The Weekend ITK Discussion Thread 4th/5th July 2015

[Bus-Conductor]

Sky sports reporting that Southampton will consider legal action against Atletico if Alderweireld does not sign for them. They believe their contract is binding.

Perhaps this is what JJ was eluding to earlier in the week.

Suddenly @JJetset 's post last night makes more sense.

 

[Francis Gibbs]

getting Roberts would represent a real coup ..

 

[Grim54]

Suddenly @JJetset 's post last night makes more sense.

JJ's comment was that 'its not a commercial reason why it wasn't going to happen'. A contractual issue sounds commercial to me!

 

[Bus-Conductor]

JJ's comment was that 'its not a commercial reason why it wasn't going to happen'. A contractual issue sounds commercial to me!

I think it's more a legal issue as opposed to a financial one - I think that's what JJ meant.

 

[only1waddle]

I think it's more a legal issue as opposed to a financial one - I think that's what JJ meant.

Surely we would make sure the buy out was cancelled on time before bidding, old DL wouldn't leave that stone unturned.

 

[Sum Monsterism]

It's already been said, but Southampton clearly can't make TA sign for them. So if he chooses us, all the legal bollocks is just bollocks.

 

[Lilbaz]

It's already been said, but Southampton clearly can't make TA sign for them. So if he chooses us, all the legal bollocks is just bollocks.

They will still be entitled to compensation unless that has expired then they might be entitled to nothing.
It's between them, we can sign him as toby hasn't agreed terms with them.

 

[$hoguN]

It's already been said, but Southampton clearly can't make TA sign for them. So if he chooses us, all the legal bollocks is just bollocks.

I imagine there is a small subtlety to this though. If he has agreed a contract as part of the buy out clause and now he is trying to back out, it may be a breach of contract

 

[SpartanSpur]

It's already been said, but Southampton clearly can't make TA sign for them. So if he chooses us, all the legal bollocks is just bollocks.

This does seem to be the case in football. I can see him coming to us still with Southampton getting a kickback in compensation.

However I can also see him just settling for Southampton to end this mess

 

[Lilbaz]

I imagine there is a small subtlety to this though. If he has agreed a contract as part of the buy out clause and now he is trying to back out, it may be a breach of contract

You can only agree terms in the last 6 months of your contract and only to foreign teams.

 

[Mr Pink]

I think it's more a legal issue as opposed to a financial one - I think that's what JJ meant.

Agreed.

And obviously after doing some due diligence the situation changed. And by that I mean, probably getting to the bottom of this loan agreement and TA's position so to speak.

My understanding is that all these threatening statements from Southampton are designed to generate leverage for compensation.

At the end of the day its down to the player, and he's clearly indicated that he wants to come to us. Not a lot they can do about that no matter what they're loan agreement stipulates.

All this crap from Peach about Saints expecting him to join them, they know full well he isn't about to do that - why all the threatening statements if that were the case!

 

[spurs9]

Suddenly @JJetset 's post last night makes more sense.

It would mean the media were 1 week behind on this one, which I think JJ has eluded to in the past. It also makes more sense of his "Toby or not Toby #thatisthequestion" tweet last week.

The bit that doesn't make sense to me though is JJ said "we were pretty resolute on why it wasnt", which suggests that we pulled out for whatever the "commercial reasons" were and I don't see why we would end negotiations because of a dispute between Madrid and Southampton.

 

[$hoguN]

You can only agree terms in the last 6 months of your contract and only to foreign teams.

When he went on-loan to Southampton he could have agreed terms with Southampton for if the buy clause was exercised

 

[nedley]

We sure do pick em.....

 

[spurs9]

You can only agree terms in the last 6 months of your contract and only to foreign teams.

That's only for players who's contracts are ending, I don't see how this applied here.

 

[225]

That's only for players who's contracts are ending, I don't see how this applied here.

I think you can only sign a contract that would apply to the next window (which would have been January). Not sure what the rules are, but it doesn't make much sense. Or most of these 'loan' moves that happen now.

 

[Lilbaz]

That's only for players who's contracts are ending, I don't see how this applied here.

I really don't know. This will be up to the lawyers.

 

[Sum Monsterism]

I think you can only sign a contract that would apply to the next window (which would have been January). Not sure what the rules are, but it doesn't make much sense. Or most of these 'loan' moves that happen now.

yeah!

 

[spurs9]

I think you can only sign a contract that would apply to the next window (which would have been January). Not sure what the rules are, but it doesn't make much sense. Or most of these 'loan' moves that happen now.

You can but it doesn't happen often (because why would you) but Utd agreed to sign Fabio and Rafael a year before they joined, as players can't join from outside the EU until they are 18.

 

[cockeral]

JJ's comment was that 'its not a commercial reason why it wasn't going to happen'. A contractual issue sounds commercial to me!

Legally he had only agreed to join Soton for a season loan. He hadn't signed a multi year contract so can't see how it's a breach of contract his end