Rumour - Jack Hobbs

[KDRF]

Even if we have lost out, we've made Forest pay 600k for a player they didnt need to a week ago, so its a mini-win in my book.

[bobby1413]

Even if we have lost out, we've made Forest pay 600k for a player they didnt need to a week ago, so its a mini-win in my book.

That's the most desperate view ever

[Millsy]

:lol:
We tried to sign someone, but it wasn't to be.
/window

Amen.

[Millsy]

We'll at least we know we have 600k in the bank to buy a striker, AM, LB and CB.

Happy days.

[Ian Royal]

Who says that Forest have to match our offer? Surely Hobbs can just not agree terms with us and sign on a free anyway. All Hull can do is recall and bench him, so Forest just have to agree a figure with Hull that stops them doing that which could for example be 6 months wages less than £600k.

Bruce says.

[CholseyRoyal]

Who says that Forest have to match our offer? Surely Hobbs can just not agree terms with us and sign on a free anyway. All Hull can do is recall and bench him, so Forest just have to agree a figure with Hull that stops them doing that which could for example be 6 months wages less than £600k.

Bruce says.

Yes, what has Bruce had to say about it? If for example, Forest have agreed just to take Hobbs of Hull's wage bill would he be satisfied with that? I assume Hull were still paying part of his wages during the loan period.

[Ian Royal]

Who says that Forest have to match our offer? Surely Hobbs can just not agree terms with us and sign on a free anyway. All Hull can do is recall and bench him, so Forest just have to agree a figure with Hull that stops them doing that which could for example be 6 months wages less than £600k.

Bruce says.

Yes, what has Bruce had to say about it? If for example, Forest have agreed just to take Hobbs of Hull's wage bill would he be satisfied with that? I assume Hull were still paying part of his wages during the loan period.

He's said Forest had to match our offer. In the same interview where he announced we'd made the offer, I think. It' even quoted in this very thread. More than once, I think.

So I repeat that in answer to "Who says that Forest have to match our offer?" the manager of Hobb's current club, which is about as good as you could possibly get.

[PieEater]

I don't take that as being definitive, more an opening to the negotiation with Forest. I'd be very surprised if they paid £600k as well as all his wages.

[loyalroyal4life]

I don't take that as being definitive, more an opening to the negotiation with Forest. I'd be very surprised if they paid £600k as well as all his wages.

Agree, probably struck a deal for that fee minus monies paid to date (wages)

[HoneyRoastHoax]

http://www.nottinghampost.com/Nottingha ... story.html

NOTTINGHAM Forest will have to shell out close to £1m to finally land Jack Hobbs from Hull City.

Fawaz Al Hasawi, the Reds' owner, was forced to agree to a hefty price-tag for the defender, with the Premier League club having massively upped the ante following interest from Reading.

Forest had hoped they would ultimately be able to sign the 25-year-old on a free transfer, when he signed on a season long loan back in the summer.

But his performances under Billy Davies in the first half of the campaign saw his stock rise – and the Tigers held firm for a significant fee, despite the fact that his contract was set to expire at the end of the campaign.

Reds boss Davies intimated that Hull's stance had changed since the 'conversations' the clubs had held back in the summer. But Tigers boss Steve Bruce says there was no bad blood over the deal.

"No, not at all. We had two clubs trying to buy him, it's as simple as that," he said.

"In an ideal world they would have wanted to keep him until the end of the season so they could have him for nothing, but I've got to do everything I can to look after the club.

"We've got close to £1m for him so we're delighted. We've agreed a fee with Forest. I want to wish Jack all the best.

"We held the trump card in the same way Sunderland did with us last January with David Meyler."

Davies also previously claimed that Hull could only recall the player in an 'emergency' situation during January.

"We've got a trail of e-mails from Forest where we've insisted we had a recall (option)," added Bruce.

"The reason he went on loan to start with was the question over his knee after having a cruciate.

"It's been pretty normal between the clubs. He left a year ago to move his home down to the Leicester area so it suited him.

"He's done particularly well for Forest and I wish him all the best.

"When you're evolving you have to make decisions as a manager to make sure you keep going forward."

The addition of Hobbs, once they have agreed personal terms, would take Forest's spending this season towards the £7m mark, which is a clear sign of intent from the club's owners.

Paid £1m for an injured defender when they thought he would be free.

[Mr Angry]

That.
Is.
Hilarious.



So much for anyone saying "where is the proof Hull got £600k!!"

Here is a conspiracy theory for you to chew on......

Hull need a club to make a bid for Hobbs in order to make Forest get the cheque book out.....
With the money that comes in for Hobbs, they can make a bid for Long......
Which team would benefit from a transfer of Shane Long from West Brom.........



Everyone's a winner (except Forest of course!)

[3points]

given the news on Carrico, looks pretty certain we were going to use that money to pay for Hobbs.

No player sales, no deals for this transfer window. Let's hope Norwich flash the cash for Guthrie

[SPARTA]

given the news on Carrico, looks pretty certain we were going to use that money to pay for Hobbs.

No player sales, no deals for this transfer window. Let's hope Norwich flash the cash for Guthrie

You're ignoring the money coming in from Long's move to Hull - approx £1.2m.

[3points]

yes I was. We were not in control of that transfer. We had much more control (and therefore certainty) that Sevilla could be encouraged to take up their option and thereby know the cash would come in to cover the Hobbs fee.

[HoneyRoastHoax]

Pete O'Rourke ‏@SkySportsPeteO 15m

Hull City have recalled Jack Hobbs from his loan spell at Nottingham Forest leaving his future up in the air. #hcafc #nffc #readingfc

[SPARTA]

It'll be nothing to do with us, but Hobbs has been recalled and has not agreed a deal with Forest, and Forest have most certainly not agreed a fee with Hull. It seems their owner did an SJM and hasn't matched his words with money!

[M Brook]

Failed to agree personal terms with Forest apparently. Only offered him £15K a week. Other suitors apparently offered him £20K a week.

This is from Forest fans' site. No substance - just hearsay.

[loyalroyal4life]

He is back at Hull now anyway due to injury to Chester.


Still believe we were not serious in actually getting him, why would NA come out and say he can't sign anyone due to uncertainty of takeover and we put in £600k bid for someone?

[Nameless]

Why would we go around making phantom bids for players ?

It's just not credible to suggest that people at football clubs have nothing better to do with their time than phone up other teams making 'joke' bids for players.

obvioulsy it makes sense in HNAworld, but in reality why would Hammond bother ?

[Royal Ginger]

Or perhaps very simply, we thought we'd have the funds by now but the takeover is taking longer than anticipated, so we don't. No conspiracy.