much cover it, let alone Alex’s .. We’ll probably sell Tommy for a decent fee too which would in effect result in pretty much a straight swap if we really wanted to sign a player like Whitaker. It’s not the money, the owner’s loaded, it’s the mindset.

[Mr Popodopolous]

49 minutes ago, FNQ said:

Well we have actually… Antoine’s sale would pretty much cover it, let alone Alex’s .. We’ll probably sell Tommy for a decent fee too which would in effect result in pretty much a straight swap if we really wanted to sign a player like Whitaker. It’s not the money, the owner’s loaded, it’s the mindset.

Semenyo helped us to scrape by FFP.

Conway sale may assist but wealth of owner is only part of the puzzle.

It's not so clear with the new FFP regs inbound. These state the following as a starting point albeit the transitional arrangements may soften it.. 

*Income- £x

Of that..

*Player and management Wages maybe Football Wages

*Player Amortisation and Impairment

*Agents Fees

Just not exceed 70% of Revenue. Or maybe 80% in Year 1.

Suddenly not quite so...on the cards.

However Profit on Disposal of Players may also count towards Income.

Then you have the current FFP rules. Within the £39m maybe but..

...Clubs have to if they lose -£15m after adjustments over 3 years have to submit their next 2 years Forecast Financials to the EFL by 31st March of that season.

Not so straight forward then?

Clubs voted for it unanimously so can't complain for one and the internal body (Club Financial Reporting Unit) have certain powers to assist with their Financial Obligations if required.

The League also can have more Restrictive Powers if required.

Basically an idea behind tbis future looking one as stated anyway is to capture and prevent breaches before they happen.

Signing Whittaker as a Championship Club for say £12m, is it feasible in this context?

Edited April 2 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

@FNQ

Feel free to read, at your leisure albeit you may have already.

https://efl.com/governance/financial-regulation

Plus.

Does Whittaker for £12m or whatever as a non Parachute Championship club fit within said framework ?

[FNQ]

22 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Semenyo helped us to scrape by FFP.

Conway sale may assist but wealth of owner is only part of the puzzle.

It's not so dkest with the new FFP regs inbound. These state the following as a starting point albeit the transitional arrangements may soften it.. 

*Income- £x

Of that..

*Player and management Wages maybe Football Wages

*Player Amortisation and Impairment

*Agents Fees

Just not exceed 70% of Revenue. Or maybe 80% in Year 1.

Suddenly not quite so...on the cards.

However Profit on Disposal of Players may also count towards Income.

Then you have the current FFP rules. Within the £39m maybe but..

...Clubs have to if they lose -£15m after adjustments over 3 years have to submit their next 2 years Forecast Financials to the EFL by 31st March of that season.

Not so straight forward then?

Clubs voted for it unanimously so can't complain for one and the internal body (Club Financial Reporting Unit) have certain powers to assist with their Financial Obligations if required.

The League also can have more Restrictive Powers if required.

Basically an idea behind tbis future looking one as stated anyway is to capture and prevent breaches before they happen.

Signing Whittaker as a Championship Club for say £12m, is it feasible in this context?

Thanks Mr P.. certainly a lot for me to consider there for sure.

But in a nutshell, after securing FFP order by the sale of a proven young striker, if a championship club can then sell another prized asset for £20m+ and potentially one more for another £10m? Surely we can bring in a player for £12m or so if we were inclined to do so? I’m sure a more forward thinking owner could find a way to do so within the rules of FFP. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 hours ago, FNQ said:

Thanks Mr P.. certainly a lot for me to consider there for sure.

But in a nutshell, after securing FFP order by the sale of a proven young striker, if a championship club can then sell another prized asset for £20m+ and potentially one more for another £10m? Surely we can bring in a player for £12m or so if we were inclined to do so? I’m sure a more forward thinking owner could find a way to do so within the rules of FFP. 

Perhaps. Depends on a) How much of the budget we are prepared to put that way and b) If we are under the new proposed system of 70% subject to how TV distribution changes then it gets a lot less likely.

On a football note I'd also say Whittaker destined for bigger things even at this juncture. Newly promoted to PL dependent on Club? Lazio had bid turned down, always thought Brentford too.

[Silvio Dante]

I thought yesterday, as was said, he was peripheral again. I’d be putting a degree of that down to fitness. It is noticeable he likes a bit of a moan when tackled, even if fairly - wins a good number of free kicks but when he doesn’t is pretty incredulous!

The question on Twine really is this - he spent a large proportion of last season injured, and this season did “ok” for Hull but they were happy enough to let him go and then he’s had two months injured and three “ok” games for us.

So, we’re now two seasons away from where he did fantastically for Dons at the level below, with a couple of bad injuries and a patchy record at our level.

There is a player there no doubt. But I’m not sure at present that we should be spending a significant fee on him bearing the above in mind. The next six are very much an audition, but if his name wasn’t Scott Twine, how many of us would spunk £5m (alleged) on a player with the above record?

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

31 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

I thought yesterday, as was said, he was peripheral again. I’d be putting a degree of that down to fitness. It is noticeable he likes a bit of a moan when tackled, even if fairly - wins a good number of free kicks but when he doesn’t is pretty incredulous!

The question on Twine really is this - he spent a large proportion of last season injured, and this season did “ok” for Hull but they were happy enough to let him go and then he’s had two months injured and three “ok” games for us.

So, we’re now two seasons away from where he did fantastically for Dons at the level below, with a couple of bad injuries and a patchy record at our level.

There is a player there no doubt. But I’m not sure at present that we should be spending a significant fee on him bearing the above in mind. The next six are very much an audition, but if his name wasn’t Scott Twine, how many of us would spunk £5m (alleged) on a player with the above record?

But if he's likely to be injured for half the season we're bound to buy him! 

[Redrascal2]

8 hours ago, Dastardly and Muttley said:

The next Tomlin. We’ll spend big on him to back Manning, and he’ll revert to L1 standard at best whilst being undroppable due to the fee and being Manning’s man.

Not another of these optimists.

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 minutes ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

But if he's likely to be injured for half the season we're bound to buy him! 

Hull He featured in 25 consecutive League games at, out of 25.

Whoscored says 20 starts, 5 subs.

Not saying I'd advocate we necessarily go £5m on him but there was nothing wrong with his availability record. This year anyway.

Edited April 2 by Mr Popodopolous

[GrahamC]

8 hours ago, FNQ said:

Well we have actually… Antoine’s sale would pretty much cover it, let alone Alex’s .. We’ll probably sell Tommy for a decent fee too which would in effect result in pretty much a straight swap if we really wanted to sign a player like Whitaker. It’s not the money, the owner’s loaded, it’s the mindset.

If you really think we are going to be the most attractive club in for Whittaker, prepare to be disappointed.

Lazio were linked in January & he’s far more likely to join a club with parachute payments than a mid table Championship one.

I think Twine will be our main target this summer & won’t be at all surprised to see him here in August.

Burnley will have parachute payments & if last summer is anything to go by, will bring in a raft of signings (like HNM) with absolutely no coherent plan.

[Silvio Dante]

5 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Hull He featured in 25 consecutive League games at, out of 25.

Whoscored says 20 starts, 5 subs.

Not saying I'd advocate we necessarily go £5m on him but there was nothing wrong with his availability record. This year anyway.

Yeah it’s actually the spell at Hull which probably adds a few more doubts over suitability of the signing. 22-23 you have the injury issue and then his availability is fine first half of this year but he’s not pulled up any trees - by all accounts was fine but nothing exceptional (noting was out of position), hence the loan termination. Of course, had he done well at Hull he wouldn’t be even on the radar as a potential signing as he’d still be there.

I’d maintain he needs a big last six games. Not judging him on the last few quiet games as I think he is working towards fitness but it was noticeable how much better we were with Sykes against Leicester so for me that’s the standard he needs to hit as he gets to fitness.

[Silvio Dante]

Just to add I think I said when we completed the loan that the best result would be an underwhelming loan spell in order to keep the price down - on a bizarre basis the injury and quiet start may be long term beneficial as it means it’s a £2.5m (for example) as opposed to a £4-5m deal, which I think we’d all be amenable to as an acceptable “risk”