Scott Twine - Signed on Four Year Deal - Official

[Davefevs]

46 minutes ago, 0606 said:

Maybe it is done and dusted just cannot be announced yet - due to specific release clause

Gissa clue, as to what type of release clause could fit this narrative?

[cheddarwedlocker]

Morning all, Twine to be announced this week apparently.

[westonred]

8 minutes ago, cheddarwedlocker said:

Morning all, Twine to be announced this week apparently.

Is that you Brian

[Major Isewater]

21 minutes ago, cheddarwedlocker said:

Morning all, Twine to be announced this week apparently.

For who ? 

[italian dave]

28 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Gissa clue, as to what type of release clause could fit this narrative?

A release clause that says “…..no announcement of the release will be made until a date determined by the releasing club”. ??

[ciderwithtommy]

35 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Gissa clue, as to what type of release clause could fit this narrative?

Pure guesswork - when technically would twine stop being a premier league player and become a champ player (with Burnley) - and would that effect his salary/bonuses (loyalty bonus?)

[Red Army 75]

38 minutes ago, cheddarwedlocker said:

Morning all, Twine to be announced this week apparently.

Let’s hope so, would be a very good signing for us. Would be very happy with that 

[Davefevs]

10 minutes ago, italian dave said:

A release clause that says “…..no announcement of the release will be made until a date determined by the releasing club”. ??

2 minutes ago, ciderwithtommy said:

Pure guesswork - when technically would twine stop being a premier league player and become a champ player (with Burnley) - and would that effect his salary/bonuses (loyalty bonus?)

This was the kinda response I was looking for.  Thanks Cider.

[italian dave]

11 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

This was the kinda response I was looking for.  Thanks Cider.

And not mine…

More seriously (and not suggesting this is the case in this instance) but it has occurred to me that there’s no way we’d want to ‘release’ Andi Weimann, or maybe even formally transfer Tommy, right now. I assume that would jeopardise the windfall we’re making from their national selection at the Euros. 

[RedEyez]

1 hour ago, cheddarwedlocker said:

Morning all, Twine to be announced this week apparently.

Let’s bloody well hope so

[Sniper]

I can't see Twine being announced anytime soon IMO.

Burnley haven't even got a new manager in yet, so I'd be amazed if their Hierarchy will be selling players before the new manager has had time to assess the squad.

I'm not sure if a player can force a sale even if they want out.

 

[Silvio Dante]

40 minutes ago, RedEyez said:

Let’s bloody well hope so

Counter. Let’s bloody well hope not.

We had with Twine a “try before you buy” and it was at best an indifferent loan spell. Dominating Rotherham tells us nothing - we know he can do that at league one - but you couldn’t make a case in the other games he was anything above average at best, and at worst (Huddersfield) lazy and disinterested.

We’ve made our number one target a player who has had two reasonably serious injuries in two years, who hasn’t proven he can do it at this level and whose real quality seasons were at lower levels two plus years ago.

It all depends on the fee for me. But if we’re seriously, as Gavin Marshall indicates, a bit Mick Hucknall, splashing the majority of the budget on a player who really didn’t pull up any trees here seems a batshit move. Get him on the cheap, fine. But there aren’t indications that is what this will be and I’m as unenthused at this potential signing, bearing in mind probable fee and quality of loan spell, as you could be.

[Davefevs]

56 minutes ago, italian dave said:

And not mine…

More seriously (and not suggesting this is the case in this instance) but it has occurred to me that there’s no way we’d want to ‘release’ Andi Weimann, or maybe even formally transfer Tommy, right now. I assume that would jeopardise the windfall we’re making from their national selection at the Euros. 

Haha

Andi’s contract runs to 30th June, so no problem with him.

If Tommy was to be sold whilst on Scots-duty, you’d imagine they might factor in how the split of his portion of the “windful” could impact the fee.  My gut feel is a lost portion of the £100-150k(ish) we get won’t be that significant.

[Davefevs]

6 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Counter. Let’s bloody well hope not.

We had with Twine a “try before you buy” and it was at best an indifferent loan spell. Dominating Rotherham tells us nothing - we know he can do that at league one - but you couldn’t make a case in the other games he was anything above average at best, and at worst (Huddersfield) lazy and disinterested.

We’ve made our number one target a player who has had two reasonably serious injuries in two years, who hasn’t proven he can do it at this level and whose real quality seasons were at lower levels two plus years ago.

It all depends on the fee for me. But if we’re seriously, as Gavin Marshall indicates, a bit Mick Hucknall, splashing the majority of the budget on a player who really didn’t pull up any trees here seems a batshit move. Get him on the cheap, fine. But there aren’t indications that is what this will be and I’m as unenthused at this potential signing, bearing in mind probable fee and quality of loan spell, as you could be.

What fee would you be comfy with btw?

Personally I think he has limited upside, ie he doesn’t take us to the PL, nor will he make enough of a difference to get us to the playoffs, so that makes me worry about how much we might spend.  To me that makes him a transitional signing at best.

But Manning wants him, thinks he’s all-important, so if we do sign him then I expect him to be our best player.  High expectations, yes, but as he’s likely to be our highest fee and likely right at top end of wage budget, then why wouldn’t I?

[Sir Geoff]

14 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Counter. Let’s bloody well hope not.

We had with Twine a “try before you buy” and it was at best an indifferent loan spell. Dominating Rotherham tells us nothing - we know he can do that at league one - but you couldn’t make a case in the other games he was anything above average at best, and at worst (Huddersfield) lazy and disinterested.

We’ve made our number one target a player who has had two reasonably serious injuries in two years, who hasn’t proven he can do it at this level and whose real quality seasons were at lower levels two plus years ago.

It all depends on the fee for me. But if we’re seriously, as Gavin Marshall indicates, a bit Mick Hucknall, splashing the majority of the budget on a player who really didn’t pull up any trees here seems a batshit move. Get him on the cheap, fine. But there aren’t indications that is what this will be and I’m as unenthused at this potential signing, bearing in mind probable fee and quality of loan spell, as you could be.

Totally with you. I find all this Twine mania well ott. Didn't pull up any trees weak in the tackle, quick to go to ground and whine for a free kick ( fair play he won an undeserved free kick and scored from it in one game). 

[Silvio Dante]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

What fee would you be comfy with btw?

Personally I think he has limited upside, ie he doesn’t take us to the PL, nor will he make enough of a difference to get us to the playoffs, so that makes me worry about how much we might spend.  To me that makes him a transitional signing at best.

But Manning wants him, thinks he’s all-important, so if we do sign him then I expect him to be our best player.  High expectations, yes, but as he’s likely to be our highest fee and likely right at top end of wage budget, then why wouldn’t I?

Less than I think we’ll pay!

If I work on the basis of us playing in the £2.5m ballpark in January and that not being enough, my thinking is that we’re overpaying based on evidence (and I agree with you re limited upside which also drives that thinking). Based on all the factors, I’d want the fee to start with a 1 and possibly with some clauses to top it up (if you said £1.75m for example I’d live with it begrudgingly).
 

But I don’t think we’d get him for that, and I think we will pay more and sign him. 

Essentially I agree with you - I think Manning wants him so we’ll do the deal. But I don’t see it as a game changing deal or even a relatively sensible one. I don’t think the fact they signed him for £4.5m is here or there - they overpaid and no reason why we should correct their error, but I think we probably will and it’ll be a north of £3m fee.

[RedEyez]

2 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

Counter. Let’s bloody well hope not.

We had with Twine a “try before you buy” and it was at best an indifferent loan spell. Dominating Rotherham tells us nothing - we know he can do that at league one - but you couldn’t make a case in the other games he was anything above average at best, and at worst (Huddersfield) lazy and disinterested.

We’ve made our number one target a player who has had two reasonably serious injuries in two years, who hasn’t proven he can do it at this level and whose real quality seasons were at lower levels two plus years ago.

It all depends on the fee for me. But if we’re seriously, as Gavin Marshall indicates, a bit Mick Hucknall, splashing the majority of the budget on a player who really didn’t pull up any trees here seems a batshit move. Get him on the cheap, fine. But there aren’t indications that is what this will be and I’m as unenthused at this potential signing, bearing in mind probable fee and quality of loan spell, as you could be.

Fair enough but I think LM would get a tune out of him next season if he remained fully fit for the entirety. 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, RedEyez said:

Fair enough but I think LM would get a tune out of him next season if he remained fully fit for the entirety. 

Let’s hope so, we all want that, whether it’s Twine at 25p or £2.5m.

[W-S-M Seagull]

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

What fee would you be comfy with btw?

Personally I think he has limited upside, ie he doesn’t take us to the PL, nor will he make enough of a difference to get us to the playoffs, so that makes me worry about how much we might spend.  To me that makes him a transitional signing at best.

But Manning wants him, thinks he’s all-important, so if we do sign him then I expect him to be our best player.  High expectations, yes, but as he’s likely to be our highest fee and likely right at top end of wage budget, then why wouldn’t I?

I tend to agree. 

I don't think Twine is as good as people make out. He did OK here. Nothing more, nothing less. 

I'd rather we spent 2-3 million on a player that has potential. I'd have been more comfortable spending 2.5 mil on Azaz than I am Twine.

[Shauntaylor85]

27 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

I tend to agree. 

I don't think Twine is as good as people make out. He did OK here. Nothing more, nothing less. 

I'd rather we spent 2-3 million on a player that has potential. I'd have been more comfortable spending 2.5 mil on Azaz than I am Twine.

I agree. 

[Southport Red]

10 hours ago, Major Isewater said:

There’s nothing Nietzsche couldn’t teach yer bout the raising of the wrist. 

Aristotle, Aristotle, was a bugger for the bottle

[BobBobBobbin]

5 hours ago, Davefevs said:

What fee would you be comfy with btw?

Personally I think he has limited upside, ie he doesn’t take us to the PL, nor will he make enough of a difference to get us to the playoffs, so that makes me worry about how much we might spend.  To me that makes him a transitional signing at best.

But Manning wants him, thinks he’s all-important, so if we do sign him then I expect him to be our best player.  High expectations, yes, but as he’s likely to be our highest fee and likely right at top end of wage budget, then why wouldn’t I?

As a slight counter, perhaps he can make enough of a difference to the team as a single entity? For too long we've been reliant on individual brilliance to win games, one of my only criticisms of 433 Nige (in the 3412 times (WSM) we had a system that got plenty out of our key players) was that at times it felt like it needed to be an individual moment to unlock teams if the high press hadn't done its job. 

I agree that as an individual Twine isn't an investment, nor is he so brilliant that we can expect 15 goals and 15 assists next season; However if we are ever to see what Manningball actually is, a player like Twine, who is better technically than what we currently have and plays between the lines could be a difference maker to those around him. More link ups, more pop to our passing, more ball retention in the final third. 

One thing it does do is heap the pressure on Manning to deliver better attacking play. He'll have what he wants at a price that doesn't stand to make the club money. Excuses start to run thin after that. 

[RollsRoyce]

5 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

Less than I think we’ll pay!

If I work on the basis of us playing in the £2.5m ballpark in January and that not being enough, my thinking is that we’re overpaying based on evidence (and I agree with you re limited upside which also drives that thinking). Based on all the factors, I’d want the fee to start with a 1 and possibly with some clauses to top it up (if you said £1.75m for example I’d live with it begrudgingly).
 

But I don’t think we’d get him for that, and I think we will pay more and sign him. 

Essentially I agree with you - I think Manning wants him so we’ll do the deal. But I don’t see it as a game changing deal or even a relatively sensible one. I don’t think the fact they signed him for £4.5m is here or there - they overpaid and no reason why we should correct their error, but I think we probably will and it’ll be a north of £3m fee.

It will be undisclosed , until Tinnion leaks a low  (false) number to Ian Gay 

In any case, it would be strange for Burnley to sell anyone without having a manager in place, or full vision of their own summer (departures) , a bird in hand so to speak. If he was moving, you would have thought later in the window, unless of course we pay the full monty. 

He seems to be the one Manning wants, and they will want to please him. But what happens when he is injured? Do we change how we play 

I agree with all the comments about the fee. We should and could have signed him for nothing years ago, that was the time to sign Twine, not now. Zero upside, it is WellsKalas/DaSilva failed Prem  club player ,money down a hole transfer. So just on principle, we have been down this road before. 

 

[Lew-T]

7 hours ago, cheddarwedlocker said:

Morning all, Twine to be announced this week apparently.

Let’s hope it’s a success and works out.

[Lew-T]

Just not overly excited about him coming back, especially for the value.

[Silvio Dante]

2 minutes ago, RollsRoyce said:

It will be undisclosed , until Tinnion leaks a low  (false) number to Ian Gay 

In any case, it would be strange for Burnley to sell anyone without having a manager in place, or full vision of their own summer (departures) , a bird in hand so to speak. If he was moving, you would have thought later in the window, unless of course we pay the full monty. 

He seems to be the one Manning wants, and they will want to please him. But what happens when he is injured? Do we change how we play 

I agree with all the comments about the fee. We should and could have signed him for nothing years ago, that was the time to sign Twine, not now. Zero upside, it is WellsKalas/DaSilva failed Prem  club player ,money down a hole transfer. So just on principle, we have been down this road before. 

 

I think this is the thing - I’m not that hung up about not signing him for a pittance years ago; that happens. If, however, we have to accept that SL has lost interest and funding for transfers is limited, then as fans I think it’s right we ask the question “Is this really value for money?” - and again, I’m not seeing that it is, and the more of the budget it takes, the less is available for others. It’s not a single sum game where we sign Twine and can still get quality from other signings - it eats the budget and means less chance for success elsewhere.

Again, I think we’ll sign him no matter what (sorry Ronan). And in respect of him being the one Liam wants - Mebude was one he wanted. Mehmeti was one he wanted. All very much types of a player - technically good footballers. But in no case of the three have so seen so far that they’re up to championship standard (or at least top half or top six challenge) as a package and that is a bit of a concern at the moment.

[Dastardly and Muttley]

3 hours ago, RedEyez said:

Fair enough but I think LM would get a tune out of him next season if he remained fully fit for the entirety. 

I guess that the Captain of the Titanic even managed to keep the orchestra going whilst they sunk.

[Davefevs]

14 minutes ago, BobBobBobbin said:

As a slight counter, perhaps he can make enough of a difference to the team as a single entity? For too long we've been reliant on individual brilliance to win games, one of my only criticisms of 433 Nige (in the 3412 times (WSM) we had a system that got plenty out of our key players) was that at times it felt like it needed to be an individual moment to unlock teams if the high press hadn't done its job. 

I agree that as an individual Twine isn't an investment, nor is he so brilliant that we can expect 15 goals and 15 assists next season; However if we are ever to see what Manningball actually is, a player like Twine, who is better technically than what we currently have and plays between the lines could be a difference maker to those around him. More link ups, more pop to our passing, more ball retention in the final third. 

One thing it does do is heap the pressure on Manning to deliver better attacking play. He'll have what he wants at a price that doesn't stand to make the club money. Excuses start to run thin after that. 

A perfectly good counter too BBB.

My opinion is that his “better technically” comes predominantly from dead-balls.  I get the “between the lines” bit, but I don’t think he adds “ball retention”.  Some of that will be because he tries stuff, but he isn’t gonna be a player to move the ball around.  I’m happy to accept lower ball retention in that scenario, but when we had Palmer there were times to try a killer pass and times not to.  I do think Twine has better decision making than Palmer!!!

It’s gonna be interesting to see how it pans out.

I have no problem admitting that some of my thoughts come from a view (unconfirmed) that I think we will overpay (against my valuation).  I’d love to know who our alternative options are / were.

[BobBobBobbin]

Just now, Davefevs said:

A perfectly good counter too BBB.

My opinion is that his “better technically” comes predominantly from dead-balls.  I get the “between the lines” bit, but I don’t think he adds “ball retention”.  Some of that will be because he tries stuff, but he isn’t gonna be a player to move the ball around.  I’m happy to accept lower ball retention in that scenario, but when we had Palmer there were times to try a killer pass and times not to.  I do think Twine has better decision making than Palmer!!!

It’s gonna be interesting to see how it pans out.

I have no problem admitting that some of my thoughts come from a view (unconfirmed) that I think we will overpay (against my valuation).  I’d love to know who our alternative options are / were.

All fair, 

Yes, I'd love to see that list too. It's a very specific role that Manning wants and I'm not sure there are many who fit the bill unless you go down the Omari Hutchinson type in the loan market. That again offers a short term and expensive solution to what we hope will be a need for a number of years (Ie Manning is successful and here a while). 

Shea Lacey, Bobby Clarke or even Fabio Carvalho could offer a solution from that perspective. 

Completely agree on interesting to see how it pans out. Fascinating if not bum off seat exciting. 

[Dolman Block B]

Don’t think we have seen the best of ST yet

 

Came in, got injured and played a few towards the end of the season 

Many other clubs fans say they would snap their hands off for him 

Once he’s settled back into the area along with his family you will see a top top player for us

[marksy]

4 minutes ago, BobBobBobbin said:

All fair, 

Yes, I'd love to see that list too. It's a very specific role that Manning wants and I'm not sure there are many who fit the bill unless you go down the Omari Hutchinson type in the loan market. That again offers a short term and expensive solution to what we hope will be a need for a number of years (Ie Manning is successful and here a while). 

Shea Lacey, Bobby Clarke or even Fabio Carvalho could offer a solution from that perspective. 

Completely agree on interesting to see how it pans out. Fascinating if not bum off seat exciting. 

Carvalho was on £50 grand a week at Hull. No chance we’ll be paying that type of money. 
That’s why Rosenior was bumped out as manager. They backed him with big bucks and they didn’t even make the playoffs. 

[BobBobBobbin]

2 minutes ago, marksy said:

Carvalho was on £50 grand a week at Hull. No chance we’ll be paying that type of money. 
That’s why Rosenior was bumped out as manager. They backed him with big bucks and they didn’t even make the playoffs. 

No of course, merely listing types who might fit the mould of what we want; Not a suggestion. 

[lenred]

15 minutes ago, Dolman Block B said:

Many other clubs fans say they would snap their hands off for him

Not for £4/£4.5m they don’t.   Massive massive mistake we are making here imho, he’s not worth anywhere near what we will more than likely be paying for him.  But I hope he proves me completely wrong.  

[Red white and red]

Hopefully he ends up like Tomlin did when he signed permanently. 

[Port Said Red]

2 minutes ago, Red white and red said:

Hopefully he ends up like Tomlin did when he signed permanently. 

Why?

[Mr Popodopolous]

7 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

Totally with you. I find all this Twine mania well ott. Didn't pull up any trees weak in the tackle, quick to go to ground and whine for a free kick ( fair play he won an undeserved free kick and scored from it in one game). 

I'm undecided on Twine, I suppose one thing though ability to win free kicks in either half of the field can be useful tactically. Build pressure, relieve it depending on phase of the game.

[steviestevieneville]

17 minutes ago, Red white and red said:

Hopefully he ends up like Tomlin did when he signed permanently. 

A fat *** ? 

[Red white and red]

Yeah, it was a joke guys. 

[tin]

1 hour ago, lenred said:

Not for £4/£4.5m they don’t.   Massive massive mistake we are making here imho, he’s not worth anywhere near what we will more than likely be paying for him.  But I hope he proves me completely wrong.  

Totally agree. With almost every signing, I ask are we likely to recoup (or ideally better) the fee we paid for them? In Twine’s case, that’s £4m-£4.5m too much when the club was well aware he was on free after leaving Swindon three years ago. At that price, it’d be a no for me. 

[BS3 Ark at Ee]

Up the HPC this evening in full City gear, looks like he’s been doing official photos etc

[Loosey Boy]

9 minutes ago, BS3 Ark at Ee said:

Up the HPC this evening in full City gear, looks like he’s been doing official photos etc

Hope this is true…..for the right money, think this is a great signing for us

[cheddarwedlocker]

14 minutes ago, BS3 Ark at Ee said:

Up the HPC this evening in full City gear, looks like he’s been doing official photos etc

Yeah photoshoot was today. Dont believe the club will release the kit until after the announcement of Twine though so will be similar to Williams announcement, wearing some of our doss leisure range. Dont hold me to that (kit release after twine announcement)

[mozo]

I'm undecided and open-minded with Twine. 

He definitely was not great on loan, but I also think there was enough to suggest that the potential is there for him to be the creative spark. 

I liked that he relentlessly tried through balls, and whilst things didn't tend to come off for him, I'm open to the possibility that they will next season.

We shall see!

Edited June 18 by mozo

[BCFCGav]

Results did improve upon his arrival. Good player at this level. Hope we’ve been sensible with the spend, but good to have him here proper (if true!).

[W-S-M Seagull]

I don't think Twine is any better than Freeman, Paterson or Tomlin. Just more of the same. 

[Cov 77]

1 hour ago, lenred said:

Not for £4/£4.5m they don’t.   Massive massive mistake we are making here imho, he’s not worth anywhere near what we will more than likely be paying for him.  But I hope he proves me completely wrong.  

We aren’t going to pay anything like that , 2.5million tops and that with strings from the things I have heard, but we will see

[Jose]

1 minute ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

I don't think Twine is any better than Freeman, Paterson or Tomlin. Just more of the same. 

I think he’ll be better than all three for us. Arguably not a high bar. That’s not to say I’d want to spend over 2.5 for him. 

[cheddarwedlocker]

Also, I believe the fee is under 3m, from what ive been told. Main factor for ST being Manning. He was told before transfer window opened that he wouldnt be playing for Burnley this season, regardless of outcome of manager search

[Simon bristol]

For the right price im quite happy with this, our form certainly improved when he got fit, hes a good championship player, and is clearly mannings preferred option. What we need is 2/3 more of this level coming in,,, twine playing through balls to cornick is a waste of time.

[redsquirrel]

57 minutes ago, mozo said:

I'm undecided and open-minded with Twine. 

He definitely was not great on loan, but I also think there was enough to suggest that the potential is there for him to be the creative spark. 

I liked that he relentlessly tried through balls, and whilst things didn't tend to come off for him, I'm open to the possibility that they will next season.

We shall see!

it will take time for the others to get on his wavelength,where to make runs etc, wouldnt it be great if tc  clicked with twines creativity and started banging goals in,might give him the inspiration to sign a new deal, ( but i doubt it very much) 

[BS3 Ark at Ee]

A striker with genuine pace would be ideal with Twines vision 

[Merrick's Marvels]

He's a good player.

He improves our starting XI.

Who would we rather have playing wide Left - Twine, Mehmeti, Bell? No contest.

Who would we rather have playing as a 10 - Twine, Knight, whoever? No contest.

The price is the price.

@Harry might burst a blood vessel but the rest of us just have to live with it. It is what it is when you're buying a player from a Prem team.

[Bcfc24]

Hope some of the posters here are correct this time! Doubt it though, Twine was the one we were told would take longest

[BritAbroad]

I also hope this is correct. Would be a good signing, at the right price.

 

[Bcfc24]

This forum doesn’t have the best track record this year after the promised signing on Friday so I’m saying this is more BS

[Ska Junkie]

4 minutes ago, Bcfc24 said:

This forum doesn’t have the best track record this year after the promised signing on Friday so I’m saying this is more BS

I'm hoping it's correct but am more than happy to continue in blissful ignorance of any transfer news whatsoever.

[BCFC31]

Basically no one  has a clue as per usual

Edited June 18 by BCFC31

[Dynamite Red]

If it's under £3m, thay is a good deal for a quality upgrade and set peice taker. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Under £3m is fine, IMO. Beyond that?

[JAWS]

A definite improvement to the squad and would provide some credibility to the clubs stated top 6 aspirations. Think he qualifies to be in a top 6 squad. Only just but definitely improves our chances imo

[Nugget]

From memory Twines return from injury seemed to coincide with a good run of results. Shame he was out before that, lost some crucial games.

If he was listed on an opponents lineup id deffo be concerned, just one of those players other teams look out for, if they back Manning with this signing they need to back him up with others of equal / better quality for us to push on & in a way justify the price they’ll be paying for Twine. 

[redsquirrel]

1 hour ago, Nugget said:

From memory Twines return from injury seemed to coincide with a good run of results. Shame he was out before that, lost some crucial games.

If he was listed on an opponents lineup id deffo be concerned, just one of those players other teams look out for, if they back Manning with this signing they need to back him up with others of equal / better quality for us to push on & in a way justify the price they’ll be paying for Twine. 

if he is our key money signing, the best i think we can hope for will be young players with potential prospects that we hope we can develop to become those better players you mention.  that would fit with the stars aligning comment.

[westonred]

7 hours ago, BCFC31 said:

Basically no one  has a clue as per usual

Especially Tinnion

[marksy]

51 minutes ago, westonred said:

Especially Tinnion

I don’t expect he had at this moment in time. Burnley haven’t appointed a manager yet! 
I would imagine the selling club has the final say?

[Selred]

1 hour ago, marksy said:

I don’t expect he had at this moment in time. Burnley haven’t appointed a manager yet! 
I would imagine the selling club has the final say?

Burnley want promotion. Twine isn’t the man for them to do that.

[Davefevs]

12 minutes ago, 0606 said:

Well one example I know of - in the champ there is a player whose contract states that when he has X number of international caps it creates a buy out clause - club (just relegated) counter this by stating clause can only be activated between date a/ date b in transfer windows, to mitigate. Of course there are many variables at play with contracts and sometimes it’s very basic - like a club losing a player wanting to delay announcement of player leaving to save face/to counter with positive news. 
 

 

Yeah, I know there can be lots of clauses in contract.  One current City player has an add-on which is as likely to be achieved as me making my debut for City (I’m 54 with no knees, let alone ability)!!!

I was asking specific to this delayed announcement.  Delaying an announcement to coincide with a transfer the other way wouldn’t be a clause in a player’s contract.  But delaying it til July 1st to allow annual contract bonuses would.  Even then you could still announce now and state transfer will be from 1st July.

[marksy]

25 minutes ago, Selred said:

Burnley want promotion. Twine isn’t the man for them to do that.

Didn’t he help them achieve that the last time they went up? 

[Ian M]

9 minutes ago, marksy said:

Didn’t he help them achieve that the last time they went up? 

Depends how much credit you give to him for the 13.6% of their matches he played. (564 minutes out of 4140 possible)

[RedEyez]

14 hours ago, Dolman Block B said:

Don’t think we have seen the best of ST yet

 

Came in, got injured and played a few towards the end of the season 

Many other clubs fans say they would snap their hands off for him 

Once he’s settled back into the area along with his family you will see a top top player for us

I concur 

[KegCity]

Seen a lot of complaints about a £2.5-£3m fee, who else is out there as a realistic alternative?

Feels odd for me to be optimistic, but I think Twine showed some good quality and our form improved with him in the side. £2.5m would be fine.