- Apr 16, 2005
- 16,047
- 18,013
Spurs face the prospect of forking out even if he seals January move.
Read the full article at Daily Mail
Read the full article at Daily Mail
His contract as a player was terminated, but I'm sure the termination triggered a new contract handling the pay off in instalments. Or something shite like that.i thought his contract was terminated?
I'd go along with this...similar to loan players and parent clubs. But saying that...he played against City when they subsidised his wages for us...I don't know...we should have had him put down a while agoIf we're paying him then can we prevent him playing against us?
No - she's one of our own...I thought that said Adele for a minute.....
His contract as a player was terminated, but I'm sure the termination triggered a new contract handling the pay off in instalments. Or something shite like that.
It doesn't really matter, but I probably would expect that they replaced his contract as a player with a contract of paying him off. Or severely amended his contract if you prefer.No, his contract wasn't terminated. His contract is the only thing states 'We will pay him at least 100k a week until the contract ends'. (June) Of course, if he signs with another club, then our contract is terminated.
This saga will never end!
Apparently we have agreed to pay him a portion of his wages for the rest of his life.
£5 a week.
He's like a lingering fart that refuses to go away.