Players demanding money to move

Does this really happen in real life? I don't think I've ever heard of it happening...although it's maybe not the type of thing you would hear about...would probably be kept out of public knowledge.

It just seems that every player I try to sell (I'm Celtic) my players refuse to accept any kind of wage drop and will only move if I pay extra money to them. Kind of annoying after a while.

It's more annoying that it doesn't happen the other way round that much. If we can't offer the player what they want then 99 percent of the time we will not be able to sign the player, I play FM a lot probably too much and in all that time I have only had it happen once in my favour.

I would say it does happen but I think it happens in different ways in real life. For example I have seen players say they would like a pay off or have had a pay off before moving to a new club. Which is kind of like the players old club paying some of his wages so he was still on a similar amount at his new club.

Yes it does. It was probably most talked about when Leeds went into freefall and it was revealed they were still paying part of the wages for players that left (Fowler and Bridges are in my head, though that may not be correct!)

Yeah Mido wanted Boro to do it. Thing is though you cannot do it the other way round, I mean you have to sometimes players outgoing but you cant get other teams paying for players they offload to you.

Yes it happens. you often hear of transfers being held up because the player demands what is ironically known as a 'loyalty payment' - even when they demand the move, to be added to the signing-on fee.This is not the same, however, as the selling club continuing to pay part of their wages. This will be a common feature with players who leave Man Citeh; already they're paying 80% of Bellamy's salary whilst he's on loan; I betcha in January they'll be paying a chunk of the salary of Bridges and a few others.

Yes it happens. you often hear of transfers being held up because the player demands what is ironically known as a 'loyalty payment' - even when they demand the move, to be added to the signing-on fee.This is not the same, however, as the selling club continuing to pay part of their wages. This will be a common feature with players who leave Man Citeh; already they're paying 80% of Bellamy's salary whilst he's on loan; I betcha in January they'll be paying a chunk of the salary of Bridges and a few others.

he isnt talking about loans though, he is talking about when you sell a player and he demands money to complete the transfer.

Yeah Mido wanted Boro to do it. Thing is though you cannot do it the other way round, I mean you have to sometimes players outgoing but you cant get other teams paying for players they offload to you.

would you know if they did though? Like why would you find out something like that happening at another club?

This happens often IRL, and I like this feature in FM, but I would like it to be expanded. Because it is kind of random when it happens. Sometimes players just reject contracts from other clubs on the basis on to low salary without my club being able to intervene. It could maybe be available in the "offer to clubs" screen that I as the selling club is willing to subsidize a certain % of the wages to attract more offers. Or every time a player of mine reject a contract from a buying club, it should be made available a "response" button to this news where I can offer a to pay a certain % of the wage to save the sale, and this now could be negotiated back and forth.

I would also like the same feature being available when i want to bun players transfer listed by the club. That when I come to the offer contract for the player page, if for example the player demands 50k and dont seem to budge and my wage budget only allows 35k, I should be able to make a final plea for the selling club to pay him off to make the deal go through.

Not all financial transactions in football are as clean as you would probably like for a video game.

Portsmouth are still owed money for Muntari. Tottenham still haven't had their refund on Bergovic.

Teams will still be paying off a players transfer fee after theyve sold him.

Disputes occur due to appearances and clauses etc.

Luckily the game deals with it all perfectly. It's your choice whether you don't continue to pay some of the wages - who signed him originally?

Thanks for the responses guys...just wasn't sure if it happened in real life but it seems as if it does.

I also a agree with some of you that is unfair that it can't happen both ways. For example I was trying to sign Santa Cruz from Man City, everything was fine apart from the wages he wanted...It would have been better if it would have at least been suggested that Man City pay some of his wages.

Actually CRCameron I see your point.

I reckon 50% of the sales I do the player comes and asks me to pay a proportion of his wages - whether £2k a week or £30k a week.

Never have I felt that I got a decent player on decent wages because his parent had paid some. Would be nice to offer a guy who's on £50k a week, £30k and advising him to speak to his current employer to get it topped up. That would balance it a bit more.

Yeah, the main problem with it is, that it NEVER works in reverse.

All the Man City players sit in the reserves because they never ask Man City to pay some of the excess wages.

It would be a good feature if it was used more reasonably and went both ways. There should be some sort of negotiation behind it where you can say "I'll only give you £x a week"

Its all part of the larger problem whereby no one is ever willing to take a pay cut whilst at a club. They'd rather go unemployed and then take a much much larger pay cut.