January 2016 - Transfer Rumours, Speculation & Suggestions

[Malandro]

Makes me wonder why they released him if they are still paying his wages. Is he that bad of an influence? Surely if you have to pay him anyway you'd keep in case of an emergency.

The only possible reason for that would to not pay him off in one lump sum, but draw it down week or month by month in the hope that someone takes him on.

But even then

Incredibly, that means the striker remains Tottenham’s highest earner, on more than double what Harry Kane currently pockets, even though he is no longer contracted to the club.

makes no sense to me. If his contract has been cancelled, presumably  Spurs can have no claim on his registration and he can have no claim on Spurs on his wages.

I'm sure one of our legal eagles will put me right, but the contract is an agreement to provide services (play football) for a fixed length of time for an agreed wage with the total remuneration fixed so the club can't just cancel the contract unilaterally. So for the contract to be cancelled, either the terms of the contract have to be met (Adebeyor gets the money owed for the final year) or they come to a mutual agreement. If they're still paying him, surely they must still hold his registration otherwise they're sailing close to restriction of trade, or he's got one of the worst agents out there, which given the size of his contracts would suggest not.

Essentially he's on the transfer list, guaranteed a free transfer but not allowed near their training ground?

I guess its like a redundancy payoff in the civil service - get another civil service job in a certain period of time and you have to repay it.

[cdbearsfan]

But.... but... Daniel Levy is the World's best negotiator it said so in the press.

[PeterWithesShin]

According to the stuff I read he couldn't join a club until this month so they were guaranteed to be paying him that £100K for 4 months. Why not just keep him in the squad and tout him to clubs in Jan? Strikes me as very strange.

[eamonn]

Makes me wonder why they released him if they are still paying his wages. Is he that bad of an influence? Surely if you have to pay him anyway you'd keep in case of an emergency.

The only possible reason for that would to not pay him off in one lump sum, but draw it down week or month by month in the hope that someone takes him on.

But even then

Incredibly, that means the striker remains Tottenham’s highest earner, on more than double what Harry Kane currently pockets, even though he is no longer contracted to the club.

makes no sense to me. If his contract has been cancelled, presumably  Spurs can have no claim on his registration and he can have no claim on Spurs on his wages.

I'm sure one of our legal eagles will put me right, but the contract is an agreement to provide services (play football) for a fixed length of time for an agreed wage with the total remuneration fixed so the club can't just cancel the contract unilaterally. So for the contract to be cancelled, either the terms of the contract have to be met (Adebeyor gets the money owed for the final year) or they come to a mutual agreement. If they're still paying him, surely they must still hold his registration otherwise they're sailing close to restriction of trade, or he's got one of the worst agents out there, which given the size of his contracts would suggest not.

Essentially he's on the transfer list, guaranteed a free transfer but not allowed near their training ground?

I have a feeling that Pochettino values hard-work and team-ethos above all, hence Townsend being frozen-out after having a row with Spurs' fitness coach.
Getting rid of a potentially detrimental personality like Adebayor being more beneficial than having him in reserve when even then the manager would be loathe to play him.
Leicester aside, Spurs have looked the most cohesive and united team this season so in Pochettino's eyes he's made the right call.

[peter w]

Do you have to apply to be able to apply for permission for the appeal?

When it comes to professional footballers it seems quite harsh to me to have rules in place where you have to have played x amount of games for your country. Why does it matter? Am I missing something? Especially being a GK there's only one bastard spot!

It makes a huge difference. Its all to do with the category they fall into in the Points Based System category. If you are a world leader in your field then you'd be in a Tier 1 and have to show different criteria for other Tiers. for a start you don't need a work permit. This keeper isn't a world leader and so would be Tier 2. Even then its for elite sports people. I haven't looked at his case, or his footballing career but he'd need to be a current international for a start, but other caveats can be taken into account if not. But the rules state that he must have participated in at least 75% of his games for Croatia when available over the last 2 years. Probably not a problem for Croatia abut haven't checked but their World ranking also comes into it.

Also, as I said earlier he will need to show an IELTS  (English test) score to a certain level.

fail that and you don't actually get an appeal but an Administrative review. You can take it to an appeal but there is no jurisdiction unless you're arguing under different grounds than just the refusal based on not meeting the rules.

[Smoke]

I think the whole work permit thing in this instance is pointless.

The guy's asking for a work permit so that he can complete on a contract or employment for say 4 years on X thousands of pounds per week of which he will be rightly taxed.

that should IMO be enough for the government to say, "more income for us? Welcome to the UK!"

all this business on so many games played for country blah blah, the chaps being offered a contract that will bring in hundreds of thousands in income tax over the next 4 years.

I must be missing something but to me it's loopy.

[peter w]

There are plenty of other people who are far more qualified in other areas of industry who should be coming in, and are, and just because we want this keeper doesn't mean he's any more qualified or that the Exchequer will miss out.

[Malandro]

I think the whole work permit thing in this instance is pointless.

The guy's asking for a work permit so that he can complete on a contract or employment for say 4 years on X thousands of pounds per week of which he will be rightly taxed.

that should IMO be enough for the government to say, "more income for us? Welcome to the UK!"

all this business on so many games played for country blah blah, the chaps being offered a contract that will bring in hundreds of thousands in income tax over the next 4 years.

I must be missing something but to me it's loopy.

I don't think you are missing anything.

Its nuts. The guy probably has a contract of £30k p/w on the table.

[peter w]

But say yes to him and you have to say yes to virtually anybody regardless of skills. The idea is that the UK company/sports team need this person because they are unable to fill it in the UK/EU. This keeper isn't the best and we could find a lot better elsewhere its just that he's willing to come. he could be good he could be rubbish but rules are there for a reason. for every Martin Laursen there's an Alex Sperr, for every Stiliyan Petrov  a Kurt Bakholt.

[old man villa fan]

I would have thought goalkeeper is a unique situation in that there are not many keepers of high enough standard that are not tied to contracts or available.

I would have thought this is a matter of labour law principle and the fact that a club can over pay to get a player from another club should not come into it.

[Smoke]

I see your point Peter,

however this GK is having his entry sponsered by a multi million pound company. I don't see why it would open the flood gates, if anybody else from where ever can get themself a contract for so many thousand a week over a 3 to 4 year period, As a country we should be welcoming them with open arms!

as to letting anyone in regardless of skill, it shouldn't really be skill they're judge on for me, it should be their earning potential and therefore input into the country.

[edgysatsuma89]

But say yes to him and you have to say yes to virtually anybody regardless of skills. The idea is that the UK company/sports team need this person because they are unable to fill it in the UK/EU. This keeper isn't the best and we could find a lot better elsewhere its just that he's willing to come. he could be good he could be rubbish but rules are there for a reason. for every Martin Laursen there's an Alex Sperr, for every Stiliyan Petrov  a Kurt Bakholt.

Cheers for the info peter. I still don't agree that there should be the same rules in place for professional sports people but I understand it better now. I know sweet FA about it.

[Risso]

But say yes to him and you have to say yes to virtually anybody regardless of skills. The idea is that the UK company/sports team need this person because they are unable to fill it in the UK/EU. This keeper isn't the best and we could find a lot better elsewhere its just that he's willing to come. he could be good he could be rubbish but rules are there for a reason. for every Martin Laursen there's an Alex Sperr, for every Stiliyan Petrov  a Kurt Bakholt.

Cheers for the info peter. I still don't agree that there should be the same rules in place for professional sports people but I understand it better now. I know sweet FA about it.

It's bad enough that young British players have to compete with everybody from the EU now, but just opening the floodgates for the rest of the world too would make their chances of getting a start almost nil.

[ozzjim]

Does anyone else find the transfer window jokes about bit signing people incredibly tedious?

[PaulWinch again]

I think I find the whole transfer window tedious.