Alexander Isak - International C*nt

[David Edgar]

Just now, Deuce said:

Unless you can sue Liverpool for being cunts

 

Would be so easy a case to win.

 

[gbandit]

The one massive positive from this disgusting saga is that it’s uniting the club again 

[Optimistic Nut]

Just now, Deuce said:

Unless you can sue Liverpool for being cunts

 

Would love it if one day a Romano or Ormstein put out some false information (whether it was from a source giving them wrong info or whatever) and then a club suing the fuck out of them for it.

[Mattoon]

This is so blatantly obvious, word gets out that he's definitely, categorically not for sale and he will be reintegrated into the team when he's ready, straight after Liverpool say they won't bid again until they get an open door from us. 24 hours later Isak hoys his toys out the pram and says he'll never play for us again no matter what and all of a sudden the bin dippers are readying a new bid to intimate his paddy has worked and we're willing sellers?!

 

We need to double down, give our response publicly quoted that Isak is not for sale this window within seconds of their derisory offer and a very public tapping up complaint. I'm done with this man child and the perpetual victim club, scorched earth, they cannot win this one under any circumstances.

[Mattoon]

They're going to want a premier league tour of 1 minutes silence in every game for how nasty Newcastle United have been to them not letting them have the shiny new thing they want

[Rosenrot]

5 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

A quick google suggests you can sue an employee for damages resulting fro. braach of contract without terminating their employment, but I'm definitely no employment law expert and that could well be wrong., or wrong in this case.

It’s not automatic but he could claim constructive dismissal. I don’t think we would be obligated to release his registration while legal stuff was ongoing, but it would be the absolute nuclear option and would set all sorts of precedents, probably some Liverpool wont want, or us for that matter, so for that reason I don’t think it’s a realistic eventuality.

[Rosenrot]

9 minutes ago, David Edgar said:

 

Would be so easy a case to win.

 

You can sue a third party in tort for interfering in another contractual relationship. Lookup “tortious interference with contractual rights”.

 

 

Edited August 12, 2025 by Rosenrot

[Keegans Export]

9 minutes ago, Toonpack said:

 

Read Borson's article (posted previously, but here it is again) We hold ALL the cards

 

https://stefanborson.substack.com/p/the-final-isact?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1780285&post_id=170761047&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=172gw&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

This shouldn't surprise anyone. There is no way clubs are going to make it easy (or possible in fact) for a player to just walk out when they are paying tens of millions to buy them in the first place and then the same again to replace them.

 

With three years left on his deal the only bargaining chip Isak and his team have is that we won't be willing to pay him £100k+ per week to train and play with the reserves, if needs be for the next three seasons. Take that away and there is nothing they can do to force the transfer to go through, that includes making an official transfer request which I assume will happen at some point this week.

 

It's now just a case of who blinks first? Do we ultimately decide that we aren't willing to risk having the most expensive U21s player of all time for three years and sell? Or do Isak and his team accept that once September rolls by he'll need to play and play well otherwise Liverpool and any other potential landing spot may have started looking at the next shiny new thing? 

[Fak]

19 minutes ago, Toonpack said:

 

Read Borson's article (posted previously, but here it is again) We hold ALL the cards

 

https://stefanborson.substack.com/p/the-final-isact?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1780285&post_id=170761047&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=172gw&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

 

 

[Wilson]

1 minute ago, Keegans Export said:

risk having the most expensive U21s player of all time for three years and sell?

 

Honestly don't see it playing out like that if he stays. No chance.  He would be back in the team within a month and probably away in January or next year.... Which suits us a lot better than letting him go now. 

 

Really hope we don't blink. 

[Pata]

5 hours ago, relámpago blanco said:

We might have grounds to terminate his contract then.

Why would we want to terminate the contract of an asset we value at +£150m and just let him walk to a new club?

[MagPar]

4 hours ago, Lush Vlad said:

 

You are obsessed with making completely unrealistic lists that would never work due to our wage structure/wages to turnover %  

 

Sorry, not having a go    But every thread I seem to see some FM type list of a load of players for fees way lower than what they would go for and/or well out of our wage range. 

You could get Billy Mehmet,  Charlie Kane, Kane Richie Hosler, Kyle Benedictus and Sam young from Dunfermline. Hands off John Tod though.

[Emotic]

1 minute ago, Keegans Export said:

This shouldn't surprise anyone. There is no way clubs are going to make it easy (or possible in fact) for a player to just walk out when they are paying tens of millions to buy them in the first place and then the same again to replace them.

 

With three years left on his deal the only bargaining chip Isak and his team have is that we won't be willing to pay him £100k+ per week to train and play with the reserves, if needs be for the next three seasons. Take that away and there is nothing they can do to force the transfer to go through, that includes making an official transfer request which I assume will happen at some point this week.

 

It's now just a case of who blinks first? Do we ultimately decide that we aren't willing to risk having the most expensive U21s player of all time for three years and sell? Or do Isak and his team accept that once September rolls by he'll need to play and play well otherwise Liverpool and any other potential landing spot may have started looking at the next shiny new thing? 

Mackems had Didier NDong refuse to return for the season when they dropped into the Championship. From what I understand, they literally sacked him in the summer, but retained control of his contract. And he signed a contract with Guingamp that same December, after Guingamp had worked something out with Sunderland. Not sure whether this sort of option serves anyone's interest.

 

I'd hold him to his contract, and if he didn't put in an effort, sit him on the bench and introduce him only in the last minute of every match (to cover against accusations of keeping him and not playing him). And do it for three years. No exposure.

[Keegans Export]

1 minute ago, Wilson said:

 

Honestly don't see it playing out like that if he stays. No chance.  He would be back in the team within a month and probably away in January or next year.... Which suits us a lot better than letting him go now. 

 

Really hope we don't blink. 

No, I agree. The chances of both parties being so stubborn he doesn't play first team football for three years seem pretty remote, but if we make sure he knows that we would be willing to accept that outcome as preferable to selling him for less than our price this summer then he has nothing to negotiate with.

[Toonpack]

Btw, If anyone is wondering if Ornstein has an agenda - The New York Times (The Athletic) company is second only to John Henry in shareholding in FSG who happen to own...............

[TRon]

5 minutes ago, Wilson said:

 

Honestly don't see it playing out like that if he stays. No chance.  He would be back in the team within a month and probably away in January or next year.... Which suits us a lot better than letting him go now. 

 

Really hope we don't blink. 

 

 

Yep. This is just a last desperate effort by him and Liverpool to get him over there on their terms. They like to pride themselves on driving a hard bargain, and they will want to show their fans that even when they buy the best they buy them at knockdown prices! 

[Emotic]

3 minutes ago, Toonpack said:

Btw, If anyone is wondering if Ornstein has an agenda - The New York Times (The Athletic) company is second only to John Henry in shareholding in FSG who happen to own...............

I believe the NYC Company sold its stake in FSG more than a decade ago, although they did pitch in to set up the conglomerate. Still the links, however tenuous, are there.

[Keegans Export]

4 minutes ago, Emotic said:

Mackems had Didier NDong refuse to return for the season when they dropped into the Championship. From what I understand, they literally sacked him in the summer, but retained control of his contract. And he signed a contract with Guingamp that same December, after Guingamp had worked something out with Sunderland. Not sure whether this sort of option serves anyone's interest.

Can't say I had followed it at the time but it seems you're right about Ndong - the club sacked him but basically said "We'll chase you and/or whichever club you end up signing with for compensation" which it seems they got from Guingamp 

[Pata]

5 hours ago, JP said:

Some more from the Ornstein piece:

 

- told Howe he wanted out 2 weeks before season ended

- reiterated this message to Howe after the final day defeat to Everton and flew home to Sweden the day after

 

I can’t see how this is true or his agent is massively incompetent by not letting anyone know. Wouldn’t Arsenal and Liverpool put a bid in earlier if they knew he was available right after the season ended?

[gbandit]

3 minutes ago, Pata said:

I can’t see how this is true or his agent is massively incompetent by not letting anyone know. Wouldn’t Arsenal and Liverpool put a bid in earlier if they knew he was available right after the season ended?

Aye, it’s a garbled mess and all reputation management from his agent. It’s amateur hour on their part and everyone can see through it now 

[Kooiman]

I only learned today his agent is allegedly banned from several clubs (Ajax, PSV, AIK) and allegedly has questionable ties to Abramovich from back in the day. 

 

He certainly seems like Mino Raiola minus any semblance of tact. I think it's nice to see most fans appreciate we're holding firm on a price and refusing to be messed around. I think the wave of briefings are a direct consequence of Liverpool losing Sunday and now feeling impatient to get a deal done. 

[Emotic]

1 minute ago, Pata said:

I can’t see how this is true or his agent is massively incompetent by not letting anyone know. Wouldn’t Arsenal and Liverpool put a bid in earlier if they knew he was available right after the season ended?

Others have pointed it out, but it bears repeating:

 

1) Ornstein had himself tweeted quite emphatically "Isak will stay at Newcastle after they get to the UCL". This tweet was on the last day of the season, so apparently two weeks after Isak told Howe he wanted out?

2) During Bruno's "release clause" scare last summer, Bruno was not involved in any of the pre-season kit release media materials. This indicates our club won't waste time doing media and comms content with a player who may not be around for the start of the season. This year, just a month ago, Alexander Isak featured front and centre of Newcastle United's 2025/2026 new kit release content.

 

Ornstein and Isak and Liverpool and Romano are launching a coordinated attack on our club in a last-ditch effort to force an exit. There isn't any pretense anymore and lies are accepted currency.

[The Prophet]

Feels like a second low ball bid is incoming.

[1964]

2 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

Feels like a second low ball bid is incoming.

We won't get 150m i doubt, be closer to 130 or we keep a player who is going to cause chaos 

[Rosenrot]

1 minute ago, 1964 said:

We won't get 150m i doubt, be closer to 130 or we keep a player who is going to cause chaos 

Chaos in the opponent’s penalty area, aye