united we stand
Life President⭐🦐
I don't think anyone's missing that point, but the case you cite potentially proves both why the buying club might be more motivated to wait for a tribunal rather than agree to a fee. I'm pretty sure Liverpool would have been willing to pay more than £6m but the tribunal maybe saved them from having to. I'm also pretty sure they banked on that as will any club looking to pick up Bentley at the end of his contract.
That's just my perception though that tribunals will often undervalue the player but I'm absolutely open to being proved wrong if someone can do so. In fact, I'd welcome that.
Either you're misunderstanding me or I'm misunderstanding you, but you were using QPR's offers as a yardstick to demonstrate to the tribunal what the player is worth? Of course "length of the contract" will no longer be a factor in the tribunal's view as it will have run out. But it would have been a significant factor in QPR's bid, and a factor that will be fundamentally different at the end of the season if and when the tribunal makes its deliberations. We could hardly argue that Bentley was worth the maximum bid we received mid-contract once his contract had run out. Unless of course, that's EXACTLY what the tribunal is intending to do.
Again, my own opinion based on what seems fair and logical, but it could be complete bobbins so I'm very happy to be proved wrong.
Reading the Guardian article there does appear to be a degree of common sense applied in the panels procedures. Ie they take into account what the buying club is going to pay him, and what we have offered. So hopefully the contract we offered was a generous one. The fact that we get an opportunity to state our case means that you would assume that we would include bids that we had turned down , and the fact that Dan had improved since those bids were made