Malcolm Ebiowei

[Andicis]

I remember people on here trying to claim Palace were a nice club trying to help us out, haha. I think that shoots that theory dead.

[Gaspode]

8 hours ago, Andicis said:

I remember people on here trying to claim Palace were a nice club trying to help us out, haha. I think that shoots that theory dead.

They and several other vulture clubs need to live long in our memories - so much for the so-called 'football family' when there's the chance of grabbing a promising youngster for a pittance because his club is in trouble....

[Srg]

8 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

They and several other vulture clubs need to live long in our memories - so much for the so-called 'football family' when there's the chance of grabbing a promising youngster for a pittance because his club is in trouble....

We did the same thing, albeit with older players, with Wigan the season before. Can’t blame other clubs, it’s the rules that are s****. 

[Oldben]

I think derby are correct to take this to tribunal.

I don't see the tribunal doing anything other than giving us a more reasonable payout.

Edited July 29, 2022 by Oldben
Added content

[Gaspode]

1 minute ago, Srg said:

We did the same thing, albeit with older players, with Wigan the season before. Can’t blame other clubs, it’s the rules that are s****. 

But the point I was making was that these vultures are deliberately targeting young promising players knowing they'll get them at a fraction of their real value - with the potential for huge profits a few years down the line.

The players we picked up from Wigan were never going to significantly increase in value and they wanted to get them off the wage bill - whereas we would have wanted to keep most of the young players.

You're correct that the rules are crap that allow this, but I still detest those clubs who saw we were in trouble and thought they could take advantage....

[Crewton]

I think the EPPP system is a swizz for all EFL clubs, but unfortunately our history of doing joint transfers and loading the value on the home grown player to reduce sell on fees for the other player in the transaction means we're also guilty of playing games to screw smaller clubs (see Riggot/Christie and Lowe/Bogle deals for reference). 

I hope that, under DC, we'll play fair with smaller clubs as well as lobbying against the EPPP system. 

[May Contain Nuts]

5 hours ago, Srg said:

We did the same thing, albeit with older players, with Wigan the season before. Can’t blame other clubs, it’s the rules that are s****. 

There's one key difference - Wigan actively wanted Byrne & Marshall off the wage books to cut costs going forward. We took unwanted goods off their hands.

We had no desire to be rid of Ebosele, Ebioewei & Plange and would have tied them down to new deals given the opportunity.

It's really not the same thing at all.

Edited July 29, 2022 by Coconut's Beard

[LazloW]

15 hours ago, Andicis said:

I remember people on here trying to claim Palace were a nice club trying to help us out, haha. I think that shoots that theory dead.

Does it have to be this black and white? Could it be that, with Plange they were a nice club trying to help us out and then with Malcolm they were a nasty club trying to make a killing?   I can appreciate Palace giving us the money up front for Plange and letting him stay and be annoyed that they’ve only offered £30,000 for Malcolm.

I think there is room in life for subtlety and context, areas of grey and reacting to different circumstances differently.

[Andicis]

1 hour ago, LazloW said:

Does it have to be this black and white? Could it be that, with Plange they were a nice club trying to help us out and then with Malcolm they were a nasty club trying to make a killing?   I can appreciate Palace giving us the money up front for Plange and letting him stay and be annoyed that they’ve only offered £30,000 for Malcolm.

I think there is room in life for subtlety and context, areas of grey and reacting to different circumstances differently.

Believe whatever you choose, I just don't think they were ever trying to help us out. They offered a small figure but upfront payment as it was attractive for administrators on a cashflow perspective. It wasn't about helping us. I think it's naive to believe otherwise myself. 

[dcfcreece1601]

That is absolutely disgusting , taking advantage of a lower club , massive see you next tuesdays

[Ted McMinn Football Genius]

Scumbags

Edited July 31, 2022 by ThePrisoner

[SirBrian]

37 minutes ago, Ted McMinn Football Genius said:

Scumbags

Really! remember they gave £1 million pounds for not proven Plange to help keep our club going, the club will get more than £30,000 from the tribunal.

[Carnero]

8 minutes ago, SirBrian said:

Really! remember they gave £1 million pounds for not proven Plange to help keep our club going, the club will get more than £30,000 from the tribunal.

Exactly, we'll be able to use their own payment for Plange as evidence when pitching our case to the tribunal. The interest from the likes of Man Utd and others will also show that Ebiowei is a MORE sought after player than Plange was.

[IslandExile]

It would have been less of an insult not to offer anything.

[roboto]

19 minutes ago, Carnero said:

Exactly, we'll be able to use their own payment for Plange as evidence when pitching our case to the tribunal. The interest from the likes of Man Utd and others will also show that Ebiowei is a MORE sought after player than Plange was.

The thing is, they bought Plange when under contract and Ebiowei was out of contract.

We only had him for a year, so that amounts to about £40k value as an academy player moving clubs under the age of 24.

We offered him a new contract which will hopefully help our cause, but I’d be surprised if we got much more than £200k for him, which is still way too low.

Does anyone know if we can add a sell-on clause in this situation? Also, was a sell on ever mentioned with Plange?

[Ted McMinn Football Genius]

1 hour ago, SirBrian said:

Really! remember they gave £1 million pounds for not proven Plange to help keep our club going, the club will get more than £30,000 from the tribunal.

Yeah, I personally really do think so and stand by it.

They paid a value for a player that was reasonable, how much would they want if we tried to buy either of them back…. More than £1m for LP and certainly more than £30k for Ebosele.

Their purchase of LP may have helped keep us going but then offered £30k for a player of far more value, hope the tribunal make them pay as much if not more than the fee we received for LP.

Thats my opinion on it and I’m sure many may not agree, but there it is ??

Edited July 30, 2022 by Ted McMinn Football Genius

[Crewton]

38 minutes ago, roboto said:

Does anyone know if we can add a sell-on clause in this situation? Also, was a sell on ever mentioned with Plange?

We can set out our position, and the Tribunal will decide. They can include add-ons too. 

[Mr. P]

Well hopefully this is the last time this sort of thing happens. Can't do anything about the big clubs swooping in and taking academy prospects for nothing though.

[Ambitious]

Remember Palace would’ve made an offer that would be similar to a tribunal, albeit a little less, due to the money being upfront. 

£30k may seem absolutely mad, but maybe we’re only due £80-100k from a tribunal as he was with us for less than 2 years? It’s all guess work, but I imagine Palace would know the process quite well and feel that was a fair fee based on the eventual payout anyway. 

They aren’t going to overpay based on his ability alone, so don’t see it as them taking the piss. See it as a base line figure for what we should expect. 

[Steve Buckley’s Dog]

If they think he’s worth 30k we should offer them 60k for him. They would be mad to turn down an offer twice the value they put on him wouldn’t they. Everyone’s a winner.