Withnail
Full Member
Nothing much. They're a bit pointless.What is a transfer request supposed to change? It doeesn't trigger anything legally outside of the player potentialy losing money.
Nothing much. They're a bit pointless.What is a transfer request supposed to change? It doeesn't trigger anything legally outside of the player potentialy losing money.
The problem was signing a 6 year deal just as he was coming into his peak years. He essentially committed himself to Spurs for his entire career and everyone knows what Levy is like. It seemed short-sighted at the time and so has it proven to be.Most people saying that he shouldn't have signed the contract without a clause need to reconsider. Plenty of players have signed contract in such a way and left. The thing is Spurs are horribly run and their new players need to be funded by sale of high profile players. The system works till a point but then every now and then this is bound to happen. It is ridiculous to ask for 150m. Of course, it is city who are buying so I can understand the sentiment to rob them blind. But either way Kane deserves a chance to secure a move and I am hoping that is happening behind the scenes. If he is having the need to ditch training then surely its all going against him. Either way you do not disrespect the club and ditch practice. It should never come down to this.
This is the best solution by far. It ensures the club get a respectable fee should the player decide he wants out, and the player has the option to leave if the pursuing club is prepared to pay his agreed-upon release clause. Win win.One side of the argument will be - He has signed long term contract and he should respect that.
Other side would be - he had gentlemen agreement with Levy.
I don't know why players, especially the top ones don't insist for release clause.
Yes. I absolutely agree on that point. Signing a contract was indeed not the right thing to do, but thats in hindsight. What I am saying is he deserves a fair negotiation and not a random pumped up figure!!The problem was signing a 6 year deal just as he was coming into his peak years. He essentially committed himself to Spurs for his entire career and everyone knows what Levy is like. It seemed short-sighted at the time and so has it proven to be.
You people are weird.Like I said elsewhere, City’s PR people ( that’s all City is about, PR for Abu Dhabi) will be working on timing the announcement of Kane and Grealish to steal the limelight from United. Just like when they would announce player X has signed a new deal before the derby or player b is injured an a doubt for a big match but he plays. If they do sign Kane and Grealish, the published figure will be a fraction of the real one.
I really hate how football fans describe players they no longer want at their clubs who are no longer good enough. Has never sat right with me.I just wish United got rid of the trash and made room to sign Kane. If we can raise 100 million from selling all the excess in the squad, we should be able to go for him and can afford the signing fee and his wages.
Wouldn't be surprised if some particular managers converse in the same way.I really hate how football fans describe players they no longer want at their clubs who are no longer good enough. Has never sat right with me.
14 clubs need to vote for this for it to be a thing.If City get away with this PL investigation into fraud and are basically given free reign to do as they please with the UAE purse....then Utd, Liverpool and Arsenal need to come out of the shared TV deal and sell our own TV rights. We'd ruin City overnight. Sheikhs and Oligarchs can't be allowed to continue to do what they have done. How many titles have gone to the Russian gangster and Sheikh over the last 10-12 years? The vast majority of them.
True. However if City can get away with murder I'm not so sure that will hold up in court.14 clubs need to vote for this for it to be a thing.
Then it would just go like Spain with fees being utterly ludicrous.This is the best solution by far. It ensures the club get a respectable fee should the player decide he wants out, and the player has the option to leave if the pursuing club is prepared to pay his agreed-upon release clause. Win win.
Beginning to think release clauses should become mandatory in all future contracts.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
In principle, in reality it will help force his move.I think Kane has been advised shockingly. This could just further make Levy unwilling to sell.
His price has almost certainly gone up, if he were to leave
His Brother is his agentI think Kane has been advised shockingly. This could just further make Levy unwilling to sell.
His price has almost certainly gone up, if he were to leave
2 points from 8 gamesShaping to be a Berba type situation
Imagine if Pogba was the Tottenham chairman and did what Levy did. The media would have a field day.
Unsure what the context is though - if Levy has made an agreement behind the scenes and is going back on his word, Kane seems to have little choice.I like Harry Kane and would love him to join United but I despise this missing training garbage. Put me right off him as a player.
Perhaps, but I guess it would be up to the player and his agent to agree a suitable release clause with the club.Then it would just go like Spain with fees being utterly ludicrous.
Kane's would be 200m.
Signed a deal with no release clause. Gentleman's agreement is probably if City bid this we will sell you. What if City are nowhere near the agreed fee? I hate the likes of Levy, but hes in the right unless there's some written clause I'm unaware ofUnsure what the context is though - if Levy has made an agreement behind the scenes and is going back on his word, Kane seems to have little choice.
I'm insinuating here that Levy would have agreed that a club with a reasonable bid will have his blessing (so long as it's not Chelsea or something).Signed a deal with no release clause. Gentleman's agreement is probably if City bid this we will sell you. What if City are nowhere near the agreed fee? I hate the likes of Levy, but hes in the right unless there's some written clause I'm unaware of
Since Neymar the clauses are totally ridiculous. Fati at Barca is 400m Euros, Vinicius 700m and Benzema a cool 1bn.Then it would just go like Spain with fees being utterly ludicrous.
Kane's would be 200m.
I absolutely agree that 100m is more than reasonable, but hes impossible to replace like for like and 100 may not be enough to replace his productivity from 2 players so I understand why it may not seem reasonable enough an offer for Spurs.I'm insinuating here that Levy would have agreed that a club with a reasonable bid will have his blessing (so long as it's not Chelsea or something).
Now 100m is arguably reasonable so if Kane is causing a ruckus then fair enough. He's 28 and in this scenario would have been led to believe a move is on the cards. Whats more, the club he's employed at is in a far worse state than 3 years from no fault of his own.
I'd hate it if it was at United because we're a huge club. But this is Tottenham holding on to a player who may well be the highest goalscorer in league history.
Yeah something shifty about that I reckonSince Neymar the clauses are totally ridiculous. Fati at Barca is 400m Euros, Vinicius 700m and Benzema a cool 1bn.
I think it is because Barca never dreamed that someone would activate Neymar's clause when they inserted it so now they're just going with total overkill on them.Yeah something shifty about that I reckon
Because we don't really do them in the top flight in England. And when we do...ie Suarez, then the owning club still refuse it.How did he not get a release clause put in his contract? I'm baffled.
We could absolutely offer them that.Do you think we could offer martial, lingard pereira and Jones in a swap deal?