Fabian Delph - Signed for Manchester City

[Dave]

Problem is when or how he gets rid of it. If indeed he does. Why put it in if you don't want it activated. If he dies get rid of it too quickly then he maybe makes himself ridiculous and lets the story linger on. If he doesn't then he's open to scrutiny as to why he hasn't got rid of it and his long-term commitment to the cause.

To give himself options?

If he wants to leave at any point then he will use it to leave. If he doesn't want to leave, then it doesn't matter if it's there or not as we found out at the weekend.

And any scrutiny isn't going to run any further than a few hundred Villa fans across a couple of forums panicking about it every transfer window until he eventually does leave us.

But the reported figure is ridiculously low and probably around half the market value for an England international.

You're right that the scrutiny may be there from just a few hundred people but why have it there if it leaves needless question marks hanging over him.

I'd say more like a third.

The point is still why not have it there? He held the cards in the contract negotiations due to the club's leisurely attitude to renewal discussions, got himself a contract that gives him a great amount of flexibility over the next four years, so why would it be in his interest for that clause to be removed?

The only reason that it will pose a problem is if something happens that means he wants to leave, otherwise he'll just carry on playing for us. He's got the best of both worlds.

[peter w]

Well lets just say £12m-£16m then.

I think he realises that £8m is very low so if he wants to keep his options open fair enough but 8m is no longer fair to us, the club he chose to stay with.

[adrenachrome]

Problem is when or how he gets rid of it. If indeed he does. Why put it in if you don't want it activated. If he dies get rid of it too quickly then he maybe makes himself ridiculous and lets the story linger on. If he doesn't then he's open to scrutiny as to why he hasn't got rid of it and his long-term commitment to the cause.

To give himself options?

If he wants to leave at any point then he will use it to leave. If he doesn't want to leave, then it doesn't matter if it's there or not as we found out at the weekend.

And any scrutiny isn't going to run any further than a few hundred Villa fans across a couple of forums panicking about it every transfer window until he eventually does leave us.

But the reported figure is ridiculously low and probably around half the market value for an England international.

You're right that the scrutiny may be there from just a few hundred people but why have it there if it leaves needless question marks hanging over him.

I think this is down to his agent who is only doing what is he is paid for, when all is said and done. Most professional athletes do not want to involved in the haggling.

If you let a valued player run down his contract to within 2 years of expiry, then you are asking for trouble. Plenty of posters pointed this out at the time, often to be told that they were bed wetters, pillow biters, panty waists and suchlike.

After that, the closer to the expiry date the more leverage the agent has to insert any clause he wants.

Benteke has stated, ominously in my view,  that his agent "knows what he wants".

[Dave]

Well lets just say £12m-£16m then.

I think he realises that £8m is very low so if he wants to keep his options open fair enough but 8m is no longer fair to us, the club he chose to stay with.

I meant that it's about a third of his market value rather than half - the current England midfield seems to be Henderson, Delph and Wilshere. If somebody tried to buy either of the other two then there wouldn't be any change from £25m, so I'd expect Delph to not be a million miles from that.

As for the second point, sometimes things aren't fair. Hopefully the club see it as a cautionary tale about not waiting for such a long time before offering new contracts to our better players. Like I say, if things go badly for him then he has an out and if they don't then it doesn't matter how much the release clause is because he stays with us.

[Gregorys Boy]

Interesting debate about Delph's decision on the Monday Night Club last night.  Kilbane saying he should have gone because these chances don't come along very often (or ever in his case ) and because he felt Delph was good enough to break into the City side regular (he may have a point there), but on the other side Alex Scott and Rorey Smith saying that with the Euros coming up Delph is giving himself a better chance at going if he stays and plays every week for us, and that if he plays well this season then another big offer may well come anyway.  I agree more with the second opinion, but then I would, wouldn't I Thoughts?

I listened to this as well. I Had a lot of trouble with the prevailing sentiment that if a bigger club comes in for you, you owe it to yourself to move, regardless of any other considerations. Maybe Manchester City aren't as big a draw as they think they are? They certainly aren't to me because I have been following football for more than ten years. They do seem to be for Raheem Sterling, but then he's only young, and impressionable.

Ignoring for a moment his statement of loyalty when he signed the new contract, I would have understood if he had left. At the same time though, I don't think he is a reprehensible human being to have stayed. In fact I think it shows the kind of determination that would have been admired in years gone by.

I admire his loyality without doubt.

As for the clause it doesn't bother me whether its in his contract or not.  Contracts aren't worth the paper their printed on.  If a player is happy at a club he is going to stay, and if he's not happy or feels its time to for a change he is going to leave, and all the clauses in the world won't change that.

[Dante Lavelli]

The fact the clause exists means we will have to endure this circus every transfer window as people will potentially try and sign him simply to cover injuries and/or quota demands.  Whilst I can understand Delph wanting the insurance option I'd be inclined to argue that the low value is actually detrimental to Delph because he will have to deal with the stress/uncertainty each window and also, at such a low fee, clubs may buy him when they don't really rate him.

As a consequence we might be able to increase the clause to something more reasonable.  At £15m he'd still hold all the cards but it would be high enough to deter the time wasters.

[Diablo]

The fact the clause exists means we will have to endure this circus every transfer window as people will potentially try and sign him simply to cover injuries and/or quota demands.  Whilst I can understand Delph wanting the insurance option I'd be inclined to argue that the low value is actually detrimental to Delph because he will have to deal with the stress/uncertainty each window and also, at such a low fee, clubs may buy him when they don't really rate him.

As a consequence we might be able to increase the clause to something more reasonable.  At £15m he'd still hold all the cards but it would be high enough to deter the time wasters.

Hopefully Hendrik Almstadt will address this (Monday first thing)

[john e]

The fact the clause exists means we will have to endure this circus every transfer window as people will potentially try and sign him simply to cover injuries and/or quota demands.  Whilst I can understand Delph wanting the insurance option I'd be inclined to argue that the low value is actually detrimental to Delph because he will have to deal with the stress/uncertainty each window and also, at such a low fee, clubs may buy him when they don't really rate him.

As a consequence we might be able to increase the clause to something more reasonable.  At £15m he'd still hold all the cards but it would be high enough to deter the time wasters.

Hopefully Hendrik Almstadt will address this (Monday first thing)

I heard he's coming in 15 mins early to do just that

[Singapore Villa]

The fact the clause exists means we will have to endure this circus every transfer window as people will potentially try and sign him simply to cover injuries and/or quota demands.  Whilst I can understand Delph wanting the insurance option I'd be inclined to argue that the low value is actually detrimental to Delph because he will have to deal with the stress/uncertainty each window and also, at such a low fee, clubs may buy him when they don't really rate him.

As a consequence we might be able to increase the clause to something more reasonable.  At £15m he'd still hold all the cards but it would be high enough to deter the time wasters.

Hopefully Hendrik Almstadt will address this (Monday first thing)

I heard he's coming in 15 mins early to do just that

Fabian, can I get a quick autograph for my son?!!

[Gregorys Boy]

The fact the clause exists means we will have to endure this circus every transfer window as people will potentially try and sign him simply to cover injuries and/or quota demands.  Whilst I can understand Delph wanting the insurance option I'd be inclined to argue that the low value is actually detrimental to Delph because he will have to deal with the stress/uncertainty each window and also, at such a low fee, clubs may buy him when they don't really rate him.

As a consequence we might be able to increase the clause to something more reasonable.  At £15m he'd still hold all the cards but it would be high enough to deter the time wasters.

Yeah I get that we would have a bit more power without the clause, but I really don't think it makes that much difference in the long term, unless we seriously pick up next season and the interest from bigger clubs goes away then he will leave sooner rather than later, and 8mill is still a profit on him.

[Pete]

Good article in the Guardian:  "Fabian Delph’s Aston Villa pledge shows play still trumps pay for some"

Link

[Hookeysmith]

Excellent article and as well as loyalty it also shows that some players are intelligent enough to think about their careers rather than just chase the money

[peter w]

Well lets just say £12m-£16m then.

I think he realises that £8m is very low so if he wants to keep his options open fair enough but 8m is no longer fair to us, the club he chose to stay with.

I meant that it's about a third of his market value rather than half - the current England midfield seems to be Henderson, Delph and Wilshere. If somebody tried to buy either of the other two then there wouldn't be any change from £25m, so I'd expect Delph to not be a million miles from that.

As for the second point, sometimes things aren't fair. Hopefully the club see it as a cautionary tale about not waiting for such a long time before offering new contracts to our better players. Like I say, if things go badly for him then he has an out and if they don't then it doesn't matter how much the release clause is because he stays with us.

But if it was only as a precautionary clause because of relegation then once we avoided it the clause would have become redundant. it wasn't so no matter what has happened he is still holding a ridiculously low release clause over our heads. And he's our captain and leader. Sherwood's spokesman on the pitch.

[Dave]

Well lets just say £12m-£16m then.

I think he realises that £8m is very low so if he wants to keep his options open fair enough but 8m is no longer fair to us, the club he chose to stay with.

I meant that it's about a third of his market value rather than half - the current England midfield seems to be Henderson, Delph and Wilshere. If somebody tried to buy either of the other two then there wouldn't be any change from £25m, so I'd expect Delph to not be a million miles from that.

As for the second point, sometimes things aren't fair. Hopefully the club see it as a cautionary tale about not waiting for such a long time before offering new contracts to our better players. Like I say, if things go badly for him then he has an out and if they don't then it doesn't matter how much the release clause is because he stays with us.

But if it was only as a precautionary clause because of relegation then once we avoided it the clause would have become redundant. it wasn't so no matter what has happened he is still holding a ridiculously low release clause over our heads

It still might happen. We could go down next season. Sherwood could turn out to be a two-bit chancer who messes the club up even worse than the last lot. This way he has options.

I completely get that Delph's contract situation benefits him far more than it does the club. What I don't get is why it would be in his interests to even think about having it removed. What would be the point?

[Risso]

Well lets just say £12m-£16m then.

I think he realises that £8m is very low so if he wants to keep his options open fair enough but 8m is no longer fair to us, the club he chose to stay with.

I meant that it's about a third of his market value rather than half - the current England midfield seems to be Henderson, Delph and Wilshere. If somebody tried to buy either of the other two then there wouldn't be any change from £25m, so I'd expect Delph to not be a million miles from that.

As for the second point, sometimes things aren't fair. Hopefully the club see it as a cautionary tale about not waiting for such a long time before offering new contracts to our better players. Like I say, if things go badly for him then he has an out and if they don't then it doesn't matter how much the release clause is because he stays with us.

But if it was only as a precautionary clause because of relegation then once we avoided it the clause would have become redundant. it wasn't so no matter what has happened he is still holding a ridiculously low release clause over our heads

It still might happen. We could go down next season. Sherwood could turn out to be a two-bit chancer who messes the club up even worse than the last lot. This way he has options.

I completely get that Delph's contract situation benefits him far more than it does the club. What I don't get is why it would be in his interests to even think about having it removed. What would be the point?

The only way it would happen is with another new contract and a substantial pay rise.