Other clubs' transfers

[SiLvOR]

 please let this get blocked

[mattypnufc]

18 minutes ago, HayDen Traces said:

Is any club outside of the big 6 allowed to lodge a complaint about a (big 6) club like this? 

No how dare they.

[Skeletor]

Premier League officials are now likely to decide whether to investigate. Should they do so, and should Spurs be found guilty, they could face a hefty fine or even a

transfer ban.

 

[toon25]

Like those cunts Chelsea, Spurs are ultimately too valuable to the PL brand for those sackless wankers leading it to sanction them. Spurs will offer an extra few quid and it'll be waved through 

[McCormick]

Will be nothing but a face-saving exercise, unfortunately. Can’t see how they can block a transfer when a release clause has been met.

[GeordieDazzler]

[Steve Charlton]

9 minutes ago, McCormick said:

Will be nothing but a face-saving exercise, unfortunately. Can’t see how they can block a transfer when a release clause has been met.

Gooners & Chelsea failed in deals for Suarez and Oliseh after the release clauses were met

 

Perhaps the manner in how they went about triggering the clauses was illegal

 

 

[SiLvOR]

It did seem a bit odd that nobody else was in for MGW at that price, you'd figure there would be a fairly big queue

[christ]

2 minutes ago, Steve Charlton said:

Gooners & Chelsea failed in deals for Suarez and Oliseh after the release clauses were met

 

Perhaps the manner in how they went about triggering the clauses was illegal

 

 

Everyone the proper way to notify the world of a release clause is have Harry Redknapp mouth off in a press conference.

[Skeletor]

Imagine Spurs doing all that underhanded tapping up to find his secret release clause and then Chelsea just swooping in to stockpile him.

[toon25]

43 minutes ago, christ said:

Everyone the proper way to notify the world of a release clause is have Harry Redknapp mouth off in a press conference.

 

Out the window of a car, marra

[Steve Charlton]

Forgot about Spurs reporting Forest to the Prem for not selling Brennan J before a certain date/Cheap enough too.

 

War Marinarcos

[Dokko]

1 hour ago, Stottie said:

Liverpool didn't sell even though Arsenal offered the Luis Suarez release clause.

There are various theories why, as in it wasn't a binding clause or Suarez' representatives didn't lawyer up and force the issue.

John Henry reckons they simply refused to sell. 

 

Was a badly written contract. He had a release clause (£40m+ hence the extra £1) but Liverpool did not have to accept it. 

[MagPar]

2 hours ago, gdm said:

Nah if they’ve been wronged they should complain. Sick of these ‘big 6’ clubs throwing their weight about time and again 

Let's be honest, we'd all love it to be a 'big 7'.

[gdm]

1 minute ago, MagPar said:

Let's be honest, we'd all love it to be a 'big 7'.

It’ll never be tho because they’ve banded together and closed shop. That’s the point 

[nemtizz]

Thank god we signed the good headband wearing, receding 23 year old right winger. 

[RobsonsWonderland]

So who told the Romano that the deal was at the "let's go ," stage?

 

 I wonder if it's Colleen Rooney dropping snippets to see who his secret contacts are! 

[Dr.Spaceman]

But....but....I thought Spurs had done the right thing by rushing the transfer through inside 24 hours.....right?

[joeyt]

Don't think I've ever heard of a confidential release clause before

[Optimistic Nut]

3 hours ago, Stottie said:

Liverpool didn't sell even though Arsenal offered the Luis Suarez release clause.

There are various theories why, as in it wasn't a binding clause or Suarez' representatives didn't lawyer up and force the issue.

John Henry reckons they simply refused to sell. 

 

Was it something to do with if they bid a certain valuation it gave the club permission to speak to the player, but nothing in the wording meant that Liverpool had to accept the offer? Rings a bell but might be misremembering.

[McCormick]

2 hours ago, SiLvOR said:

It did seem a bit odd that nobody else was in for MGW at that price, you'd figure there would be a fairly big queue

More odd that there was noises of Man City wanting to bid in the 80m -100m range? Sure I saw reports of Nottingham Forest “being firm on their valuation”.
 

False news most probably but guys, if there’s a 60m release clause you rip their hands off for 61m

[GeordieDazzler]

Wonder if Forest being bumped up to the Europa League affects the clause, probably not like. Hope Maraknakis makes things very difficult for them.

[alexf]

13 minutes ago, joeyt said:

Don't think I've ever heard of a confidential release clause before

I can see how it would work. Like say we had one for Isak or something where like we don't tell anyone what it is. But if clubs blindly bid and then hit the magic number then it's agreed between club and player that we have to allow them to leave at that price. Gives the clubs the chance still to receive a bid above the release clause. Like say if Isak's was £100m but clubs assumed we won't listen to any offers less than £120m.

 

But if it's proven the player or agent leaks that price to the buying clubs then the clause is void. 

 

However Levy won't be that stupid and whilst maybe morally he's probably in the wrong, legally I'm sure there won't be any evidence of tapping up the player. Even though we know it happens it literally every single transfer. 

 

 

Edited July 11, 2025 by alexf

[Ketsbaia]

Was looking at Kudus' underlying stats and it's surprising.

 

He racked up far more goals + assists in 23/24 but the latest season (where Wham were rubbish) he had more shots, shots on target, chances created and xG figures.

 

And because Frank has bought him - rather than Potter inheriting him and playing him all over the place - I think he has a specific position in mind and Kudus will be good for them. Unfortunately.

[Deuce]

So much needless drama could be avoided if they just made these contracts publicly available