Oh well, tragedy has struck

[Superphil]

Are you MAD?

BECAUSE THEY HAD NOT AGREED TO SELL HIM TO UNITED!

Either United had not matched the required fee, or Tottenham simply didn't want to sell him to them? They own him, that is their RIGHT?

Only last year Gabby Heinze want to go FROM United TO Liverpool but United refused to sell him to them, even though they matched the required valuation!

Manure are the ultimate double standards club

No not Mad, you say Spurs owned him, surely that was outlawed hundreds of years ago. You cannot prevent someone working for another organisation just becuse you have a hissy fit about it. What the f*** does it matter to Spurs who he plays for? If it was Arsenal I could understand it, but not Man U.

 

[itszamora]

No not Mad, you say Spurs owned him, surely that was outlawed hundreds of years ago. You cannot prevent someone working for another organisation just becuse you have a hissy fit about it. What the f*** does it matter to Spurs who he plays for? If it was Arsenal I could understand it, but not Man U.

You can prevent them if they are under contract to you though.

 

[Skint Gull]

I believe that Levy knew all along that Berbatov was going to United.

Ya think? I believe the ENTIRE world knew that, United had made it quite clear!

Fair play to Levy for getting as much as he could for him but that shouldn't stop United getting a points deduction as far as I'm concerned, it's the only way it'll stop this sort of shit happening in the future

 

[Knotty]

Are you MAD?

BECAUSE THEY HAD NOT AGREED TO SELL HIM TO UNITED!

Either United had not matched the required fee, or Tottenham simply didn't want to sell him to them? They own him, that is their RIGHT?

Only last year Gabby Heinze want to go FROM United TO Liverpool but United refused to sell him to them, even though they matched the required valuation!

Manure are the ultimate double standards club

You are right that if they don't want to sell him to a cetain club, they don't have to. But they can't make him go to a club he doesn't want to, either.

In the end, they did let him go to United, didn't they? Why? The money.

 

[Superphil]

They agree to sell him at a certain price - which United hadn't met. Berbatov was under contract, so under FA rules he's not allowed to talk to other clubs unless Spurs give him permission to do so - which they hadn't for united because they hadn't offered enough money.

Fair enough, didn't understand the FA rules on that. So, are we saying that City offered more than Man U then? Blimey

 

[Skint Gull]

No not Mad, you say Spurs owned him, surely that was outlawed hundreds of years ago. You cannot prevent someone working for another organisation just becuse you have a hissy fit about it. What the f*** does it matter to Spurs who he plays for? If it was Arsenal I could understand it, but not Man U.

So in your line of thinking the whole transfer system does not exist? A players wants to move so the club must let him go? United can bit what they like cos the player wants to go and so the law says Spurs must let him? 20 quid and a packet of Dry Roasted peanuts ought to do it

 

[Knotty]

You can prevent them if they are under contract to you though.

Spurs didn't prevent it, though, did they?

 

[Skint Gull]

You are right that if they don't want to sell him to a cetain club, they don't have to. But they can't make him go to a club he doesn't want to, either.

In the end, they did let him go to United, didn't they? Why? The money.

Exactly. If they only agreed a price with City but Berbatov didn't want to go then he would have stayed at Spurs. They player has the right to speak to ANY club who have had a bid accepted for them, but only once the bid has been accepted and he has permission to do so!

 

[Skint Gull]

Spurs didn't prevent it, though, did they?

How could they? You can't stop a grown man going on any trip he wants to? If he's breaking any rules its up to they club and/or the regulatory body (FA/Premier League) to charge him with breaking the rules but they can't physically stop him from doing it!

 

[Knotty]

Exactly. If they only agreed a price with City but Berbatov didn't want to go then he would have stayed at Spurs. They player has the right to speak to ANY club who have had a bid accepted for them, but only once the bid has been accepted and he has permission to do so!

As I have said earlier, if United have acted against the rules then they should be punished, but don't believe that Levy is the angelic innocent party in this. He knew all along that there were only two options - Berbatov stays at Spurs, sulks, grumbles and doesn't pull his weight...or...he goes to United and Spurs collect an enormous amount of dosh which will be much more beneficial to them than a grumpy Bulgarian.

The City part in all of this was irrelevant and a red herring...something that Levy also knew.

Spurs are just as much winners in this as United. I have spoken to three Spurs-supporting mates this morning and they are all delighted. Incidentally, none of cares where DB went as long as they got the maximum amount of money for him!

 

[Knotty]

How could they? You can't stop a grown man going on any trip he wants to? If he's breaking any rules its up to they club and/or the regulatory body (FA/Premier League) to charge him with breaking the rules but they can't physically stop him from doing it!

I didn't mean is visit yesterday, I meant the transfer.

They couldn't stop him physically going to United yesterday, but they didn't have to agree to the transfer.

 

[Superphil]

How could they? You can't stop a grown man going on any trip he wants to? If he's breaking any rules its up to they club and/or the regulatory body (FA/Premier League) to charge him with breaking the rules but they can't physically stop him from doing it!

But they didn't stop the transfer did they, and by your own points, they had the option to do so.

Of course the transfer system exists, if it didn't we would have this conversation. The point is, the player wanted to leave, the club should have no say in where he goes, and they didn't in the end because the let him go to Man U.

The purpose of the transfer system is to compensate teams if their contracted players decide they want to leave and play elsewhere Or if the team can no longer usefully benefit from a player who is under contract they can chose to sell him. Restrictive practice is not acceptable

In this instance the player was a greedy type, and he wanted to go to United for the fame and money and possible the oppertunity to win trophies. He got his money, Man U got the player they wanted, Spurs agreed to sell him, and they got their money. If they hadn't been so up their own arse the deal could have been sorted weeks ago and they would have been able to spend the money on new players, as it happend they rather arsed it up for themselves didn't they? They have £30M in the bank, but can't spend it on players

 

[Couldn't Be Hyypia]

Man City offered Spurs £34m for him but the player wanted Champions League football this season, so he rejected them.

 

[Knotty]

But they didn't stop the transfer did they, and by your own points, they had the option to do so.

Of course the transfer system exists, if it didn't we would have this conversation. The point is, the player wanted to leave, the club should have no say in where he goes, and they didn't in the end because the let him go to Man U.

The purpose of the transfer system is to compensate teams if their contracted players decide they want to leave and play elsewhere Or if the team can no longer usefully benefit from a player who is under contract they can chose to sell him. Restrictive practice is not acceptable

In this instance the player was a greedy type, and he wanted to go to United for the fame and money and possible the oppertunity to win trophies. He got his money, Man U got the player they wanted, Spurs agreed to sell him, and they got their money. If they hadn't been so up their own arse the deal could have been sorted weeks ago and they would have been able to spend the money on new players, as it happend they rather arsed it up for themselves didn't they? They have £30M in the bank, but can't spend it on players

I'm sure they already spent some of it because they knew he was going.

 

[Skint Gull]

But they didn't stop the transfer did they, and by your own points, they had the option to do so.

Of course the transfer system exists, if it didn't we would have this conversation. The point is, the player wanted to leave, the club should have no say in where he goes, and they didn't in the end because the let him go to Man U.

The purpose of the transfer system is to compensate teams if their contracted players decide they want to leave and play elsewhere Or if the team can no longer usefully benefit from a player who is under contract they can chose to sell him. Restrictive practice is not acceptable

In this instance the player was a greedy type, and he wanted to go to United for the fame and money and possible the oppertunity to win trophies. He got his money, Man U got the player they wanted, Spurs agreed to sell him, and they got their money. If they hadn't been so up their own arse the deal could have been sorted weeks ago and they would have been able to spend the money on new players, as it happend they rather arsed it up for themselves didn't they? They have £30M in the bank, but can't spend it on players

I'm not saying Spurs couldn't have handled it better but Manure transfer dealing and the way they condcut their business is a disgrace and should be punished.

Until you have agreed a fee with the selling club it is against the rules to approach the player. There is video evidence of Berbatov arriving for talks and a medical before this was agreed so what difference does it make whether Spurs complain to the FA or not?

Oh my fuckin days I HATE Manure!

 

[sten_super]

But they didn't stop the transfer did they, and by your own points, they had the option to do so.

Of course the transfer system exists, if it didn't we would have this conversation. The point is, the player wanted to leave, the club should have no say in where he goes, and they didn't in the end because the let him go to Man U.

The purpose of the transfer system is to compensate teams if their contracted players decide they want to leave and play elsewhere Or if the team can no longer usefully benefit from a player who is under contract they can chose to sell him. Restrictive practice is not acceptable

In this instance the player was a greedy type, and he wanted to go to United for the fame and money and possible the oppertunity to win trophies. He got his money, Man U got the player they wanted, Spurs agreed to sell him, and they got their money. If they hadn't been so up their own arse the deal could have been sorted weeks ago and they would have been able to spend the money on new players, as it happend they rather arsed it up for themselves didn't they? They have £30M in the bank, but can't spend it on players

I don't agree with this at all. To point to the 'restrictive trade' argument is nonsense. Players have registrations that are owned by the club, that are traded commodities. All traded commodities have a market value. Owners of commodities sell these (if they so wish) to the highest bidder. Why should Spurs not receive the highest fee available, just because the player does not want the move?

In a free market (which football isn't), the player would be free to sign a contract with any football club he wanted. However, without the players' registration, he could not play for that club. These are two seperate negotiations; the contract with the player, under the terms of which the player agrees to play for the club, and the registration, which gives the team a right to play the player.

 

[Skint Gull]

Why should Spurs not receive the highest fee available, just because the player does not want the move?

Indeed, and they can also choose who they sell him to, exactly as United did with Heinze

 

[Pavilionaire]

Berbatov is a very good player but £30.75 million for a bloke who is notoriously sulky and prone to throw his toys out of the pram is bloody good business from Spurs.

Spurs are 3 points down on where they should be because of Berbatov's no-show and the defeat vs Sunderland. However, they've brought in Pavlyuchenko and Campbell so should be alright - I expect them to climb back to a UEFA Cup place and maybe reach another final.

The big question is who is going to be left out when Ronaldo returns? I doubt whether Mr Tevez is going to be too happy but we shall see...

 

[Mendoza]

If a player wants to leave that desperatley he can buy out his contract which a number of players did, Hleb did at Arsenal.

The whole Man U thing stinks, I appreciate and enjoy watching them play good football, but they are their own governing body when it comes to on and off the field practices they conduct.

They cry about one thing, but are guilty of doing it themselves. The way they persued Berbatov was not in the rule books, the same with Van NIstelrooy, the same with Hargreaves, the same with Alan Smith and even that 12 year old kid from Australia they did the same.

I dont know what Luton did wrong, but they got a points deduction, a transfer embargo and were made an example of.

Why Man U think they can get away with it is beyond me, but they do, and they are the most successful team in the Premierships history.

 

[Superphil]

I guess we all have opinions about this. There are rules, which sound as though they may well have been bent or broken. It is for the football authorities to sort that out. Whether they will or not seems to be another matter of opinion, which I don't care about.

In the meantime I will waste no time hating anyone, or worrying about the apparent state of the game. I will however, look forward to watching the best league on my Skybox, with the best players on show collectivly anywhere, and quite possible see a team from it win the CL again playing the best football you could hope to see.