Damien Duff

**Razors left peg** · 16/08/2009, 7:56 AM

Hodgson confirms Duff medical...
http://www.skysports.com/story/0,195...492798,00.html

**fu1ham** · 17/08/2009, 6:53 AM

Press conference today at 11am apparently. Probably on the bench Thursday , 20minutes play , half an hour against Chelsea on Sunday. Come on Damien!

**geysir** · 17/08/2009, 1:36 PM

Remember fu1ham, you lot are just paying through the roof in order to keep him fit for his bigger gig.

**fu1ham** · 17/08/2009, 10:45 PM

Took a 30% paycut to join. Still a great talent and capable of propelling Ireland to SA if he stays fit.

**Colbert Report** · 18/08/2009, 5:08 AM

30% pay cut? Surely he was signed on a free transfer then? Not the reported four million pound fee?

**Razors left peg** · 18/08/2009, 6:19 AM

Originally Posted by Colbert Report

30% pay cut? Surely he was signed on a free transfer then? Not the reported four million pound fee?

why would there be no fee, Spurs paid Newcastle 8 million for Bassong and Beye cost Villa around 3.5. 4million for Duffer sounds a reasonable price

**dr_peepee** · 18/08/2009, 8:07 AM

I believe... And I'm open to correction... That if you don't hand in a request you're entitled to have the balance of your contract paid up when you leave. That's probably where the fee came in to it. Fulham won't pay the wages so Duff takes a cut to go. Fulham pay Newcastle a fee. Newcastle in turn pay up the balance of his contract on the way out...

**Drumcondra 69er** · 18/08/2009, 9:10 AM

Originally Posted by dr_peepee

I believe... And I'm open to correction... That if you don't hand in a request you're entitled to have the balance of your contract paid up when you leave. That's probably where the fee came in to it. Fulham won't pay the wages so Duff takes a cut to go. Fulham pay Newcastle a fee. Newcastle in turn pay up the balance of his contract on the way out...

I think you're entitled to 10% of the fee if you haven't requested the transfer. You can always turn around and say you're not moving and sit out the rest of your contract which is where a settlement deal comes in. Plus there's usually loyalty bonuses etc that you may still be entitled to. Duffer's Newcastle contract was stuffed with extra payments on top of his weekly wage. That was how Newcastle got him for �5m, Chelsea wanted �10m off Liverpool but were prepared to sell him for half that to a team they didn't consider a rivial which meant Newcastle could basically spread the other �5m over the likes of Duff's signing on fee, loyalty bonuses etc. It was the only way Duff's salary at Newcastle came close to what he was earning at Chelsea, Liverpool weren't prepared to pay those sort of wages according to the reports at the time.

**gspain** · 18/08/2009, 9:38 AM

Originally Posted by dr_peepee

I believe... And I'm open to correction... That if you don't hand in a request you're entitled to have the balance of your contract paid up when you leave. That's probably where the fee came in to it. Fulham won't pay the wages so Duff takes a cut to go. Fulham pay Newcastle a fee. Newcastle in turn pay up the balance of his contract on the way out...

I think it is 5% of the transfer fee if you don't ask for a transfer.

His contract wouldn't be paid up as he doesn't have to leave. He could volunteer for a paycut to get back to the premeirship and also for more security in a longer contract.

Damien has never been motivated by money so I suspect he is just glad to be out of Newcastle. Fulham are a good club with a great manager and in europe too so a great opportunity. Great news for us imo.

**kennedmc** · 18/08/2009, 10:13 AM

Originally Posted by gspain

Damien has never been motivated by money so I suspect he is just glad to be out of Newcastle.

Duffer has been one of our best players for almost 10 years now and has never given anything less than 100% for Ireland. However, why did he go to Newcastle if it wasn't for the cash? A player can still refuse to move to a club if he doesn't want to.

**geysir** · 18/08/2009, 10:27 AM

For a guy not motivated by money to also manage to become Irelands richest ever footballer is no mean achievement. The talk was that he got a �5m signing on fee to join Newcastle to ease that pain, plus about �5m p/a (salary plus top ups).
Though Owen was about twice as expensive as that for Newcastle.

If you had a choice between signing Owen or Duff for a team like Fulham for similar terms, who would you pick?

**DeLorean** · 18/08/2009, 11:29 AM

Originally Posted by geysir

If you had a choice between signing Owen or Duff for a team like Fulham for similar terms, who would you pick?

Probably Owen seeing as their midfield is very strong as it is. Zamora and Johnson are probably the weakest part of their team.

Words really count for nothing in football !!

**dr_peepee** · 18/08/2009, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by gspain

I thinkit is 5% of the transfer fee if you don't ask for a transfer.

His contract wouldn't be paid up as he doesn't have to leave. He could volunteer for a paycut to get back to the premeirship and also for more security in a longer contract.

Damien has never been motivated by money so I suspect he is just glad to be out of Newcastle. Fulham are a good club with a great manager and in europe too so a great opportunity. Great news for us imo.

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

I think you're entitled to 10% of the fee if you haven't requested the transfer. You can always turn around and say you're not moving and sit out the rest of your contract which is where a settlement deal comes in. Plus there's usually loyalty bonuses etc that you may still be entitled to. Duffer's Newcastle contract was stuffed with extra payments on top of his weekly wage. That was how Newcastle got him for �5m, Chelsea wanted �10m off Liverpool but were prepared to sell him for half that to a team they didn't consider a rivial which meant Newcastle could basically spread the other �5m over the likes of Duff's signing on fee, loyalty bonuses etc. It was the only way Duff's salary at Newcastle came close to what he was earning at Chelsea, Liverpool weren't prepared to pay those sort of wages according to the reports at the time.

Originally Posted by dr_peepee

I believe... And I'm open to correction... That if you don't hand in a request you're entitled to have the balance of your contract paid up when you leave. That's probably where the fee came in to it. Fulham won't pay the wages so Duff takes a cut to go. Fulham pay Newcastle a fee. Newcastle in turn pay up the balance of his contract on the way out...

Ha!! Between the 3 of us we might have a fact there somewhere..

I was talking outside the entitlement of the cut of the transfer fee though too.. It was told to me a few years ago by a friend of a Pro that legally the contract has to be paid up but more often than not there's alot of jiggery pokery goes on. "I'll wave this if you do that" kind of thing. And that this accounts for the discrepency in some transfer fees paid as opposed to respective values. Like any job, if you're contracted for 12 months and they decide after 9 months the work isn;t there, they still have to pay the 3 months.

Take Alonso for example. The fee eventually paid was about 5 mil less than what Real bid before he handed in a request. I think the logic behind it is that Real know that Pool don't have to honour the balance of the contract, plus you may find that Alonso was reluctant to offer a transfer request because of his losses so Real say "hand it in and we'll sort you out on the other side because we'll just offer less now because we know Liverpool don't have to honour your contract" and so forth. Still costs the same money, just accounted for differently...

That's why (I think) you'll see some contracts as terminated by mutual consent and others just as "Free Transfers"... And that players with more left on their contract have higher transfer fees than those with less... (even aside from the fear of loosing them on a bosman)

**fu1ham** · 18/08/2009, 12:48 PM

Great signing; wonder if he's eligible for the Thursday night match ?

**paul_oshea** · 18/08/2009, 1:09 PM

Originally Posted by dr_peepee

Ha!! Between the 3 of us we might have a fact there somewhere..

Like any job, if you're contracted for 12 months and they decide after 9 months the work isn;t there, they still have to pay the 3 months.

No they don't thats completely wrong. I am a contractor, if tomorrow the client said sorry, you are crap or whatever, they have a days notice to give. Its written in the contract. No place will pay you for work that you have not done. If you are permanent and you are on35k a year or whatever and you are let go or whatever, they dont pay you up until the financial year end.

I don't know much about footballers contracts but I cant beleive that if david beckham has 5 years in LA, leaves after 2 they pay the next 3 years for no work done. However I know for a fact that other contracts definitely dont work like that.

**dr_peepee** · 18/08/2009, 1:19 PM

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

No they don't thats completely wrong. I am a contractor, if tomorrow the client said sorry, you are crap or whatever, they have a days notice to give. Its written in the contract.

Beg to differ my good man. I too am a contractor. Maybe mines a sweeping statement based on my own experience however I think you cited your own exception in your own post....

Footballers have more clout than you or I. I wouldn't imagine they would commit to anything that leaves them at the mercy of the club to that extent. As i said, I'm not claiming what I said to be gospel. If I tell a lie it's cos I was told a lie. It just makes sense to me

**ken foree** · 18/08/2009, 3:01 PM

just read on a fulham board that duff isn't registered for the europa league with them so no playing in europe? forgive me for overstating the obvious but any confirmation on this would be a good thing

**Razors left peg** · 18/08/2009, 3:04 PM

Originally Posted by ken foree

just read on a fulham board that duff isn't registered for the europa league with them so no playing in europe? forgive me for overstating the obvious but any confirmation on this would be a good thing

Hodgson was interviewed on Sky earlier and he said that he is allowed to change 1 player on his european squad and he is definately adding Duff to the list. He said that the only concern he has is that Duff might not get a visa in time for their trip to Russia

**DeLorean** · 18/08/2009, 3:09 PM

Originally Posted by ken foree

any confirmation on this would be a good thing

Yeah I know what you mean with regards to being fresh for Ireland. However, if Fulham did have a good European run I would like Duff to be a part of it.

**paul_oshea** · 18/08/2009, 3:10 PM

Originally Posted by dr_peepee

Beg to differ my good man. I too am a contractor. Maybe mines a sweeping statement based on my own experience however I think you cited your own exception in your own post....

Footballers have more clout than you or I. I wouldn't imagine they would commit to anything that leaves them at the mercy of the club to that extent. As i said, I'm not claiming what I said to be gospel. If I tell a lie it's cos I was told a lie. It just makes sense to me

I am pretty sure if you go through an agency and you signed a contract, if you read in there, you will see that on your side you must give 1 months notice generally, but they only require to give 1 days notice. A contractor can come in tomorrow and be gone the next day( I have seen the 1 days notice happen before). I have never seen this any other way. Maybe its just in the line of work that I am in though, but I cant really see how that would be the case, at the end of the day if you aren't performing its bye bye....

Anyway back on topic if he is so keen to get Duff ready for Russia then he sees him being a first team player, and not what he said earlier in the week.