Exactly. We could possibly force him to come back, but there is no chance in hell we could then force him to go elsewhere.

Chamakh, Squillaci, Bendtner and Park agree with this.

otfgoon wrote:

That thoery makes absolutely no sense. Why would Vela even agree to take part in such a move? He wouldn't.

He has no choice. If we trigger the release clause, he is an Arsenal player. Vela can't say no. I know it sounds crazy, but that's apparently what the clause says.

It is speculated that this is why Vela has been praising both Sociedad and Arsenal lately. Hedging his bets, regardless of what happens. Of course, we can't force him to leave once we trigger the release clause. Which is why we want to sell him back to Sociedad.

Still makes no sense. To me at least.

You're dealing with a human being here, not a goat. Even if Vela has no say, Wenger would never do it. He would never do something so immoral.

We trigger the clause and negotiate with Sociedad (or other interested clubs). We either make a £10-12 mill profit or we get a quality player. Makes perfect sense to me.

Why would Vela agree to leave Arsenal?

Wilshere wrote:

I think a midfielder and a striker is more important, so it makes sense for us to use the opportunity to get a guy who can play both winger and forward, almost for free. Spending 18m on a position where we have Cazorla, Podolski and Chamberlain? Nope.

A midfielder & striker are more important but the left side is a problem for us. Firstly I've never seen Ox play there and the other two clearly haven't worked that well for us there either. Vela might be the cheaper and better player but we need players to suit our system, this isn't about who represents a better deal.

Kel Varnsen wrote:
otfgoon wrote:

That thoery makes absolutely no sense. Why would Vela even agree to take part in such a move? He wouldn't.

He has no choice. If we trigger the release clause, he is an Arsenal player. Vela can't say no. I know it sounds crazy, but that's apparently what the clause says.

It is speculated that this is why Vela has been praising both Sociedad and Arsenal lately. Hedging his bets, regardless of what happens. Of course, we can't force him to leave once we trigger the release clause. Which is why we want to sell him back to Sociedad.

How is that possible though? Surely the clause is a contract with Sociedad and not Vela? I find it highly unlikely that we have a clause that includes the terms of his contract that he'd be forced to accept too. It's far too complicated.

I've never heard of such a thing and it makes no sense either.

JazzG wrote:
Wilshere wrote:

I think a midfielder and a striker is more important, so it makes sense for us to use the opportunity to get a guy who can play both winger and forward, almost for free. Spending 18m on a position where we have Cazorla, Podolski and Chamberlain? Nope.

A midfielder & striker are more important but the left side is a problem for us. Firstly I've never seen Ox play there and the other two clearly haven't worked that well for us there either. Vela might be the cheaper and better player but we need players to suit our system, this isn't about who represents a better deal.

Let's put it this way: I'm all for Griezmann, but not if it makes us spend less on a striker or midfielder.

otfgoon wrote:
Kel Varnsen wrote:

He has no choice. If we trigger the release clause, he is an Arsenal player. Vela can't say no. I know it sounds crazy, but that's apparently what the clause says.

It is speculated that this is why Vela has been praising both Sociedad and Arsenal lately. Hedging his bets, regardless of what happens. Of course, we can't force him to leave once we trigger the release clause. Which is why we want to sell him back to Sociedad.

How is that possible though? Surely the clause is a contract with Sociedad and not Vela? I find it highly unlikely that we have a clause that includes the terms of his contract that he'd be forced to accept too. It's far too complicated.

I've never heard of such a thing and it makes no sense either.

Yeah, I think you're right. I do however think Vela would want to come here if we wanted him. It would make more sense for them to pay us to terminate the clause, than for us to trigger it and then sell Vela back to them.

Kel Varnsen wrote:
otfgoon wrote:

That thoery makes absolutely no sense. Why would Vela even agree to take part in such a move? He wouldn't.

He has no choice. If we trigger the release clause, he is an Arsenal player. Vela can't say no. I know it sounds crazy, but that's apparently what the clause says.

It sounds crazy because it's wrong. This isn't the NBA.

Football clauses are just financial rights, not ownership rights.
In both the Fabregas and Vela instances, all we have is the right to buy at a pre-determined price. In order to sign the player, we need to negotiate terms with him first, and then we can go back to their club and activate the clause.

We put these clauses in where both Arsenal and the player clearly felt they might work together again in future

I really don't know, but I presume that triggering the clause would mean that we own his registration. He presumably doesn't have to agree a contract with us for Arsenal to buy or sell that registration.

You can't just buy a players registration and own him with the player himself having no say. Something like that wouldn't last 5 Seconds in the EU. If it were the case then no player in Europe would have a say in where they go.

JazzG wrote:

From what I can gather is he similar to Theo in that he doesn't get involved in the build up play, he can go missing from games but his main asset is his pace, movement and finishing. I don't know how good a dribbler he is either.

He's a good dribbler. Much better than Theo anyway. But doesn't have Theo's willingness to get in behind, as has been mentioned a few times in this thread. Overall I'd love him back. Always been a huge fan.

otfgoon wrote:

You can't just buy a players registration and own him with the player himself having no say.

Quite. That's why transfers fall through all the time.

We might have insisted on a buyback clause at a fixed fee when Vela signed for Sociedad, but he'll still have to agree personal terms with Arsenal if we activate it. You can't hold a player's license unless you've got his signature. Not in England anyway. Maybe there are some special circumstances at play, such as Vela agreeing to a clause when he left with the specific function of transferring him back to Arsenal immediately, but I don't think that's possible. And in any event, why would he trash out details (wages, bonuses, practical arrangements) for a possible future deal three years in advance? He's worth three times the wages he used to be on right now.

Ron Burgundy wrote:
JazzG wrote:

From what I can gather is he similar to Theo in that he doesn't get involved in the build up play, he can go missing from games but his main asset is his pace, movement and finishing. I don't know how good a dribbler he is either.

He's a good dribbler. Much better than Theo anyway. But doesn't have Theo's willingness to get in behind, as has been mentioned a few times in this thread. Overall I'd love him back. Always been a huge fan.

I was talking about Griezmann not Vela 😉

JazzG wrote:
Ron Burgundy wrote:

He's a good dribbler. Much better than Theo anyway. But doesn't have Theo's willingness to get in behind, as has been mentioned a few times in this thread. Overall I'd love him back. Always been a huge fan.

I was talking about Griezmann not Vela 😉

D'oh!

We have a clause, but the clause isn't a handgun against Vela's head. He has to want to sign a contract here, that will come at a premium due to his low fee.