He doesn't have to pick him. We pay the fine, he isn't being forced to choose the player!

I'm not taking Nixon's word as gospel just find it logical and am aware that many Prem teams insist on such Clauses when loaning out . But if I was pushed I would find Nixon far more in the know than Sharpe.

This clause is only a problem if the lad is picked due to us not being able/willing to pay the fine. Just get him signed.

Says who? Sharpe? There is absolutely no advantage to the club admitting those clauses were in other loan player deals .What you expect the club to start giving the finer details of contracts out to the local media? I think it is standard practice for these sort of clauses to be in place. Van den Berg has half the championship after him and from the gist of Nixon's article it is JDT pushing the VDB deal and Is comfortable he will have enough playing time to avoid any penalties

Sharpe looked at the contracts? With all due respect Sharpe has been wrong plenty of times . Like last January when he said we were no longer interested in Maja as Bordeaux wanted a permanent deal only and we couldn't afford it and then he ended up at Stoke on loan. Loaning out young players is now big buisness for these clubs hence why they collect so many young players.

They ain't dictating our team, they want there player playing and if he doesn't they will want compensating.We do not have to play him and without knowing how much we would have to pay its hard to be too critical. These sort of clauses will be in loan deals all over the place in the EFL

It isn't bollox it's standard practice for those teams to do this when clubs are only part paying the wage. Do you think when Elliot came here we didn't have to do the same? Tosin? Other clubs will be signing up to such deals to get players over the line.Its bullshit that it's allowed agree,but if everyone else is doing it and we ain't it puts us at a disadvantage. These clubs just don't give out their better younger players without some sort of guarantee of gametime or compensation if they don't play

As said above it isn't unique.Them along with all the other big clubs will have similar clauses for all their best kids

Well we won't get any loans then as this isn't unique similar clauses would have been in place for Elliott,Tosin, Bellis,Van Hecke etc. Premier league teams send their kids to play not sit on the bench of an EFL side and if they don't make the team they want compensating.

Nixon says we still have an interest in Van Hecke as want 2 centre halves.Brighton undecided what they are doing with him and in the market for another centre half

Absolutely no chance Brererton ends up at Watford

Well whatever as much as he is called out on here he has got a lot of deals right and exclusives this summer throughout the league's. Arrogant yes Know nothing I dont agree

Those clauses are standard practice when those sort of teams are sending out players on loan, and if the player doesn't play then we would have to pay for it.Probably have a break clause in January. Bellis with Burnley will have some sort of gametime clause in the contract as will other young players that have moved from the bigger premier league teams.

Was it him who told him about our interest in Davies, Anel and the signing of Brittain as all those links came about in the media through Nixon

It was on his Twitter before that sun piece and In fairness to Nixon he said on his Twitter that he couldn't take credit for breaking Morton. He definitely did break the Brittain story though. I take what he says with a pinch of salt and do think he is arrogant but going off his Twitter which I do read he has had quite a few exclusives that have come off this summer throughout the football league

Mowbray did question (publicly) the merit of running a cat1 academy and the cost saying the money could be used for the first team and we could pick up older younger players released by prem clubs

Nixon reckons it's 2 centre backs we want

Yeah correct.If you make a sub at ht it doesn't count tho you can still have 3 stoppages

What about him?

Not seen it but will give it a go . Recently finished under the banner of heaven on Disney plus true crime drama based on the murder of a mother and her child in a Mormon community.7 episodes was fairly decent

It's loosely based on that as in its a criminal family the series and film are a lot different

Yeah Barca owe him unpaid wages so its a different situation entirely

Players get a loyalty payment for not requesting the transfer they don't get their contracts paying in full if the money on offer is the same or above their current deal. If Brererton was on 20k per week here and we sold him to a team who were only paying him 15k per week then we would have to pay him off that 5k per week(if a settlement couldn't be reached) not the full 20k Barca owe De Jong wages

We wouldn't be paying his contract up.Transfers wouldn't happen if that was the case So when we sold Rhodes we had to pay off the remaining years left on his contract at 35k per week?And he walks into another 4 year contract at Boro on the same money or better than he was on here? Payoffs only happen if the player leaving is joining a club on a less lucrative contract which Brererton wouldn't. Do you think Barca had to pay Neymars contract off when he joined PSG?

He is but had no interest in even discussing a move here