We should have been made to pay more for Bostock

[chivers!]

I was talking about Bostock with a Palace fan today. His quote: "He's built like a brick shithouse".

 

[SpurSince57]

From a sensible point of view, I think the 700k was an absolute disgrace. We should have been forced to pay far more for a player of such calibre.

There is no doubt that it makes a mockery out of having a great youth academy and makes it pointless for clubs to have one as it simply is not worth the money to have such an academy. I genuinely feel sorry for the financial guys behind Palace football club.

That said, from a Spurs fan point of view, I think it is great. I just hope we take it easy on the young lad and mould him into a Spurs legend.....an not another Routeledge!!

Finally, the fact that Simon Jordan is a grade A tosser just makes the whole deal that little bit sweeter :grin:

Apparently the panel based its calculation on the inflation since their last such arbitration—£400k for Defoe, ten years ago. That may be the standard rate of inflation, but transfer fees and players' wages (and ticket prices) follow rules all of their own. No wonder Jordan went ballistic—and I'll bet our representatives were just as surprised. Once again, the FA shows itself to be totally out of touch with reality.

I seem to be in the minority on SC that actually likes Jordan. Sure, you've got the sunbed tan and the Jonathan Woss+ hairdo, and he runs his mouth off a bit at times, but he's done a good job at Palace and he's not afraid to take a stand against the blazers at the FA. And all through this saga he's never once criticised Spurs, except when he made his 'this gives big clubs carte blanche to plunder smaller ones' comment, which wasn't a pop at Spurs as such, more a generic comment, and, unfortunately, the truth. This shows we've acted with complete propriety, which is the important thing, surely.

In the end he took a calculated risk and calculated wrong. Nothing we could, or should, do about it—except, perhaps, offering Palace a friendly at the Lane next summer.

 

[General Levy]

Yeah I like Jordon as well. He is like a young Alan Sugar.

Don't want him anywhere near spurs though, ldo.

Meh he takes things too far

Jordan has said he is so disgusted with Bostock and his stepfather that he has advised the two of them they are no longer welcome at Selhurst Park and revoked their season tickets for 2008-2009, which the pair had already renewed[6].

 

[RuislipSpur]

Yeah I like Jordon as well. He is like a young Alan Sugar.

Don't want him anywhere near spurs though, ldo.

Meh he takes things too far

Give them one at Spurs instead :shake:

Though to be fair its probably better for them that they don't go there after this, the fans aren't going to take too kindly to it are they.

 

[KentuckyYid]

Spurs should loan them Ghaly for a year...

I like Palace, they're one of the teams results I look out for agree that Jordan is a complete twat.

However Palace have been robbed but it's not Tottenhams fault.

 

[SpurSince57]

Spurs should loan them Ghaly for a year...

I like Palace, they're one of the teams results I look out for agree that Jordan is a complete twat.

However Palace have been robbed but it's not Tottenhams fault.

Why? Because he's a genuine fan, not some **** out to screw the club for whatever he can get and then fuck off and leave it in the shit? If he sometimes goes OTT, so what? Isn't that what genuine fans do?

If he'd slagged us off I'd be fucking annoyed, but he hasn't. He's acknowledged we've played the whole thing straight down the middle. Like I said, that's what's important.

 

[Kyras]

Jordan just comes across as a twat sometimes, going way over the top about things, but I feel for him this time, the tribunal has screwed him and his club over.

 

[Supersonic]

Yer I agree, Jordan just cares about his club and wants to get the best for them, theres nothing wrong with being passionate about getting the best for the club.

To be fair I would be pissed if we were on the recieving end, and we should have been made to pay 2mill minimum I think, if hes as good as hes made out to be.

THe worst thing is Palace rejected a bid from CHelsea about 3 years ago that was more than what we paid. Surely that would make the tribunal demand a higher fee

 

[Chris12345]

However Palace have been robbed but it's not Tottenhams fault.

Yeah, this is how I see it!


The tribunal should compensate only for the cost of development initially, but include decent add-ons, as some one has already suggested...

Initially:

'selling' club should give the tribunal access to their accounts, look at the total cost of the academy, divide it by the amount of players in it (I know it wouldn't be simple, but it could be done)... plus any legal fees incurred...

Then:

Should be a defined criteria for any deal involving a British youngster moving from one club to another... with varying levels depending on the levels of the clubs (i.e. if a youngsters gone from League 2 to League 1, 50 appearences isn't gonna be "worth" so much)... but have a set fee for the following...

10 first team appearances
50 first team starts
Makes at least 3 appearances in a winning cup run
10 league appearances resulting in European qualification
5 International caps

Say 50 league starts for a premiership team could be worth £2m... then £500k for a championship... £100k for League 1 etc...

If you catch my drift?

Thoughts?

It seems far to logical for the FA to actually use :lol:

 

[Kyras]

Yeah, this is how I see it!


....


If you catch my drift?

Thoughts?

It seems far to logical for the FA to actually use :lol:

Yeah i totally agree with the whole of your post, unfortunately, you posted the bit in bold.

 

[Montasura]

Don't get me wrong on my last comment. Yes, I am not Jordans biggest fan for many reasons. But, perhaps I was a bit harsh towards him.

I don't think any less of him over the Bostock ruling. He has not come out and slagged Spurs because they have done nothing wrong. To be honest, I'd be fucking mad right now if I was in his shoes because he has been royally screwed by 'the establishment'!

 

[General Levy]

I just done some research on Simon Jordan and imo he is a top bloke.

[x] nearly made it as a pro
[x] bought the team he supported as a boy by the age of 32
[x] shags loads of fit birds. Sophie Anderton is so fucking hot imo
[x] lives in Marbella.

LFISGD.

 

[SpurSince57]

Don't get me wrong on my last comment. Yes, I am not Jordans biggest fan for many reasons. But, perhaps I was a bit harsh towards him.

I don't think any less of him over the Bostock ruling. He has not come out and slagged Spurs because they have done nothing wrong. To be honest, I'd be fucking mad right now if I was in his shoes because he has been royally screwed by 'the establishment'!

October, 1893 – ‘Ernie Payne’s Boots’

Even in their non-League days Spurs ran into difficulties with officialdom. Founded in 1882, Spurs’ early football was a mix of friendly games and Cup competitions under their amateur status. Eleven years after their formation on this day in 1893, Spurs drew 0-0 in a 1st Round London Senior Cup tie against Old St Marks. For that game, a new name, ‘Burton’, appeared on the team sheet, to play on the left wing for Spurs. This was in fact, Ernie Payne who was on Fulham’s books but being unable to get into their team, he accepted an invitation to play for Spurs. However, when he arrived at Tottenham he had no kit. Spurs provided him with shirt, shorts and socks but were unable to find boots to fit him. They gave him a loan of ten shillings (50p) to buy a pair of boots on the understanding that they would belong to Spurs. However, when Fulham heard about this they accused Spurs of ‘poaching’ their player and ‘professionalism’. Spurs were immediately called before the London Football Association to answer these charges.

The charge of poaching was dismissed but the charge of inducing a player and professionalism was upheld. The penalty imposed on Spurs was harsh – their ground at Northumberland Park was closed for two weeks, Spurs were suspended for a similar period and Ernie Payne was suspended for a week even though he had repaid the money to Spurs. An appeal was lodged but it was unsuccessful, the London F.A. being strongly opposed to anything suggesting of professionalism, a view that was holding back the development of football in London.

This matter became known as the ‘Ernie Payne Boots Affair’ and while Payne continued to play for Spurs, he is remembered for the longer term consequence of the matter in that Spurs, frustrated by the views held by the London FA, decided to turn professional. The club had received tremendous public support over the matter with the general view being that the London FA had been high-handed and had treated Spurs very severely. At a meeting in December, 1895, the decision was taken that Spurs would turn professional.

http://tottenham-spur.blogspot.com/2006/10/spurs-in-history-21st-october.html

I'm not convinced the FA has moved on that much in 115 years.