Maddison to Ireland? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter covbromsgrove
- Start date
JimmyHillsbeard
Well-Known Member
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
Alkhen
Well-Known Member
I'm sure its been debated before but isn't the fact he has moved from Norwich meant we lose any international appearance bonuses?
I believe we should still get a percentage of a percentage of whatever Norwich receive if and when Leicester sell him
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
you could be right, though putting an international clause in there is a bit hopeful when selling to a Championship side I'd have thought.
ccfc92
Well-Known Member
Other way round I thought...
Warwickhunt
Well-Known Member
As Anderson said that the contract he agreed with Norwich for Maddison will keep us in income for years to come. Luvley Jubbly
covmark
Well-Known Member
I remember Anderson saying that. Maybe we had a clause that said we have 10/15% of whatever Norwich ever receive from selling him on. Hopefully Norwich had a £20m international appearance clause in their sale to Leicester haha.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
I think the thought is that any international appearance bonus/clause would only relate to while at Norwich rather than just 'at any point in his career' even if he'd been sold on. It can't just be tagged on indefinitely if a player moves. Depends on the wording in the contract I suppose.
I imagine Norwich put in a bonus regarding international appearances so would be due something and we might have a percentage clause on future income Norwich make so we might be due a bit of that. Again depends on wording - is it a 'sell-on' clause or a 'future profit' clause.
Alkhen
Well-Known Member
Agreed, can't see how you could foster over appearance bonuses after 2nd or 3rd moves. Would be really unmanageable.
I guess it's possible we negotiated a deal where we would be due a percentage of any profit made by Norwich from all clauses and sell ons they have in place with Leicester. But again imagine how complicated that would get if he say moves 6 times in his career.
We probably did have an international cap clause in place whilst he stayed a Norwich player on the off chance he was there long enough to get cap but that would have end when he left.
There will definitely be a small standard percentage of future sales because we trained him. There is a name for it. Possibly a solidarity payment.
The rumour are that we also have an extra more juicy cut of whatever sell on percentage Norwich agreed with Leicester for when Leicester sell him.
Total speculation and using made up figures it might work like this.
Say Man U pay Leicester 90m for Maddison. Norwich get 20% of that, so Norwich get 18m of which Coventry get 10%. Netting us 1.8m
Last edited:
No wonder Joy won’t sell up.
Alkhen
Well-Known Member
I'd imagine the Callum Wilson deal is more of a factor in their minds.
Cov have surely got to have at least 10-15% due of whatever Bournemouth make?
Alkhen
Well-Known Member
I'd be pretty fecked off if I was Maddison after this weeks England games. Not even given a 5 min cameo to lock him in.
Madders has consistently been topping chances created and assist charts across 2 seasons
I know Berkley is rated but I don't really see it personally and how did Mason Mount jump the queue like that? Good player but has played a handful of prem games.
Does Southgate have beef with him or something??
Madders has consistently been topping chances created and assist charts across 2 seasons
I know Berkley is rated but I don't really see it personally and how did Mason Mount jump the queue like that? Good player but has played a handful of prem games.
Does Southgate have beef with him or something??
HuckerbyDublinWhelan
Well-Known Member
As far as I know we still get paid by Norwich as it was part of the transfer fee . Same if you paid in instalments over 3 years you still have to pay if you sell him after 1
But yeah - Southgate is a twat, How Mount gets ahead is beyond me... you could guarantee Lingard would have played ahead of him if he was fit
But yeah - Southgate is a twat, How Mount gets ahead is beyond me... you could guarantee Lingard would have played ahead of him if he was fit
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Plays for Chelsea.
SlowerThanPlatt
Well-Known Member
From what I understand there is extra emphasis placed on those who have progressed through the England underage groups with the ‘England DNA’
The FA unveils plan to change England team's DNA
The FA unveils plan to change England team's DNA
Last edited:
SBAndy
Well-Known Member
Like Declan Rice? Who, by the way, isn’t that good.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Yeah looks like you're on to something there.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
Alkhen
Well-Known Member
I think we need to try and nurture Rice. Really will need a holding/destroyer type player in some games.
Berkley and Keane are not for me
CJ_covblaze
Well-Known Member
Didn’t get Maddison’s omission this break. He deserves a chance to show what he can do and hopefully that’ll come in a few weeks. Have to say I enjoyed that tonight. One or two moments where I was tearing my hair out but overall it was an enjoyable game to watch. Both teams seemed to say throw defending out of the window and went for it. Plenty of goals and best of all it wasn’t at Wembley. MOTM was Sterling. Barkley looked very good and they struggled to deal with him. Same goes for Sancho.
HuckerbyDublinWhelan
Well-Known Member
Then they need to start looking to the lower levels to start the Maddison’s of this world at the England age groups.Yeah looks like you're on to something there.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
It was clear Maddison was going to be a star at 16. If Pressley knew it, why didn’t the England teams.
I’m starting to think it’s pointless for lower leagues to emphasise youth, they don’t get compensated fairly, and the players they do bring through seem to be ignored.
SlowerThanPlatt
Well-Known Member
It probably worked out better for us he weren’t selected for England tbf at that age. We had Charlie McCann who played a few games for Eng U16s and got snapped up by United
Alkhen
Well-Known Member
Really like Sancho, need to play him and Sterling from now on. Rashford can cover Kane.
Barkley made one decent run then flopped. Not for me at all. England need a classy ball player if playing Henderson and Rice
Otis
Well-Known Member
Yes, get all that, but we could have surely brought Maddison on just for s few minutes to tie him in to England.
Going to look pretty dumb if he now plumps for Ireland. We haven't been overly blessed in the midfield playmaker department lately have we!
I do have high hopes for Phil Foden though.
skyblue1991
Well-Known Member
Maddison deserves his chance. He's a player that plays well consistently and doesn't really go missing in games against the top 4.
How Barkley, Rice, Lingard when fit and Mount (albeit I do rate him) get in ahead I have no idea.
Sent from my G8441 using Tapatalk
How Barkley, Rice, Lingard when fit and Mount (albeit I do rate him) get in ahead I have no idea.
Sent from my G8441 using Tapatalk
Sky Blue Harry H
Well-Known Member
Won't be surprised if Maddison gets a few minutes and then is ignored for the 'usual' average lot. Phil Foden (who will be a star) will be established there within the next 2 seasons amd i wonder if they will just keep picking 2 holding players behind him, still leaving Maddison out - criminal waste of phis passing ability.
skyblueeyesrevisited
Well-Known Member
It’s the way it’s always been with England Managers. The preference is to pick from the top four teams. If Maddison moves to Man United he will be in the starting eleven. It’s the same with the age groups. Average youngsters get picked based on the fact they play for one of the top sides. Better plays at smaller academies get overlooked.
