James Vaughan

Answered by Lard Arse above. It's not rocket science!

 

most probably singing and dancing in the rain

 

I've heard from a good source that he didn't turn up to a couple of sessions. Perhaps he had permission from the club though?

 

That's what I hope happened but Stuart did say "we came to an agreement with him". This suggests that he did get something but I don't think this will be as much as some on here think. Hope I am not wrong for like most, I honestly don't know.

 

Something about breaking a contract? Why cant two parties just end a contract? Hes wanting to end the contract not us so why should that benefit him? If the situation was this stupid every player would do this.

 

The most annoying thing is that us mere mortals knew of his reputation. Why the hell did the club, not only sign him, but offer him a three year deal? If It had been in Rahic's tenure, he'd have been hung, drawn and quartered!

 

All been planned down to a tee. Do the bare minimum as not to be in breach of contract but make it abundantly clear you want out. Bradford then have the problem and not Vaughan. To be fair to Tranmere it shows they're a well run club.

 

He hasn't broken his contract, his agent and Tranmere will have stressed this to him.

 

The technical term in these parts is "mugged off"

 

This is us all over...

 

How many times do we hear of clubs parting with their manager by mutual agreement?

Quite often if I recall...

Graeme Jones at Luton in covid19 era, as Luton stated " Luton Town have today come to a mutual agreement with Graeme Jones....
the Club are taking an early move to restructure in order to reduce its cost base and to create efficiencies within the football department.

As a result of amicable discussions, Graeme and the board of directors have agreed terms upon which he will leave his role with immediate effect."

JV movement to tranmere . Has the hallmark of these mutual agreement pay offs?

 

Yep, from wanting a fee to ending up having to pay a potentially significant sum to clear him out of the club, THEN finding we're restricted in bringing in a good calibre replacement due to the salary cap. Following the Doyle fiasco, it's difficult to comprehend the inept manner in which the club is being run.

 

Precisely
We sign him on a three year deal then because he didn't get on with possibly the worst manager we have had for many a year send him out on loan and practically replace him with Guthrie
If that's not saying something what is
Not saying Vaughan is blameless (he had fire in his belly) but we had absolutely no idea whatsoever how to get the best out of him same with Doyle

 

I would of told Vaughan his payment would be
his excessive travel costs and inconvenience
savings more than compensated!

 

That sounded more of an excuse to save our face than his

 

Nah he made a big deal of his travelling,we use that
to make him realize he won't have to and he'll be so
much better off financially.

 

Right so keep him on then? If we had to PAY him off we gain absolutely nothing? This whole line of thinking makes absolutely no sense? We paid him off so he could get paid elsewhere? You DONT have to be paid off to end a contract. This is all absolute conjecture. If i went to my employer and said i want to end my contract and waive my rights to pay they would do this.

You haven't answered my question. Is it possible for two parties to just end a contract?

 

yes but unlikely that one side would give up around £400,000 in wages, he is legally entitled to if he stayed