Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Romey 1878

Punished Like Chelsea?

Recommended Posts

Completely different situation, Kakuta had agreed to sign for w/e team and then Chelsea came in, told him their offer, Kakuta then cancelled/didn't sign with whoever and then signed for Chelsea. Whereas we picked up a youth player not on a professional contract without agreeing a fee for Leeds to waive their right to tribunal. We couldn't agree a fee so it will now go to tribunial.

 

Surely Bates knows this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Elstone speaks:“We are very comfortable that we have played by the rules,” he declared “and we are very comfortable that the club elected to go to a tribunal to establish a fair value.

 

“They are the two salient points for me. We absolutely played by the rules. There is a right way to do business and that’s the way we conduct ourselves here, while the tribunal is there to establish a fair value for the player.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rightly surely?

 

The solution is quite simple.. publish all transfer and agent fees in future. None of this 'undisclosed' nonsense ;)

 

I understand that MLS teams publish the player wages and contract expirations?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rightly surely?

 

The solution is quite simple.. publish all transfer and agent fees in future. None of this 'undisclosed' nonsense ;)

 

I understand that MLS teams publish the player wages and contract expirations?

 

I'm not sure about the MLS, but for MLB and NBA you can easily find what a player gets paid on ESPN in his profile.

 

For example (the most ridiculous wages ever paid to anyone):

 

Alex Rodriguez.

Year-By-Year Salary

Contract Year Salary Contract Year Salary

2001 $21,000,000 2002 $21,000,000

2003 $22,000,000 2004 $21,726,881

2005 $25,705,118 2006 $25,680,727

2007 $27,708,525 2008 $28,000,000

2009 $33,000,000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.dailymail...t.html?ITO=1490

 

Everton will have to pay up to £1million for untried 16-year old Luke Garbutt after being stunned by the findings of a tribunal into his recent move from Leeds United to Goodison Park.

 

A Football Association hearing was set up to determine how much Everton should pay for the Leeds left-back after an initial £200,000 offer was not only rejected but described by Elland Road chairman Ken Bates as 'paltry'.

 

 

The panel appeared to side with Bates after ruling that Everton must stump up an initial amount of over £500,000 that could almost double with add-ons to cover appearances, international caps and overall achievements.

 

 

Everton are committed to footing the bill, after Garbutt turned down a scholarship at Leeds to sign on at Goodison Park, but are unhappy at a judgement they feel may have been influenced by the recent furore over talented young players being lured away by bigger clubs.

 

 

Highly rated though Garbutt may be, he was still some way short of being ready to challenge for a first-team place and will continue his development at Everton's Academy before even being considered for David Moyes' senior squad.

 

 

Everton bosses sense the timing of today's tribunal may have counted against them and that they have been forced to pay over the odds for a player who only turned 16 in May.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£1m is fair enough, let's face it, if someone took Rodwell or Baxter we would be incensed. That aside, if the bearded idiot wants us banned from transfer windows (I reckon Kenwright would have loved that one - must be gutted now) then maybe he wants to look at how Delph was procured, glass houses and bricks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£1m is fair enough, let's face it, if someone took Rodwell or Baxter we would be incensed. That aside, if the bearded idiot wants us banned from transfer windows (I reckon Kenwright would have loved that one - must be gutted now) then maybe he wants to look at how Delph was procured, glass houses and bricks.

 

Shhhhh, not allowed to be critical of Billy liar lad! Very valid points there, we would be livid if Rodwell was poached but one million for a 16 year old is day light robbery, and Bates knows it. Bates only commented about a transfer embargo against us to drive up the stakes at the tribunal, and it worked to his credit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shhhhh, not allowed to be critical of Billy liar lad! Very valid points there, we would be livid if Rodwell was poached but one million for a 16 year old is day light robbery, and Bates knows it. Bates only commented about a transfer embargo against us to drive up the stakes at the tribunal, and it worked to his credit.

 

£1million seems fair considering he is being touted as a future England international.. Gareth Barry cost Villa £500k rising to £3m when he moved from Brighton when 16. Hardly daylight robbery.. perhaps the tribunals are upping the ante as there seems to be a clampdown on purchasing young players at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was watching the Sunday Supplement on Sky Sports and one of the blokes was advocating a scheme where clubs are not allowed to buy u18 players. So I'd imagine it would be something like you sign on scholarship forms until your 18th birthday. By that point teams will generally know if you are the real deal, and the price to buy will go up accordingly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article above jumped the gun.

 

The real terms are:

 

£600,000 transfer fee

£150,000 after 5 first team appearances

£150,000 after 10 first team appearances

£150,000 after 20 first team appearances

£150,000 after 30 first team appearances

£150,000 after 40 first team appearances

£200,000 on England appearance

Leeds receive 20% of profit on future transfer fee

 

Not quite as good a deal, future fee percentage is very high!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article above jumped the gun.

 

The real terms are:

 

£600,000 transfer fee

£150,000 after 5 first team appearances

£150,000 after 10 first team appearances

£150,000 after 20 first team appearances

£150,000 after 30 first team appearances

£150,000 after 40 first team appearances

£200,000 on England appearance

Leeds receive 20% of profit on future transfer fee

 

Not quite as good a deal, future fee percentage is very high!

 

Sell on % is high but initial fee is low considering his potential. Stubbs speaks very highly of Garbutt!

Let's say is a few years he has a full season under his belt, it will only cost an additional £600-£750k.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was watching the Sunday Supplement on Sky Sports and one of the blokes was advocating a scheme where clubs are not allowed to buy u18 players. So I'd imagine it would be something like you sign on scholarship forms until your 18th birthday. By that point teams will generally know if you are the real deal, and the price to buy will go up accordingly.

 

They do that in Italy dont they? or something similar. I think the outcome was ok, £1m for a kid with expectations to be a future England International, not that bad lol

 

I did read this before (Just puts into perspective how crap some papers are):

 

In the current climate Everton will consider themselves lucky to have just been been asked to cough up £1m for a 16-year-old rather than meet the wrath of Sepp Blatter who has the scent of English blood in his nostrils just now. A transfer tribunal has ruled that the Toffees must pay £500,000 up front for goalkeeper Luke Garbutt, who was lured away from Leeds (legitimately of course) - a price that could double depending on achievements. (Various)

 

haha idiots!! Well if he can play goalkeeper aswel as left-back, then he really is one of Moyes' versatile specials ;) haha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://soccernet.esp...england&cc=5739

 

 

Leeds United have called on English football's governing bodies to consider imposing points deductions on clubs that take talented youngsters from the lower leagues, following the news that Everton have been ordered to pay an initial £600,000 for 16-year-old Luke Garbutt.

 

 

 

The defender, who has represented England at youth level, joined Everton from the Yorkshire side over the summer and a tribunal of the Professional Football Negotiating and Consultative Committee ordered the Premier League club to pay the fee on Tuesday, with the deal potentially rising to over £1.5m if further conditions are met.

 

The news comes at a time when the issue of youth player recruitment is firmly in the spotlight following the FIFA punishment handed to Chelsea as a result of their signing of Gael Kakuta, and subsequent allegations directed at Manchester United and Manchester City.

 

Indeed, Leeds chairman Ken Bates attacked the conduct of bigger clubs in an interview over the weekend, claiming that young players were being "traded like horsemeat".

 

Now Leeds chief executive Shaun Harvey has urged the custodians of the game to increase the potential punishments awaiting bigger clubs in an effort to ensure that lower league sides are able to retain their brightest prospects.

 

"The compensation package payable is significant, but not high enough to prevent future clubs from making a signing in similar circumstances," said Harvey following the Garbutt decision.

 

"If we had have had an option we would have chosen to keep the player. We feel we were deprived of the opportunity to develop the player to his full potential.

 

"We now appeal to the football authorities to mount a combined review of the registration system in place domestically to provide further financial assurances for clubs who lose players to predator clubs. Compensation awards, we feel, are no longer a sufficient deterrent and perhaps now is the time to start considering points deductions. "We need to arrive at a system whereby in any transfer there is a willing buyer, willing seller and willing player. Until we reach that position there will always be a dissatisfied party.''

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day its all relative. Delph went to Villa for alledgely £6.5 million. A 3rd tier player that might turn out to be a waste or a good premier league player. I can't remember Leeds moaning that Villa had "robbed" their player even though he was unproven. Why not? Because they got top dollar for a player they know isn't worth it. This time they havn't got millions over his worth but his probable true value. And yet they moan.............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×