United Have First Refusal Clause On Shawcross

17 Comments

1. January 4, 2011 at 13:05

   enviousnv says:

   Genious !1
2. January 4, 2011 at 13:08

   wayne says:

   utd should do this with any youngster that is sold,covers all bases alot of players deveolp late.
3. January 4, 2011 at 13:14

   BerbaGod says:

   Well, when they got him for £2m that was the least they could give us.
   Also this just gives us a chance to get a bid accepted if Stoke have accepted a bid from another club doesnt it? If Stoke never want to sell him, we wont be able to get him either..?
4. January 4, 2011 at 13:25

   sillysausage says:

   yeah all we need is this talentless clogger back *face palm*
5. January 4, 2011 at 13:28

   The Scottish Wonder says:

   jeiii we can have a player we sold for 2m back

   if we pay 20m Stoke want for him
6. January 4, 2011 at 13:33

   Colbert says:

   Is he even any good though?
7. January 4, 2011 at 13:49

   Redfanfan says:

   Could anyone explain to a non-english speaking what this means?

   Thanks.
8. January 4, 2011 at 13:54

   Corea says:

   Redfanfan – i checked it in the dictionary and i think it means that if they decide to sell we will have the first chance to buy him. It is a rather economic term and it’s not as simple as it might sound.
9. January 4, 2011 at 13:56

   United till i die says:

   sorry not worth 20m, there’s a big difference between standing out at stoke and playing for the biggest club in the world..
10. January 4, 2011 at 13:57

    smartalex says:

    Redfanfan
    Σε ποια γλώσσα ο φίλος μου?
11. January 4, 2011 at 13:59

    Redfanfan says:

    @ Corea – Smart reflex.

    Oh great, are we interested?
12. January 4, 2011 at 14:37

    denton davey says:

    This is good news – Shawcross has benefitted a lot by playing regularly. He might never be as good as Nemanja Vidic but his game is “roughly” similar.

    I agree with Wayne (@ 13:08) that this kind of buy-back/first-refusal clause should be standard when selling youngsters who might develop by being given playing time at another club.
13. January 4, 2011 at 15:01

    TK says:

    A very talented defender ,who should be playing for us in the next 3 years .
14. January 4, 2011 at 15:24

    The United Way says:

    He’s talented, but he’s not that talented.

    We were right to let go.

    Seriously, people need to lay off Evans… we know he has the quality, and up until this season, consistently showed that, leading to his nomination as Young Player of the Year.

    That talent does not just disappear… merely masked by a collapse of confidence.

    Smalling is looking better, stronger and more intelligently positioned every game he plays alongside Rio or Vida.
15. January 4, 2011 at 15:26

    StatesideAussie says:

    @Redfanfan and Corea: there are many variations on “right of first refusal” and since we don’t have the contract in front of us, I don’t know what this one specifies. But commonly, the way it would work is that we would have the right to buy him back first — but only if we were prepared to match what someone else was offering. In other words, if Club X offer Stoke $25m, then Stoke must offer to sell him to us first; we can then say yes or no; if we say yes, however, we must match the $25m. If we weren’t prepared to match that, Stoke would then be entitled to accept Club X’s offer. Like I said, there are lots of variations, but this point is a common characteristic.
16. January 5, 2011 at 00:30

    King Eric says:

    The united way. Yeah spot on ryans a good enough defender.•••••
    ••. For stoke. Only tonight fergie said jonny is back and his performances in training have been mahgnificent. To think some on here wanted him sold a few week back due to lack of form. Its timw they grew up or at least understood the utd way.
17. January 5, 2011 at 07:16

    Red Devil says:

    @The United way and King Eric

    Totally agree mates….Its just that Jonny’s confidence is shot at the moment.
    You dont dominate Dogbreath and Anelka at their peaks if you’re not talented..