Ollie Watkins

[grecIAN Harris]

I'd say they had different attributes. Ollie is perfect for Villa, who need him to work hard, chase shadows and pop up with a few goals. Calvert-Lewin is more of a natural in the box player and his link up play is better. Against, San Marino when we're going to have the ball 80% of the time Calvert-Lewin is clearly the better option.

That said there's three games in a week and I think all the forwards will feature. From an ECFC £££ perspective three 5 minute cameos will be perfect.

That depends whether Kane is playing or not. I see Calvert-Lewin as more of cover for Kane whereas Ollie is better suited to replace the injured Rashford which is the more likely scenario for tonight.

 

[jrg333]

I'm really surprised that we might get money for Ollie playing for England even though he's moved on from Brentford. A sell-on, sell-on clause? Sounds unprecedented. And doesn't seem like good business from a Brentford POV, not that I'd be complaining.

 

[Super Ronnie Jepson]

I'm really surprised that we might get money for Ollie playing for England even though he's moved on from Brentford. A sell-on, sell-on clause? Sounds unprecedented. And doesn't seem like good business from a Brentford POV, not that I'd be complaining.

Not really. As has been explained many times we get a percentage of the profit Brentford make on their initial outlay. If the profit increases because of an add on Brentford have in their sale to Villa then the value of our add on also increases.

 

[Boyo]

That depends whether Kane is playing or not. I see Calvert-Lewin as more of cover for Kane whereas Ollie is better suited to replace the injured Rashford which is the more likely scenario for tonight.

Indeed. Horses for courses. Saying Ollie is better or worse than Calvert Lewin is meaningless, unless you are specifically comparing certain attributes.

 

[jrg333]

Not really. As has been explained many times we get a percentage of the profit Brentford make on their initial outlay. If the profit increases because of an add on Brentford have in their sale to Villa then the value of our add on also increases.

You could have answered me without the patronising 'as has been explained many times' to be fair. Shame you felt the need to be a bit of a condescending pri*k but thanks anyway.

 

[IndoMike]

I'm really surprised that we might get money for Ollie playing for England even though he's moved on from Brentford. A sell-on, sell-on clause? Sounds unprecedented. And doesn't seem like good business from a Brentford POV, not that I'd be complaining.

In effect Brentford negotiated a fee of 33m for Ollie, not 28m, but the extra 5m fee is pending. So we are entitled to 15% of 33m, not 28m, but the extra 750k is pending.forvus, too
*Not being a pr*ck: just trying to help.

 

[MJP_Exeter]

I'm really surprised that we might get money for Ollie playing for England even though he's moved on from Brentford. A sell-on, sell-on clause? Sounds unprecedented. And doesn't seem like good business from a Brentford POV, not that I'd be complaining.

Its not a sell on clause sell on clause. Our clause covers 15% above the initial £1.8m transfer fee. A sell on clause for them if they make money is profit. So we get 15% of there few. £10m profit at 15% nets Brentford £1.5m and us £225,000.

 

[Matt Russell]

Its not a sell on clause sell on clause. Our clause covers 15% above the initial £1.8m transfer fee. A sell on clause for them if they make money is profit. So we get 15% of there few. £10m profit at 15% nets Brentford £1.5m and us £225,000.

Glad you cleared that up.

 

[Super Ronnie Jepson]

You could have answered me without the patronising 'as has been explained many times' to be fair. Shame you felt the need to be a bit of a condescending pri*k but thanks anyway.

All you have to do is read back a few pages. Thanks for the abuse.

 

[grecIAN Harris]

Lingaard starting in front of Watkins tonight from what I've seen, not confirmed yet.

*Confirmed now, Ollie on the bench