Johansen

[SheepRanger]

Yes but can he force a lower bid ? It would be silly if FFC just kept him and pay wages for no play ?

You cant force a player to sign for any club just because a bid had been accepted. If Forest offered £2.5m and us £1m and the player doesnt want to leave London, FFC either sell to us or keep an unhappy player.

[dogsrrs]

If and it's a big if , if we and Johansen can wait untill January he will be worth next to zilch and can sign pre forms for any club

[cocneycowboy]

Have no idea river, we are all in the same boat.

Saw what you did there!

[Qprtanpa1]

He seems to have emerged as a vital playmaking cog in our team last year. Hoping this works out given he brings the mind of maturity lacking in the midfield. Think Carroll a step down imitation of that, but looks like that ship has sailed.

Bottom line: if he leaves MW will need to figure out a slightly slightly different style of play in the midfield absent a true general.

[QPRDave]

You cant force a player to sign for any club just because a bid had been accepted. If Forest offered £2.5m and us £1m and the player doesnt want to leave London, FFC either sell to us or keep an unhappy player.

Exactly this

[QPRDave]

Saw what you did there!

lol I have to admit I didn't till you pointed it out

[stanistheman]

You cant force a player to sign for any club just because a bid had been accepted. If Forest offered £2.5m and us £1m and the player doesnt want to leave London, FFC either sell to us or keep an unhappy player.

This is it. If Johansen really wants to play for us he can to some extent get what he wants. Of course ifanother Championship club in or near London made an acceptable offer to Fulham he couldn't use that excuse.

[LoftusRoadLad]

This is it. If Johansen really wants to play for us he can to some extent get what he wants. Of course ifanother Championship club in or near London made an acceptable offer to Fulham he couldn't use that excuse.

If he insist on us he could ?

[QPROslo]

Yes but can he force a lower bid ? It would be silly if FFC just kept him and pay wages for no play ?

Many clubs refuse to play players that resist a move that is in the best interest of the club, and let them train with the U23 team , with no prospect of ever playing for the first team again, just to send a message to other players in the squad that it has a price to reject a move if the club wants rid of you. Likewise, clubs keep players they actually want to get rid off if the right price is not offered, to send a signal to other clubs that their will not back down when they have decided a minimum price for a player. And as we know in the case of Dieng, Hamalainen and Manning: The club decided not to play any of these unless they signed new long term contract when there was less than one year left of the existing contracts. Dieng and Hamalainen accepted modest salary for long term contracts while Manning never backed down and kept refusing to sign, and therefore did not play.

All clubs play this game and it makes a lot of sense.

In the case of Johansen: For QPR, it is a trade off between the salary and the transfer fee. The lower the salary Johansen will accept, the higher the transgfer fee we can afford to pay Fulham. By refusing to accept the offer from QPR, Fulham puts pressure on Johansen to lower his wage demands. If he does not, Fulham threatens not to sell him, but keep him in the reserves. In most cases, this threat works out, and Johansen accepts lower salary from QPR, leading to a high transfer fee for Fulham. These tough negotiation tactics are one of the reasons why so many transfers only get done on transfer deadline day, when either club or player back down. If both club and player stand firm, the deal collapses and the club might want to send a signal by not playing the player. All other players at the club will then know the clubs threats are real, and next time the threat of spending a year with the reserves or U23 will feel very real to any player that try to force a sale at his terms, not the clubs terms.

In the end this is business for all parties involved, and we should not feel too sorry for the players if they have to sit out a year in the reserves while earning thousands a week.

[QPROslo]

Many clubs refuse to play players that resist a move that is in the best interest of the club, and let them train with the U23 team , with no prospect of ever playing for the first team again, just to send a message to other players in the squad that it has a price to reject a move if the club wants rid of you. Likewise, clubs keep players they actually want to get rid off if the right price is not offered, to send a signal to other clubs that they will not back down when they have decided a minimum price for a player. And as we know in the case of Dieng, Hamalainen and Manning: The club decided not to play any of these unless they signed new long term contract when there was less than one year left of the existing contracts. Dieng and Hamalainen accepted modest salary for long term contracts while Manning never backed down and kept refusing to sign, and therefore did not play.

All clubs play this game and it makes a lot of sense.

In the case of Johansen: For QPR, it is a trade off between the salary and the transfer fee. The lower the salary Johansen will accept, the higher the transgfer fee we can afford to pay Fulham. By refusing to accept the offer from QPR, Fulham puts pressure on Johansen to lower his wage demands. If he does not, Fulham threatens not to sell him, but keep him in the reserves. In most cases, this threat works out, and Johansen accepts lower salary from QPR, leading to a high transfer fee for Fulham. These tough negotiation tactics are one of the reasons why so many transfers only get done on transfer deadline day, when either club or player back down. If both club and player stand firm, the deal collapses and the club might want to send a signal by not playing the player. All other players at the club will then know the clubs threats are real, and next time the threat of spending a year with the reserves or U23 will feel very real to any player that try to force a sale at his terms, not the clubs terms.

In the end this is business for all parties involved, and we should not feel too sorry for the players if they have to sit out a year in the reserves while earning thousands a week.

v

[SheepRanger]

If he insist on us he could ?

We couldn't force BOS to sign for the Brugge after we accepted a £4.5m bid. I think he went to Fenner for £500k.

We saw what BOS was like when played when he didnt want to be with us. Fulham could keep him and say hes under contract and they want him to play to the best of his ability and he may well do that if hes of the right character. If not Fulham will push through his exit for the best price they can get for a club he wants to play for.

In extreme circumstances the player could pay up the remainder of his contract himself and make himself a free agent.

I'm sure FFC will cut their losses after they've got a suitable replacement in. Hes only got a year left on his contract, so any money is better than seeing him leave for free next summer. I'd he happy to see us sign him for £1m but if it's more than that I'd rather invest in a younger player.

You cant force players to move - that's called slavery.

[QPR1976]

“You cant force players to move - that's called slavery.”

Not sure it is. I think that’s called Eviction..or Tickling !

[QPRDave]

Fwiw I'm not sure SJ will be a QPR player next season.
Seems to ground to a halt

[LoftusRoadLad]

Fwiw I'm not sure SJ will be a QPR player next season.
Seems to ground to a halt

Maybe we can loan him back again ?

[Abseits]

Seems to be growing speculation that Parker will be moving on. Dunno if that has any material affect on Johansen situation..... could mean a new manager would want to keep all their personnel to have a look at them or Johansen might feel he had more chance with a new gaffer?