You have no idea do you, it’s just any excuse for a pop.

Why don't you put your cue on the rack your quest is dull. In the real world of contracts it was a verbal agreement for an extension it wasn't signed the club parted ways and a severance made do you need anything any clearer. Langi was different as he hadn't worked for the club before the verbal contract was agreed hence a nominal agreement. Now instead of looking for a negative on everything either support the club or take the negativity elsewhere it's getting tedious.

Because the exact quote was that he would ‘honour the terms of the contract’. However lazy journalists didn’t report that. I take that to say that an appropriate notice period would be paid, and whilst CC still had at least 2 months to run on his existing contract, any expense over and above that would be minimal.

Still, doesn’t fit your rhetoric does it?

You really are a bunch of sycophants, just accept it is an unnecessary drain on already reduced income. I wonder how many of you would be on here if we had done the same for Webster for example.
We are constantly being reminded of our much reduced revenue only to then waste more on a questionable payment. I would accept severance because that would only cover the period up to the end of his signed contract not for another 12 months.
I note that Jose this is your view which is similarly based on no hard facts when it could be read to mean his as yet unsigned contract but that doesn’t fit your rhetoric does it.

Everybody has been trying to gently tell you you are wrong and just leave it alone.
As you have said, you don't know the terms agreed, or how much it was, or where the money came from.

Yep, I’m miles off

Again completely wrong. CC is no longer ‘being paid’

I suppose he’s not still driving around in his company car either then?

There are no company cars. They are provided by a 3rd party and the club have no involvement in them

Semantics Michael, semantics.

Or just fact?

Not really, because no cost lands with the Club???