Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
Hugill 08:20 - Oct 8 with 3938 viewsRblockPrior

Read a few bits and pieces this morning which says that West Ham are hoping to sell Hugill this January, surely with our year loan agreement that can't happen? Or at least the club buying him can't have him until the end of the season?

Poll: Which football club do you hate the most?

0

Hugill on 08:53 - Oct 8 with 2424 viewsdubaistu

I'd hope we have a first choice offer for Hugill and with Wells also out of contract at the end of the season it's the same for him also.
0

Hugill on 09:00 - Oct 8 with 2396 viewsrunningman75

I presume as West Ham own Hugill if someone comes in with a reasonable offer for him in January 2020 they will be able to sell. I would rather depending on circumstances we could sign Wells out of contract next season though I presume wages will be a stumbling block.
1

Hugill on 09:04 - Oct 8 with 2387 viewsozexile

We should sit this one out for once. There's no way West ham will get a fee for him.
0

Hugill on 09:27 - Oct 8 with 2335 viewsloftus77

Rblock - I hope that's right, I'm not sure.

If West Ham were to sell him in January, I'd have thought we'd keep him on loan until May, as per the loan agreement, which would be transferred to his new club. But as he's West Ham's asset to sell I'm not sure what power we'd have if the 2 parent clubs agreed that he'd go to his new club in Jan and simply cancelled the loan.
0

Hugill on 09:45 - Oct 8 with 2287 viewsNorthernr

You can recall a season long loan at the halfway point if you want.
0

Hugill on 09:59 - Oct 8 with 2249 viewsaston_hoop

Don't know how relaible any of this is, maybe not at all. But I thought it was stated there was no option for recall.

https://www.claretandhugh.info/hugill-makes-it-five-in-six/
0

Hugill on 10:02 - Oct 8 with 2238 viewsEsox_Lucius

IIRC we had Kyle Walker on a season long loan but he was recalled and sent to Villa as Spuds wanted one of their players and he was used to sweeten the deal.

The grass is always greener.
Poll: Could or do you go to watch QPR without having a drink or recreational drugs?

0
Hugill on 10:11 - Oct 8 with 2199 viewsAntti_Heinola

Hugill on 10:02 - Oct 8 by Esox_Lucius

IIRC we had Kyle Walker on a season long loan but he was recalled and sent to Villa as Spuds wanted one of their players and he was used to sweeten the deal.


don't think that was a season long deal was it? thought we wanted to extend?
just checked - yes. one month deal, that was extended to Jan.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/q/qpr/9093535.stm

Still, Clive's right, if west ham get a bid he could be sold from under us. Assuming he wants to go i guess.

Bare bones.

1
Login to get fewer ads


Hugill on 10:14 - Oct 8 with 2190 viewsfrancisbowles

Was there a situation, a few years back, where we couldn't recall a loan because we hadn't included a call back option?
0
Hugill on 10:19 - Oct 8 with 2157 viewsCamberleyR

Hugill on 10:02 - Oct 8 by Esox_Lucius

IIRC we had Kyle Walker on a season long loan but he was recalled and sent to Villa as Spuds wanted one of their players and he was used to sweeten the deal.


No, Walker was signed initially for a month to cover an injury to Bradley Orr who had started the season at right back.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/q/qpr/8995384.stm

However Warnock liked what he saw and extended the loan to January

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/q/qpr/9093535.stm
1

Hugill on 10:20 - Oct 8 with 2148 viewsaston_hoop

0

Hugill on 10:45 - Oct 8 with 2076 viewsenfieldargh

Fella I met in the cafe was insistent that all squad players are on 2.5k/week except Wells and that West Ham pay all Hugills wages.
I said Eze is on more than that surely, NO was his reply.

He was adamant!!!

Adam adamant even

captains fantastic
Poll: tonights result

0
Hugill on 10:47 - Oct 8 with 2068 viewsnick_hammersmith

Hugill on 10:02 - Oct 8 by Esox_Lucius

IIRC we had Kyle Walker on a season long loan but he was recalled and sent to Villa as Spuds wanted one of their players and he was used to sweeten the deal.


I remember hearing at the time we could have signed him for 2.5m
What a deal that would have been!
0
Hugill on 10:47 - Oct 8 with 2067 viewsNed_Kennedys

Hugill on 09:04 - Oct 8 by ozexile

We should sit this one out for once. There's no way West ham will get a fee for him.


Of course they will get a fee for him: not the £10m they paid but probably about half of that.

Can see the likes of Forest or Leeds being interested if he keeps scoring: never a bad idea to top up the amount of forwards you have for the second half of the season if you are seriously involved in the promotion race.
0
Hugill on 10:57 - Oct 8 with 2021 viewsWatford_Ranger

Hugill on 10:45 - Oct 8 by enfieldargh

Fella I met in the cafe was insistent that all squad players are on 2.5k/week except Wells and that West Ham pay all Hugills wages.
I said Eze is on more than that surely, NO was his reply.

He was adamant!!!

Adam adamant even


I’d have £2.5k on him talking bollocks. Cameron wouldn’t get out of bed for that for a start.
1
Hugill on 10:59 - Oct 8 with 2017 viewsWestbourneR

Hugill on 10:45 - Oct 8 by enfieldargh

Fella I met in the cafe was insistent that all squad players are on 2.5k/week except Wells and that West Ham pay all Hugills wages.
I said Eze is on more than that surely, NO was his reply.

He was adamant!!!

Adam adamant even


This is laughable. A whole raft of our players are on considerably more than £2.5K a week.

Poll: Should JFH get the sack?

1
Hugill on 10:59 - Oct 8 with 2014 viewsMick_S

Hugill on 10:45 - Oct 8 by enfieldargh

Fella I met in the cafe was insistent that all squad players are on 2.5k/week except Wells and that West Ham pay all Hugills wages.
I said Eze is on more than that surely, NO was his reply.

He was adamant!!!

Adam adamant even


Remember:

Don't tread on an ant he's done nothing to you
There might come a day when he's treading on you
Don't tread on an ant you'll end up black and blue
You cut off his head, legs come looking for you.

Did I ever mention that I was in Minder?
Poll: Should Seann and Katya stay on Strictly Come Dancing?

1
Hugill on 11:06 - Oct 8 with 1989 viewsAntti_Heinola

Hugill on 10:59 - Oct 8 by WestbourneR

This is laughable. A whole raft of our players are on considerably more than £2.5K a week.


Spot on. As laughable as the other rumour that Leistner is on 25k p/w. No one knows except the players, their agents and key people at the club. Makes me laugh stuff like this.

Bare bones.

0
Hugill on 11:26 - Oct 8 with 1934 viewsLunarJetman

Hugill on 09:59 - Oct 8 by aston_hoop

Don't know how relaible any of this is, maybe not at all. But I thought it was stated there was no option for recall.

https://www.claretandhugh.info/hugill-makes-it-five-in-six/


"no option to recall him from his loan until January next year."

Worth noting that there are conflicting views on this so the actual truth seems to be far from clear..
[Post edited 8 Oct 11:28]
0

Hugill on 11:50 - Oct 8 with 1884 viewsLazyFan

He can be recalled in Jan, at which point they can sell him to the highest bidder.
His wages must be high, Wet Spam will know it is far higher than QPR can ever afford. Therefore they know we shall never buy him.

Thus whiles hes on form, Wet Spam will see if someone else will take a punt on him and his high wages. So, they put it about he's available as they clearly do not fancy him and would prefer to get a fee and his full wages off the books.

Also, this probably means we are not paying all or even a large part of his wages, hence their desire to get rid. Unless he starts scoring every game from here to Jan, I suspect that no one will pay it and we shall have him for the rest of the year.

I am more worried some other club comes in for Wells. As not only is he on form goal scoring-wise, but he also seems to have a great pass on him. This for me puts him ahead of Hugnill and he is probably cheaper on wages and fee.

Wells is the real risk.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzz

1
Hugill on 12:58 - Oct 8 with 1705 viewsBrianMcCarthy

Hugill on 11:50 - Oct 8 by LazyFan

He can be recalled in Jan, at which point they can sell him to the highest bidder.
His wages must be high, Wet Spam will know it is far higher than QPR can ever afford. Therefore they know we shall never buy him.

Thus whiles hes on form, Wet Spam will see if someone else will take a punt on him and his high wages. So, they put it about he's available as they clearly do not fancy him and would prefer to get a fee and his full wages off the books.

Also, this probably means we are not paying all or even a large part of his wages, hence their desire to get rid. Unless he starts scoring every game from here to Jan, I suspect that no one will pay it and we shall have him for the rest of the year.

I am more worried some other club comes in for Wells. As not only is he on form goal scoring-wise, but he also seems to have a great pass on him. This for me puts him ahead of Hugnill and he is probably cheaper on wages and fee.

Wells is the real risk.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


Sorry, Lazyfan.

Your post seems at odds with Sean Gallagher's tweet.

Is it that you think he's saying that there is no recall until January, or that you think he's saying no recall all season but that he's mistaken?

"The opposite of love, after all, is not hate, but indifference."
Poll: Player of the Year (so far)

1
Hugill on 13:03 - Oct 8 with 1679 viewssmegma

Hugill on 10:45 - Oct 8 by enfieldargh

Fella I met in the cafe was insistent that all squad players are on 2.5k/week except Wells and that West Ham pay all Hugills wages.
I said Eze is on more than that surely, NO was his reply.

He was adamant!!!

Adam adamant even


Bloke in the cafe ???

Must be true then.
1

Hugill on 13:04 - Oct 8 with 1664 viewsLongsufferingR

If they sell him in January, maybe we could claim part of the fee as a sell-on?
[Post edited 8 Oct 13:04]
0
Hugill on 13:05 - Oct 8 with 1650 viewsNed_Kennedys

Hugill on 13:03 - Oct 8 by smegma

Bloke in the cafe ???

Must be true then.


Depends which café really.

Nailed on true if it was a Café Rouge.
0
Hugill on 13:05 - Oct 8 with 1649 viewsTacticalR

Hugill on 13:03 - Oct 8 by smegma

Bloke in the cafe ???

Must be true then.


Say no more squire.

Air hostess clique

0
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© FansNetwork 2019