Danny ings to leave liverpool

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 4:04 pm

Played and scored yesterday in a 7-0 win at Chester.

Diesel · Post by **Diesel** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 4:24 pm

I'd be more impressed if he didn't play but still scored.

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 4:29 pm

I can only assume Liverpool are putting him in the shop window,so they can get most of the 8 million fee back.And also free up wages and a squad place for any newbie signing,22 players played for the scousers,11 in each half so in reality this was a glorified training session.

Diesel · Post by **Diesel** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 4:32 pm

Still keeps me awake at night that we let him go for such a low fee when clubs were queuing up offering more.

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 4:35 pm

Swings and roundabouts though,if he had signed a new contract and then hardly kicked a ball in 3 years,many would rightly be complaining we were carrying a crock.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 4:38 pm

Diesel wrote:Still keeps me awake at night that we let him go for such a low fee when clubs were queuing up offering more.

Erm.. we didn't.

Darnhill Claret · Post by **Darnhill Claret** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 4:44 pm

Still doesn't get it despite Tony's best efforts to explain.

Diesel · Post by **Diesel** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 4:46 pm

fidelcastro wrote:Erm.. we didn't.

Spurs offered 15m and we accepted 8m from Liverpool and don't get me started on The Trippier transfer.

jdrobbo · Post by **jdrobbo** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 4:50 pm

He was out of contract and absolutely wanted to go to Liverpool over Spurs. The Spurs offer just helped to increase the tribunal fee!

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 4:50 pm

Diesel wrote:Spurs offered 15m and we accepted 8m from Liverpool and don't get me started on The Trippier transfer.

Is that a fact though?

Maybe he didn't want to go to Spurs?

He was also one of, if not the key player to our hopes of stopping up that season (yes, I know we didn't ultimately).

We didn't ACCEPT 8 Million from Liverpool. It was a tribunal decision, when Ings decided to run his contract down.

Are you slow or something?

PutTheWheelieBinsOut · Post by **PutTheWheelieBinsOut** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 4:54 pm

I think we are a little to obsessed with our wage structure, we should look at the full package of any transfer, the fee itself, the signing on fee and the wages. If we can get a higher quality player for a smaller transfer fee but the wages are higher, surely the money we save on the transfer fee pays for the higher wages. Also if a player gets injured these days a large majority of their wages is payed by insurance, which reduces the risks even further.

Diesel · Post by **Diesel** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 4:57 pm

Too soft, he's better than Wood but we paid nearly double for him.

Someone at the club needs to give their head a wiggle over this.

mybloodisclaret · Post by **mybloodisclaret** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 4:59 pm

So is he on the plane to Cork or not???

Hedontplayforyou · Post by **Hedontplayforyou** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:01 pm

Yes he is on the plane

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:01 pm

Diesel wrote:Too soft, he's better than Wood but we paid nearly double for him.

Someone at the club needs to give their head a wiggle over this.

Did they let you out for the weekend?

Diesel · Post by **Diesel** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:16 pm

fidelcastro wrote:Did they let you out for the weekend?

So we should just continue to sell our best players for chestnuts? Heads should do roly polys over these transfer dealings.

Darnhill Claret · Post by **Darnhill Claret** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:21 pm

Chestnuts?? Is that an upgrade over peanuts?

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 8:29 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:They have to to ensure they get some sort of return fee, otherwise he’d just run his contract down & leave for nothing.

That's only for under 24s. Once the player is over 24, there's no transfer fee receivable if he stays until his contract expires, and it makes no difference whether you offered him a contract or not.

claptrappers_union · Post by **claptrappers_union** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 8:54 pm

jdrobbo wrote:He was out of contract and absolutely wanted to go to Liverpool over Spurs. The Spurs offer just helped to increase the tribunal fee!

Bristol City had a bid of £9m accepted for Andre Gray, but Steve Cotterill couldn't make him agree personal terms for some reason. Co-incidently, we signed Gray as Ings' replacement.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/33974678" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 10:20 pm

I never believed that Ings was going anywhere but Liverpool - by all accounts it was a done deal a long time before the rumoured Spurs interest.

Also never believed any of the reports about what Spurs offered. Why would they offer so much when they knew it could go to tribunal ? Does not sound anything like the type of thing that Daniel Levy would do - quite the opposite in fact.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 10:29 pm

dsr wrote:That's only for under 24s. Once the player is over 24, there's no transfer fee receivable if he stays until his contract expires, and it makes no difference whether you offered him a contract or not.

Ok fair enough, I haven't researched that much into the rules so to a certain degree it's guess work, Hope Danny kicks on wherever he goes I don't think he has future at LFC.

CharlieinNewMexico · Post by **CharlieinNewMexico** » Mon Jul 09, 2018 12:14 am

TVC15 wrote:I never believed that Ings was going anywhere but Liverpool - by all accounts it was a done deal a long time before the rumoured Spurs interest.

Also never believed any of the reports about what Spurs offered. Why would they offer so much when they knew it could go to tribunal ? Does not sound anything like the type of thing that Daniel Levy would do - quite the opposite in fact.

We were talking to Spurs about the Trippier deal and they agreed to make an official Ings bid as part of it to inflate the tribunal fee.

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Mon Jul 09, 2018 9:54 am

CharlieinNewMexico wrote:We were talking to Spurs about the Trippier deal and they agreed to make an official Ings bid as part of it to inflate the tribunal fee.

How do you know that ?
Sounds like pure conjecture to me.

Even if it’s true - and I doubt it was - it had no impact on the fee agreed

Plus why would we be “talking” to Spurs about the Trippier deal ? There was nothing to discuss - the fee was always going to be £3.5m as that was the buy out clause in his contract.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Mon Jul 09, 2018 10:34 am

TVC15 wrote:How do you know that ?
Sounds like pure conjecture to me.

Even if it’s true - and I doubt it was - it had no impact on the fee agreed

Plus why would we be “talking” to Spurs about the Trippier deal ? There was nothing to discuss - the fee was always going to be £3.5m as that was the buy out clause in his contract.

The £3.5m was the trigger whoever sanctioned such a low clause is at fault, done differently quadruple that amount should have been the bare minimum, even taking the age into consideration give him a sweetener then sell high later.

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Mon Jul 09, 2018 10:41 am

Jakubclaret wrote:The £3.5m was the trigger whoever sanctioned such a low clause is at fault, done differently quadruple that amount should have been the bare minimum, even taking the age into consideration give him a sweetener then sell high later.

That’s not correct - it was nobody’s fault. The only reason Tripps agreed to sign a new contract and stay with us another year was if we included the £3.5m release clause. So we got an extra season out of him and a bit of cash.
Sometimes (probably quite often) all the cards are with the player.

We had a few great seasons out of Tripps - we picked him and Ben up for virtually nothing and it would be hard to think of 2 players who have given the club so much effort on the pitch and been so instrumental to our success.

Pearcey · Post by **Pearcey** » Sat Jul 14, 2018 10:44 pm

Southampton in for him according to Nixon. Liverpool value him at £20m.

Steve-Harpers-perm · Post by **Steve-Harpers-perm** » Sat Jul 14, 2018 10:45 pm

20 million what a ridiculous fee!!!!

Pearcey · Post by **Pearcey** » Sat Jul 14, 2018 10:48 pm

Steve-Harpers-perm wrote:20 million what a ridiculous fee!!!!

Agreed.

DustyBawls · Post by **DustyBawls** » Sat Jul 14, 2018 10:49 pm

I hope we leave well alone.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Sat Jul 14, 2018 10:53 pm

Steve-Harpers-perm wrote:20 million what a ridiculous fee!!!!

Are there any add-ons with the tribunal fee that will give Burnley a share of £20 million - or any other fee L'pool receive?

More to the point, have we rec'd the max due for add-ons for apperances?

Good luck, Danny Ings, you contributed to Burnley's successes.

Japebe43 · Post by **Japebe43** » Sat Jul 14, 2018 10:54 pm

How has doubled his value sat in the injury room?

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Sat Jul 14, 2018 10:55 pm

If Southampton are willing to take the gamble fair play to them,but they are risking Danny and Charlie both being absent for long periods of the season,that said they definitely need firepower,Austin and Tadic were their top goalscorers with a paltry 7 strikes each,if they don't remedy this relegation looms large.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Sat Jul 14, 2018 11:12 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:The £3.5m was the trigger whoever sanctioned such a low clause is at fault, done differently quadruple that amount should have been the bare minimum, even taking the age into consideration give him a sweetener then sell high later.

Trippier would never have agreed an escape clause so much higher than his then valuation. Remember he had never played Premier League at the time, and the transfer market in 2014 was not the same as it is now. And remember too that we had three options - sell Trippier for his value at the time (£3.5m?), or let him run out his contract and go for free, or give him a contract he was willing to sign.

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Sun Jul 15, 2018 12:10 am

Japebe43 wrote:How has doubled his value sat in the injury room?

I'd agree but he still has 2 years on his contract,and will obviously be earning a much higher salary then when he was a Burnley player,if Liverpool can get 20 million they are

all the way to the bank.

Japebe43 · Post by **Japebe43** » Sun Jul 15, 2018 12:14 am

tiger76 wrote:I'd agree but he still has 2 years on his contract,and will obviously be earning a much higher salary then when he was a Burnley player,if Liverpool can get 20 million they are all the way to the bank.

Just read they only paid 6.5m.. I thought it was nearer 10m.. Sorry, 20m is not on.. I realise they got him on the cheap in the first place, but he's worth no more than 10-12m.. I doubt saints will end up paying more than that before add ons.

Long Time Lurker · Post by **Long Time Lurker** » Sun Jul 15, 2018 12:23 am

Tripps was in the same contract boat as Ings. The only difference is that he signed a contract extension so he wouldn't leave us for nothing. He didn't have to do it, but because of that extension we at least got something for him.

It was time for him to leave, but he did right by the club because that's the type of bloke he is. Demanding a significant release clause would have been very discourteous on our part.

Nothing but praise for Tripps and the way he conducts himself, a top bloke and a true professional with a good heart. Long may his success continue, he deserves it.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Sun Jul 15, 2018 12:30 am

dsr wrote:Trippier would never have agreed an escape clause so much higher than his then valuation. Remember he had never played Premier League at the time, and the transfer market in 2014 was not the same as it is now. And remember too that we had three options - sell Trippier for his value at the time (£3.5m?), or let him run out his contract and go for free, or give him a contract he was willing to sign.

Don’t know all the ins & outs as pure fact, amongst certain quarters some will believe we got dry power bummed with no lube in sight, I’m past caring now if somebody made a mistake with the paperwork, it’s done & dusted.

DustyBawls · Post by **DustyBawls** » Sun Jul 15, 2018 12:52 am

I think with Trippier it's not so much about what we sold him for, it's what he helped us to achieve, which indirectly helped us earn much more money.

What we got for him is a bit short-sighted. He's one of those players that was so influential in us going up, it's pretty much peanuts anyway. Don't forget he was behind Walker in the pecking order anyway and only since Walker moved to City has really come on leaps and bounds. He could have flopped and never had the chance.

Wile E Coyote · Post by **Wile E Coyote** » Sun Jul 15, 2018 1:51 am

klopp, a won nothing manager, playing catch up with duds, he announced before last season began ings would not feature in his side, desperation meant he dragged him around to warm the bench, nothing happened, and a highly talented youngish player with horrific knees is left in the doldrums.
THE opposite of what a 2018/19 Burnley team require to progress.

DustyBawls · Post by **DustyBawls** » Sun Jul 15, 2018 2:02 am

Wile E Coyote wrote:klopp, a won nothing manager, playing catch up with duds, he announced before last season began ings would not feature in his side, desperation meant he dragged him around to warm the bench, nothing happened, and a highly talented youngish player with horrific knees is left in the doldrums.
THE opposite of what a 2018/19 Burnley team require to progress.

Not a fan of Klopp, I'm guessing?

Japebe43 · Post by **Japebe43** » Sun Jul 15, 2018 4:10 am

Wile E Coyote wrote:klopp, a won nothing manager, playing catch up with duds, he announced before last season began ings would not feature in his side, desperation meant he dragged him around to warm the bench, nothing happened, and a highly talented youngish player with horrific knees is left in the doldrums.
THE opposite of what a 2018/19 Burnley team require to progress.

Won bundesliga titles ahead of Bayern Munich in Germany with an unfashionable side. No mean feat.

Vegas Claret · Post by **Vegas Claret** » Sun Jul 15, 2018 5:05 am

Can't believe I just gave Saxo a like lol

Woodleyclaret · Post by **Woodleyclaret** » Sun Jul 15, 2018 3:37 pm

Whatever the fee for Ings the scallies turned us over wainting over 18 m to get paid out screwing up our transfer dealings.

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Sun Jul 15, 2018 3:46 pm

Diesel wrote:Spurs offered 15m and we accepted 8m from Liverpool and don't get me started on The Trippier transfer.

I don't think you understand that his contract had expired, which means that he was s free agent and HE chose with whom he signed.

The reason we received any fee at all, was because he was under the age limit, so a 'development' fee is payable. That fee was sorted by a tribunal and the Spurs 'offer' may have been taken into consideration, at that time. However, Burnley were rewarded for our part in his development only.

gandhisflipflop · Post by **gandhisflipflop** » Sat Feb 15, 2020 5:00 pm

gandhisflipflop · Post by **gandhisflipflop** » Sun Jul 19, 2020 11:37 pm

Should have had him back.

mdd2 · Post by **mdd2** » Mon Jul 20, 2020 12:36 am

I don't think he wanted to come back. He signed for the club he has supported all his life I believe

Vegas Claret · Post by **Vegas Claret** » Mon Jul 20, 2020 12:45 am

he earns 75K a week - there's your reason