I read recent reports that suggested Gosling could leave on a free but didn't believe it as I was led to believe (from a club insider) that he had a year left on his contract.
I am amazed to read tonight that his agent has been in touch with the Premier Lague who say he's a free agent and can sign for whoever he wants.
Now if true (and thats still a big IF because we all know about "stories") it begs the following questions:
- Who is responsible for this massive cockup?
- Does he really want to leave for more first team football as has been suggested?
- That being the case, are we still responsible for his medical bills (bit callous I know but so is wanting to take advantage of a cockup!)?
- What club would take him in his current "unmedical" like condition?
Jay Harris, Posted 07/07/2010 at 02:13:54
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 07/07/2010 at 04:51:22
Dan Gosling has apparently left the club for nothing because he is a shallow golddigger who would rather get paid more at a worse club than earn a regular spot at the team that gave him his break.
This on top of the fact that Arteta, who a month ago was staying, is now wanting to leave along with Pienaar. What odds that World Cup Johnny will want a double-your-money deal or he's off to City? Let's not forget that Fellaini's Dad was trying to get him to move before he was injured and now he is just about ready to return ... to the shop window.
I guess the only question is did all of this come as a surprise to Kenwright or does it explain why Moyes has signed half-a-dozen seemingly unnecessary 19-year-old long shots?
2 Posted 07/07/2010 at 06:33:00
3 Posted 07/07/2010 at 07:28:53
4 Posted 07/07/2010 at 07:26:06
Umm, not exactly the most reliable of sources. It states that Newcastle and Sunderland are interested. Not exactly the clubs that a player with International aspirations (given the current state of the national team are in) should be looking towards.
I think I remember reports that were saying that Rodwell & Gosling had caught Fergies eyes as stand-out upcoming players. Now you wouldn't turn down a free transfer to Man Utd would you?
But let's just see if he picks up an Everton embossed pen and signs a new 4-year contract shall we.
5 Posted 07/07/2010 at 07:32:04
6 Posted 07/07/2010 at 07:14:33
I don't think we can get too angry with Gosling. Players want to play and if he's given the opportunity to start and earn more doing it ? well what can we do? I mean there are people calling for Landon Donovan to come back and if that happens, Dan is pushed further down the pecking order so why wouldn't he want to go someplace where he'll be given the chance? But all of this is moot if whoever monitors player contracts does their fucking job.
Will he leave? I don't know. Will other clubs try to bring in a player who will be out for so long? They might if it only costs them a weekly salary. What gets me is, IF he leaves, all the money that has been spent on any surgeries, consultations, and rehabilitation will be for another club's benefit. I also wonder if there was a sell-on clause that we would have owed a percentage of Gosling's fee to Plymouth? Wonder if we would be made to pay them something ? money we don't have.
7 Posted 07/07/2010 at 08:30:39
I sincerely hope it is all media speculation as it makes us as a club an utter laughing stock... the club have not made any official comment and at the moment are filling their pages with trivia from Australia.
8 Posted 07/07/2010 at 08:41:25
1. The club didn't give him a written offer in time. Why does that rip up his current contract and make hime a free agent?
2. I thought the offer was an extension to a current contract? If not, and he is at the end of his contract, could he not have declined any written offer and become a free transfer in any case?
9 Posted 07/07/2010 at 08:59:50
The mere act of "putting a written contract in front of him", to the best of my knowledge (and I've worked with contracts for 25 years) has no legal basis whatsoever.
He either signs a contract, as does the club, and then it's binding. Or he does not sign it, in which case it has no value to anybody.
I fail to see how the physical presentation of a new contract changes his status in any way, shape or form. Unless there is a football ruling that says something along the lines of "a player must receive a written offer of a new contract before the last year of his current contract begins, otherwise he is a free agent".
All sounds like typically surreal nonsense from the parallel universe of Premier League football.
10 Posted 07/07/2010 at 09:19:17
Can't say I'm too bothered though, Gosling's just not very good in my opinion. But I'll always have fond memories of his goal against Liverpool.
11 Posted 07/07/2010 at 09:20:32
As I understand it, he has a year left on his contract. How does the fact he was not given a "written" offer render his current contract null and void?
Also as he is under 24, I was of the impression that he cannot move for free. Look at Ledley at Cardiff, he is out of contract but they are still due some sort of fee from his next club.
Who would sign him while he is out with a serious injury?
Why would he go to a lesser club (Barcodes, Sunderland) rather than the stable environment of Goodison where it is known that Moyes likes to bring players through? Moyes gave him his chance after all.
If the "verbal offer" was acceptable (which I assume it was as the issue seems to be written and verbal rather than the terms on offer), why not just offer him a "written" contract and get it signed?
12 Posted 07/07/2010 at 09:22:07
My take on it is this ? the (FA) rules say Danny Gosling must have had a written contract to play for Everton.
Everton would argue that he had everything bar the paper, and that it is not just and equitable for him to be allowed to escape a contract merely because it is not on paper ? ie, implied performance (Gosling accepting his wages, turning up to training and playing etc) says both parties were living up to the contract.
1. FA Rules apply 100% (and he leaves);
2. Gosling's current (unwritten) contract applies ? which I assume he could either carry on/ or mutually terminate;
3. Gosling signs a new contract.
I dunno if that makes sense. Once again... Everton stay quiet.
13 Posted 07/07/2010 at 09:28:48
14 Posted 07/07/2010 at 09:32:45
Gosling joined on a 3½-year contract in January 2008. So by my reckoning, this contract expires next summer, so what is the fuss about?
I can only assume we have offered him a contract extension, but if it was only verbal, so what? He still has a year remaining on the original contract we gave him!
15 Posted 07/07/2010 at 09:44:11
Looks like it's happened ? just one of the many calamities due to Bill Kenwrong and the board.
I am absolutely astonished by it though. I cannot for the life of me understand Gosling quitting Goodison whilst he is in the midst of a serious injury and the only clubs looking at him are below the calibre of Everton.
The only reason that can exist is that Gosling can negotiate a fairly massive signing on fee due to being unattached. With that in mind, if this does prove to be true, we appear to have dodged a bullet on a young, unproven player who would have fucked us over a few years down the line.
16 Posted 07/07/2010 at 09:47:45
17 Posted 07/07/2010 at 09:52:43
If however your club does not offer you an improved deal then you can leave on a free.
This seems to be the point made is that the club made a verbal offer which Gosling has sought to overturn and has been successful on the grounds that, I assume, the rules state an offer must be in writing.
18 Posted 07/07/2010 at 09:53:19
Maybe on the back of a serious injury, he's questioning how long he has left in the sport and wants to milk it dry.
I wouldn't be surprised if he was turning out for a League Two side in four or five years if this is true ? because in my view it means he's lost his bottle for the professional game.
19 Posted 07/07/2010 at 10:00:38
Who cares if he received a written offer?
Verbal offers are more difficult to prove, but there are ways.
If an offer was given, he can turn it down ? simples. If he has not turned it down ? i.e. accepted it ? that could be used as proof that the verbal offer was made.
If he has a year on his deal and wants out for no fee, then he has got us by the short and curlies. We pay his wages while he is crocked, and get nothing in return.
So... to the question... are we still responsible for his medical bills? (Bit callous I know ? if it's true, then there is nothing remotely callous about it all.)
Jeez, these guys get paid mega-bucks. I could not imagine getting paid anywhere near that, consider walking out on my employer for a better deal elsewhere, and still think it ok that they pick up my medical bills!
20 Posted 07/07/2010 at 10:21:43
21 Posted 07/07/2010 at 10:19:48
Has he signed for someone else?
22 Posted 07/07/2010 at 10:20:03
23 Posted 07/07/2010 at 10:05:36
There is no way we'd get anywhere near four million from a tribunal anyway. We're probably losing about a million pounds... and an average player (in the position we play him) who will probably never make it at Goodison.
If he goes then I wish Dan all the best. Hopefully someone will play him in centre midfield and make a decent player out of him... because he's certainly not going to make it as a winger ? or a full back for that matter.
24 Posted 07/07/2010 at 10:42:16
I don't understand the FA position but surely if he still has a year left, the FA would be encouraging breach of contract, which surely they have no right to do.
Final point ? he accepted the "verbal" offer only months ago. Irrespective of not being followed up by a written offer, are we to assume that he didn't want to agree to the new contract then? In which case, WTF??
Smacks of an agent wanting a payday here!!!
25 Posted 07/07/2010 at 10:44:50
26 Posted 07/07/2010 at 11:11:19
Gosling struck me as a bit slow, a bit of a tap-in merchant ... but I'd rather have him in the squad than have him leave in this manner.
Let's hope Gueye is a more than useful replacement.
If Pienaar and Arteta leave I'll be a lot more annoyed though!
27 Posted 07/07/2010 at 11:24:13
This means Gosling could effectively see out his time at Everton, making the most of our medical expertise, and then move on next summer.
28 Posted 07/07/2010 at 11:22:46
Comments like that from Greg have to be true, because if they are not, this could really affect Gosling and his relationship with the fans, but also he will be looked at by other clubs as 'wanting things his way'.
Poor lad. I can imagine that Everton or his agent may release a statement about this, but if the statement was printed in the press too early, it will make the journalists look like a bunch of idiots.
29 Posted 07/07/2010 at 11:33:12
My information is that he was disappointed not to receive the offer of a step-up deal on par with Rodders and his dad threw the toys out. Given that it was likely to have been Xmas before he kicked a ball in anger, we would almost have forgotten him by then.
Whilst it`s being painted as a cock-up, who wants a disgruntled injured player? So good luck to the lad who I always saw as just another John Oster, whose career will probably take a similar route!
30 Posted 07/07/2010 at 11:47:19
If he isn't, and doesn't, he will go. I would be happy for him to leave, as I believe we only need player's who are 100% commited and love club.
11 Phil Neville's? Yes please.
31 Posted 07/07/2010 at 11:23:12
Could we have made the cock-up on purpose so Gosling leaves and then we re-sign him back up on a free this summer?
Hear me out: when we signed him from Plymouth, there was an agreement in the contract that Plymouth would get a percentage of any fee we brought in if we sold Gosling at any time whilst he was contracted to us. Well, now he's gone, that agreement no longer exists... so, if he left but re-signed and in the future we sold him for a decent fee, that money would solely go to us and no percentage would go to Plymouth.
Could it be possible that Everton are trying to pull a crafty one by cocking up Gosling's contract offer, resulting in him leaving and then we possibly sign him back up so that, if we ever did sell him in the future cos were so hard up, we would get 100% of his fee instead of say only 75% because Plymouth are entitled to 25% (I'm not saying it's that, it could be anything between 10 and 25%) due to the agreement back when we first bought him?
It sounds a stupid one, I know... but what other reason could it be, cos I'm sure we do want to keep him as he is a decent up-and-coming player who will get better. With our financial situation, where we can't go out and spend millions, we need to keep players like Gosling and nurture them along in to good first team players. So it doesn't make sense for us to be so daft and do what we've done and ended up losing him for nothing. There must be a reason for our actions, surely... and it can't be that Moyes doesn't rate him and as let him go either, IMO anyway!
What I've said sounds weird, I know... but, like someone as said above, Man Utd was looking at both Rodwell and Gosling and see them both as good prospects and players for the future. Say if we gave Gosling a new deal in time and in the future he improved and became a top player and the likes of Man Utd or who else came sniffing with offers we couldn't refuse and we accepted and he left, we would only get a certain amount of the fee due to Plymouth being entitled to a percentage of the fee. Whatever we got out of it might not have been enough to replace Gosling, but now he's left for nothing, and if we signed him back up, we would get the whole of the fee for him in the future as the agreement with Plymouth would be void due to him leaving and we would get the full amount to buy someone else?!
It makes me wonder if we're so hard up that we've thought of silly little things like this for our future gain.
32 Posted 07/07/2010 at 11:20:22
He'll end up in the Championship in 2 years anyway. He looks lost in the Premiership.
33 Posted 07/07/2010 at 12:09:09
Anybody who think's the employees of this club..'love the club' ... needs their head tested.
34 Posted 07/07/2010 at 12:12:29
35 Posted 07/07/2010 at 12:19:15
Could this be his agent fucking him around? Make it public that there is interest in Dan and that he's not had a proper contract and it may force Everton's hand in giving him an improved deal or risk losing him for nothing.
I hate agents, I really do, and I would not be surprised if it is just the agent weasling his way around claiming he knows what's best for Dan. I bet it's not been mentioned that with any transfer, the agent gets a fair wedge of sign-on fee too...
36 Posted 07/07/2010 at 12:31:49
The papers are reporting as he's left though... I'm still going to hang on until it's reported on the OS (albeit in the papers section which should be enough for a statement from the club one way or another). There's one thing speculation that a player is wanted by Sheik Shitty and they're offering a cock-sucking unicorn in exchange, but when there's reports such as these the club should really be on top of them.
37 Posted 07/07/2010 at 12:40:04
Like Ciarán, I have few illusions about the loyalty of the majority of players.
Assuming the Echo has it right (and this could be a big assumption), what this would illustrate is a gap in the basic management processes at Everton. Contractual issues like these should never fall between the cracks (although from my work in many organisations, I know that important matters often do, with no-one taking responsibility.)
I hope someone is taking steps to plug this gap, after which a robust conversation (and perhaps more) will be required for the culprit. The club needs to conduct its affairs in a professional manner; we?re not street vendors flogging dodgy hamburgers.
38 Posted 07/07/2010 at 12:47:24
According to SSN, he didn't agree to the new deal as he demanded that he be a first team regular and be played in his favoured CM position, so really all this nonsense about a cock-up is bollocks and why he has left is because both parties obviously couldn't come to an agreement. No doubt Moyesie couldn't garuantee either as Arteta, Fellaini, Cahill and Rodwell are ahead of him for the CM berths... even Pienaar, Osman and Bily will get picked to play centrally ahead of him. I really don't know what he's thinking, he either rates himself very highly as a player or his agent has been talking him up and telling him he's great, for him to be so demanding cos he isnt better than any of the above that's mentioned!
If he had a brain, he would sign up and get his head down, keep learning and improving, no matter where he was played at the moment, and then see if he could warrant a start in his favoured position after he's proved himself and got better over the years?!
39 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:09:20
I know it's a little much to expect player's to 'love the club' but, if Gosling want's to leave, let him. Look what happened with Lescott. My point was, if Gosling was anything like Neville or Cahill, he will re-sign.
If he wants out, there's no sense dragging it out and trying to force the lad to stay.
40 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:17:19
It's on the "What the Papers Say" section right now.
Seems like it's fact now. Dan Gosling is an ex-Everton player!
Amateurish from our board in every way ? the reporting of it along with the fact it actually happened. I mean, player contracts is literally the only thing I can see that this board actually does on a regular basis. They don't seek investment, they don't search for new managers ? all they are responsible for is player contracts and income/expenditure.
41 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:18:44
42 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:22:41
Regarding Gosling, as a player, I don't really care for him at all. The lost money is the concern (which would have been about £2m tops).
So Elstone has effectively lost our club £2m. Or, to be fair, the board collectively have lost themselves £2m.
Which means, essentially, that Beckford cost us £2m.
43 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:13:45
HE STILL PLAYS FOR EVERTON!!!! HE HAS NOT SIGNED FOR ANYONE!
Also, if he did leave and went to Newcastle or someone of that ilk, surely it would be becasue he will get more games... How is that being a 'gold-digger'???
People really need to calm down... Oh and #2... Get rid of Fellaini, Heitinga, Pienaar et al for 11 Phil Nevilles (who by the way must be oh so loyal to play for Everton for a measly £40k a week)... GET A GRIP!
44 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:27:04
45 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:30:13
46 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:31:01
Gosling is a kid, he's been given an opportunity in the Premier League that few ? if any ? other clubs would have given him.
He's been offered a multi-year contract despite suffering a serious injury. He's paid more than 90% of players his age in the Premier League. He's on the fringes of a first team squad consistently aiming for European football.
Yet he is now walking away from Everton to join a lesser team who will be lucky to avoid the drop this year, solely to earn a quick payday by negotiating his own signing on fee. (I disagree with Ciaran, the only reason for this can be money or, at a stretch, location.)
Gosling's situation is a world away from anything Neville or Cahill would face. If either of those players were offered a four-year contract with increased or similar wages at their age, nobody would begrudge the move.
The point here is: will Gosling get anything improved by moving club other than the instant payday? And would Gosling have the status he has as a player now (limited though it is) if Moyes hadn't taken a punt on him?
47 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:30:13
48 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:36:09
49 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:31:38
The problem is that Neville and Cahill get paid big bucks and are first-team players... Gosling is not.
I'm also not convinced by the whole 'Neville and Cahill are here for the love of the club' thing; they've never been tested, and never will be.
To be honest, the whole Gosling scenario reads to me like he wants to play football... rather than warm the bench. If that's the case, then fair play to him.
50 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:37:06
Plus the sheer amount of rags picking up on this now makes me 99% sure Gosling has gone.
51 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:33:36
Fran, don't be such an idiot, the lad is 19 ? not 33!
Everyone is right, considering the training and Premier League football he is getting, the lad should be very grateful indeed and should show us a little respect.
What annoys me most is the £3m we've lost, especially with our budget.
52 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:36:02
Gosling is an injury away from retirement... or an injury away from low-division, low-paying football.
A signing-on fee to Gosling will mean a heck of a lot more to him than to Neville or Cahill. If Nev was so loyal, he would accept lesser wages, knowing that he is not as imporatnt as he was when he first signed.
Gosling will get first team football at another club... rather than sit on the bench at a club aiming for Europe. If an Everton player, eg, Pienaar, leaves for a CL club to sit on the bench, you say he is disloyal, as football should be about playing games... now with Gosling you swing the arguement round saying he should be happy to sit on the bench for a 'bigger' club rather than play for a 'smaller' one.
If this does happen, the blame should be with the club.
53 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:37:36
Talk of millions is pure and utter gibberish.
54 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:42:36
He's probably going to receive a payday of around £1.5 - 2M realistically.
55 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:48:51
Who exactly values him at £4mill?
He'd get sod all of a signing-on fee.
56 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:52:28
If they want him cause he's cheap, surely they want him casue he's cheap, and then wont give him millions... they may as well try and sign an uninjured player for those millions.
57 Posted 07/07/2010 at 13:59:04
58 Posted 07/07/2010 at 14:15:27
Just because he's unattached doesn't mean he's free.
59 Posted 07/07/2010 at 14:34:32
A terrible player I'll be glad to see the back of ? even if it ends up costing us £4m or whatever a tribunal would have said he's worth. 4p is closer to the mark.
60 Posted 07/07/2010 at 14:52:53
61 Posted 07/07/2010 at 15:02:02
The board just burned a million quid!
62 Posted 07/07/2010 at 15:15:25
63 Posted 07/07/2010 at 15:30:46
2) If Gosling is seriously just going to walk out on the club in this way, then good riddance. After the big break Moyes gave him and after the club sticking by him when he got injured, to have this kind of attitude is a fucking disgrace. (it would be interesting to know who his agent is by the way!)
3) To be perfectly honest, when our squad is fully fit, he won't even get near the bench, so, as a player, he won't be missed that much. Could have done with the money though!
64 Posted 07/07/2010 at 15:42:12
Cheers Doddy, stupid of me -- for a minute there I thought one of Bill's Blue Backroom Brigade had made a mistake and lost the club 2-3 million quid
Does your information stretch to knowing if the club will continue to pay Gosling's medical biills and recuperation costs? Oh and wages, of course
Be nice of the club if they did, wouldn't it?
65 Posted 07/07/2010 at 16:20:07
2. Say everything happened as in media reports. Did Gosling go back to Everton and say - "What's happened?" I assume he's asked for more money and been rejected. Hence the tribunal
3. Would a court date be better? Would the civil courts/employment law override the FA (at lease the contract side)? I imagine the FA would stop him playing.
4. If he wanted to stay, it could of been done, on the "verbal terms" previously agreed within an hour, surely.
5. Everton are naive, amateur and idiotic. I only pray in my naivety a lawyer did it who can be sued for the losses.
66 Posted 07/07/2010 at 16:27:19
For the club, it's a loss of £4 million potentially but I never thought he was all that good to be honest.
67 Posted 07/07/2010 at 16:37:21
68 Posted 07/07/2010 at 16:47:02
69 Posted 07/07/2010 at 16:54:50
70 Posted 07/07/2010 at 17:19:47
71 Posted 07/07/2010 at 17:23:19
I would dearly love to see a wage cap in the Premier League. I wouldn't care if the 'top' footballers weren't attracted; the Bundesliga seems to cope well enough without paying average players stupid amounts of money.
72 Posted 07/07/2010 at 17:30:04
As stated earlier, I do agree with you though that Gosling seems to be pretty rubbish, and we're probably well rid of him if he's leaving.
73 Posted 07/07/2010 at 17:34:32
I like bullet points, so :
1) Gosling is not very good.
b) £4 million? No.
c) Greedy money-grabber? I'd go literally anywhere for a signing on fee of £1.5 million English sterling pounds. Come on, hands up, who wouldn't?
5) He'll probably stay anyway, who the hell signs injured players?
ii) Calling Kenwright "Kenwrong" isn't clever, funny, or cool.
74 Posted 07/07/2010 at 17:46:54
With regard to Gosling... haven't read rest of thread ? work and all that ? but whilst I don't think he will be a great loss if he goes, and thanks for THAT goal, to not get a bean for him shows some serious incompetence at Everton.
75 Posted 07/07/2010 at 17:53:54
To say he's one of the worst players ever to play for Everton is pathetic and wrong, oh so very wrong... Hottiger, Nyarko, Barlow, Angell, Pembridge, Gemmil, Jô and many many more...
He's a decent player, and we need a big squad. Nothing to be happy about here.
However, I am confused about this contract thing... How is he free if we didnt extend his contract? Why has the club not came out and made a statement on this? It's now in the Echo and Sky Sports so merits comment.
76 Posted 07/07/2010 at 17:36:02
I mean come on, was anyone actually surprised that Kenwright, Elstone, whoever, showed such a basic lack of business acumen? As Evertonians we've become accustomed to the board's constant bare-arsed bungling. They're a pack of fucking clowns minus the make up. Don't forget we're the club who, last summer, applied for a work-permit for a player we hadn't actually agreed a deal for and whose agent had never even fucking heard of us.
77 Posted 07/07/2010 at 18:11:17
78 Posted 07/07/2010 at 18:01:44
79 Posted 07/07/2010 at 18:16:03
80 Posted 07/07/2010 at 18:12:41
Enter Bill Kenwright.
What the fuck happened with Dan Gosling's contract? Are we that skint that we can't afford a piece of fuckin' paper and a pen?
I couldn't really give a fuck about dishonest Dan or his gobshite agent. I'm just demoralised at the way things happen at Everton. If Bill and his board won't fuck off then at least they could employ someone that has got half a fuckin' clue how to run a football club.
81 Posted 07/07/2010 at 18:38:36
If he wants £15k a month plus appearance fees, we'll claim that back in saved wages. At most he'd play a total of 20 games over the next season ? I'd personally like other more potential players get the game time than him. It might sound bitter but again I'll say what his asset now to build on?
82 Posted 07/07/2010 at 18:51:42
83 Posted 07/07/2010 at 18:58:01
84 Posted 07/07/2010 at 19:05:59
85 Posted 07/07/2010 at 19:13:49
I've always thought him to be a new Leon Osman, good honest Premier League squad player but never going to go on to play at a top level consistently. A couple of big goals against the Ugly Red Sisters, have made his value higher than it was.
Where the story gets interesting is the fact all is not what it seems. The inquiry was requested by Everton not Gosling (or his agent) after a verbal Contract was agreed but not submitted in writing. They needed to find out if a) they could still offer the contract to him and b) if they could get a fee for him if he could leave.
At no point has Gosling said he was desparate to leave or has his agent actually tried to move him on. This is a mess caused by Everton and their poor admin, how many times has it affected supporters over the years and now finally it has caused the ultimate embarrassment to the club as it has affected a player.
Someone at Everton really has let the club down, I have no idea who actually this person is who negotiates the contracts, Moyes, Kenwright or Elstone, or someone else, but I think someone may have a price to pay.
Having said all that, Gosling being injured and having already agreed a contract verbally maybe he won't go and all this all blow over.
86 Posted 07/07/2010 at 19:09:14
87 Posted 07/07/2010 at 19:26:45
I can't see how not extending his contract voids the previous contract. If the club know different they should let us know, instead of letting Sky and the world laugh at us for being so shit at even the simplest things.
It's the top story on Sky Sports teletext, FFS; it's embarrassing.
88 Posted 07/07/2010 at 19:25:20
89 Posted 07/07/2010 at 19:32:32
90 Posted 07/07/2010 at 19:35:29
Everton FC, Bill Kenwright and Moyes, however, need to be kicked squarely in the ass. I can only imagine the outcry had Rodwell gone to Chelsea or United in similar circumstances. We need to be a lot more professional if we are going to attract players in the future.
91 Posted 07/07/2010 at 19:45:52
Gosling did well to break into the team straight away, but surely they would not have expected him to until this season. Why offer such a short contract?
92 Posted 07/07/2010 at 19:57:00
93 Posted 07/07/2010 at 20:05:09
I know how stringent Moyes is with giving older players long contracts but he always gives 3-4 year ones to younger players. I just can't see them giving a 2½-year contract. Plus, unless it was a rolling or 6-month contract, it would be on annual set up so either 2 years, 3 years. Not and a half.
94 Posted 07/07/2010 at 20:17:11
95 Posted 07/07/2010 at 20:19:47
96 Posted 07/07/2010 at 19:31:09
My understanding of contract law is that if there was a verbal agreement and the club continued to treat him as our player and pay him, then the contract still stands, a contract can be verbal or written. Also the Premier League does not supercede general contract law. I would be saying ,"See you in court!" Also can you really believe that the Premier League would make this ruling against the Sky Four? I smell a rat.
The other issue to consider is what club would take a player in these circumstances? Surely this will poison relationships between Everton and the club that fields Gosling and I'm sure between the player's agency and football clubs in general. I can't see Fergie taking Gosling in these circumstances and I'm sure we are not the only club who expect to operate with their employees in good faith. You could well see a situation where young disgruntled players might use stalling tactics and deny they have seen a written contract to get a move. Its not in the overall interest of clubs to operate in this way surely?
Which begs my final question, did the club want to keep him? Maybe they're thinking he'll cost too much money to keep the bench warm.
97 Posted 07/07/2010 at 20:40:21
Or that his agent, one Mr Hodgson, in 2008, said "?We?ve been involved in ten or 15 transfers where the clubs have probably thought ?what on earth?s going on here?? because it?s not what they?re used to from agents, but we are thorough and detailed to ensure our clients are looked after.
?There are so many unscrupulous people involved in the industry now that it?s frightening ? people who will make enormous sums of money for making a single phone call. We?re not like that."
Really Mr Hodgson???
98 Posted 07/07/2010 at 20:50:43
99 Posted 07/07/2010 at 20:54:12
Probably a ploy by Bill to get him off the books and not have to pay his medical fees.
Also, why doesn't he just accept the new deal? If he was in agreement before, what is the problem now?
100 Posted 07/07/2010 at 21:57:33
Offer was made by Everton ? I'll call it "non-written" since thats all I'm sure about. Appears to be a valid contractual offer.
Acceptance ? does not need to be in written form ? this is what puzzles me. If Gosling is today, right now, on the old contract, and hasn't accepted the new one, then surely (media reports being true) he will have to see out his old contract.
If he has taken the pay rise from Everton, I would assume this would constitute implied acceptance. FA regs state (so we're told ? and I haven't read them) that no paper, therefore no contract. But that's just the FA, that doesn't mean that in the civil court there wouldn't be a contract.
So what I'd like to know is (and we will never know), what contract is Dan Gosling on today? He MUST be getting paid whilst injured. Is it his old one or his new one?
And secondly, who had the responsibility of watching the clock regarding the paper ? Everton or their lawyers?
I'd suggest Everton might mount a legal challenge but, as I've said above a few times, even if successful in the courts, he won't play for us again, because we don't want him to, and the FA probably wouldn't let him.
101 Posted 07/07/2010 at 22:16:07
a) the 'old' contract was cancelled by mutual agreement when the new one was verbally offered, or
b) we have been misinformed all along about the length of his 'old' contract, and it was in fact 2.5 years and not 3.5 years.
I can't wait for the explanation. This is going to be spinning taken to a totally new level.
102 Posted 07/07/2010 at 22:26:39
If he goes, I'd like to see the reception when he plays against us.
103 Posted 07/07/2010 at 22:25:47
He wants to play as a regular central midfield player, does he seriously think he is as good as Felliani, Artetea, Cahill, Pienaar or Rodwell?
Move on, Dan, and enjoy relegation, at least we got a fee for Rooney!
Maybe one of the new signings will now get an earlier chance.
Bring on Blackburn, COYB.
104 Posted 07/07/2010 at 22:38:45
The players signed so far are totally unproven and will reduce any money available to sign any 'name' player/s. I dread the thought of losing Pienaar and Arteta as, whatever fans think of Gosling's merits, he has been a decent sub when drafted in.
Instead of attacking Gosling and perhaps others who might see greener pastures elsewhere... our club management should be required to make a statement and clear the air.
105 Posted 07/07/2010 at 22:45:14
I do not pretend to know the ins and outs of Gosling's playing contract - it seems that there seemingly must be some kind of anomaly in it that means that he is now a free agent.
However, it might be true that the club had deliberately not offered Gosling a written contract as of mid-May - possibily due to the fact that he is currently recovering from quite a serious cruciate ligament injury (the sort which has resulted in other players never quite returning to their former glories).
Let's say BK et al thought "Let's stall - see how he gets on; we'll string him and his agent along with some vague promise of a contract - but if it looks like the injury has taken it's toll then we can always review that closer to the time." Let's say it went something like that.
And let's say that BK et al thought that they were likely to get away with that - whether they were aware of the potential problem with the "verbal contract" offer or not. And let's say that Gosling and his agent were savvy enough to go to the FA/PFA and check what the official legislation was.
And let's say that because Gosling felt slightly affronted by the fact that no written contract had been forthcoming, and that perhaps he himself might have gotten wind of the severity of his injury etc, that he thought "I might just exploit this loophole as right now it seems the most sensible thing to do."
None of that is anything more than ridiculous speculation. But let's say it wasn't...
106 Posted 07/07/2010 at 23:05:18
So did Everton fuck up or did Gosling shaft us? I'm realy unsure which side, if any, you are coming down on. Or is it a plague on both their houses?
107 Posted 07/07/2010 at 23:09:39
108 Posted 07/07/2010 at 23:12:15
In which case, he's still under contract.
No word from Everton, but that's hardly a surprise.
109 Posted 07/07/2010 at 23:24:01
110 Posted 07/07/2010 at 23:18:25
Who can tell at this stage ? especially with the club or Gosling himself yet to issue their official stance on proceedings. And even when they do, what can we actually take at face value?
My fear is that both parties are to blame to some degree ? showing neither in a particularly good light. It's easy to feel that this is a simple case of the wronged (Everton FC) and the wrongdoer (Gosling and agent... and Gosling's family if some reports are to be believed) ? but that is almost never true.
All I can say is that I would never wish a plague on my own house... which in this case is always going to be Everton FC. So, if a mistake has been made then so be it; and if there is some chance of Gosling staying ? or the club gaining compensation via appeal ? then I would hope that the club can achieve it.
Gosling himself, on the other hand, I do not care massively for ? as a player (or as a person). But if he felt undervalued by the club then it is his prerogative to flex his legal muscle; if the club had offered him a reasonable contract, and he had flat turned it down and sought a move, then I for one would have been much more disappointed in his attitude.
All just speculation though.
111 Posted 07/07/2010 at 23:25:56
112 Posted 07/07/2010 at 23:42:53
He is average at best and probaly will find his level when Newcastle get relegated back to where they belong. Fuck him.
113 Posted 07/07/2010 at 23:45:06
Perhaps this is what happened with Gosling's contract: Bill and Co got distracted thinking about whether humming birds make a buzzing noise or something.
With regards to why Dan was not offered a longer contract, it's something to do with a player under 21 not being able to sign a contract more than 3 years in length (according to what I've read elsewhere... certainly not professing to know much about this mess professionally) ? something which will surely be addressed once this debacle has been used as a high profile test case.
Until he has moved on, I am not going to vent anger at him. Regardless of personal perceived ability, he is (was) on our books. He's had a horrible injury which has left many a talented player looking away from playing professionally. We have paid for his rehabilitation thus far because of a mutually beneficial contract to both parties, and I'm as at much of a loss how this can be nullified unless again it is in the interests of parties involved.
Surely if the contract had been voided when the verbal offer had been made (does Wild Bill think he's in a Western ? "a man's word is his bond"?) then could we not charge him for the healthcare, lack of appearances in training given that any contract surrounding him would be to play/train etc? Whilst he would have holiday rights, surely he would have to earn time on his new unwritten "contract".
Anyway, this is all speculative on my part and I'm sure there's people far smarter than me looking into it... Maybe Bill's asked his milkman to have a glance over it as he doesn't want to waste money(!).
I'm just angry there's no official line, even if it's "we're aware of the situation... In communication with him and agent... Lawyers exploring options... etc". It's fucking stupid to remain dumb when every hack is republishing the same shit.
This is not a sudden story and they must have been able to have thought of several different ways in which to spin it, but as someone else wrote, all we get is a bit in What The Papers Say (with comments enabled?!) and news on how Neville is going to talk over some shit, as though he's the Pope...
Unless the fucker's been ordained, been smoking crack, or has suddenly developed Messi-esque skills, it would be nice to hear about things directly affecting our club.
114 Posted 08/07/2010 at 00:08:25
115 Posted 08/07/2010 at 00:17:36
116 Posted 08/07/2010 at 00:47:56
Don't forget that if in fact he was looking for £25k a week, that's not far off £1.5 million a year.
Had he wanted away (and been a little less conniving about it), £1.5 million would have more than likely been the fee we would have been able to get for him. So financially it's not too great a loss.
I would have liked to see him develop for at least a season more to see if he could find a way around his lack of pace, as he did seem a composed footballer. But alas he was always going to be outshone by Jack Rodwell (2 years younger) and Marouane Fellaini (2 years older) in his preferred position, at least in terms of the immediate future.
As has been stated previously, the biggest loss to the club is the embarrassment of having had their business incompetencies splashed all over the tabloids.
Hopefully a high profile case like this is what was needed to ensure our amateur board no longer take a footballer's word as his bond. Thankfully, at least this lesson has been learned with a Dan Gosling rather than a Wayne Rooney.
117 Posted 08/07/2010 at 07:08:32
1. Greedy players with zero loyalty ? despite the fact we've nursed him through injury and given him a start in the Prem, he's fucking off purely for his own ends. If he really wanted to go, he could have had the decency to let the club get some cash from him on the transfer market;
2. The fact that an 'average' footballer, and yes Dan Gosling you are a deeply average footballer, can earn £25k a week (whilst most clubs are on the verge of bankruptcy and a lot of the fans are facing pay freezes on average salaries of less than £25k a year... IF they've got a job);
3. That Footballers' rights are somehow higher than anyone else's in a court of law ? a verbal agreement surely has some weight?
4. Football agents. (Need I say more? They make estate agents look like angels.)
Ultimately our beloved game has been hijacked by people who's morality levels are a shade below the average banker or Eastern European pimp ? the Premier League and the football agents. For all those who say 'football is business now, get used to it', I have to say this: how many businesses do you know that have increased their income by a marked percentage every year for 10 years plus yet are making bigger losses and stacking up debts year on year?
The only ones winning are the players (and I think it's time that balance is redressed ? the earnings and behaviour of our PL 'stars' are both frankly obscene now and completely unjustifiable and unsustainable), the vile agents and the equally twisted creatures who run the Premier League and put their own personal profit above sport and the fans 8/10. This isn't a business ? it's a bloody casino!
Obviously it also yet again exemplifies a certain level of unprofessionalism under the current Everton administration (Moyes is excepted), so we can't put all the blame at the little mercenary's door; Kenwright, you have to take responsibility for this I'm afraid, you're in charge so you either need to step up or sack someone.
118 Posted 08/07/2010 at 07:31:51
Sorry to sound old fashioned but I have always believed in the principle of loyalty working both ways. Dan Gosling has shown precious little loyalty to the club that gave him a chance in the Premier League. If he is making comparisons between himself and Rodwell then he is being stupid. Let's see which one of them has the more successful career ? my money would be on Rodwell.
119 Posted 08/07/2010 at 08:04:27
He's 20, just done his knee and as we well know with JV, these years are critical in the progression of a young footballer. £4 Million, I seriously doubt that. He'll wind up in the Championship soon enough.
120 Posted 08/07/2010 at 08:24:00
121 Posted 08/07/2010 at 08:05:08
At present Dan Gosling is still listed as an Everton Player on the OS. John Ruddy isn't, which shows that they are keeping the site up to date. Therefore I am not going to assume that Dan has left until it is official either on the OS or in an interview with Dan himself on screen, not reported in a newspaper.
As for no reports from the club, they probably can't believe that people are taking this seriously, as many people have said he still has his original contract which he must honour, so if he wants to leave the club this summer it will cost the buyer, he can only leave on a free at the end of his contract.
122 Posted 08/07/2010 at 07:56:50
However reading the report in the Echo gets my spider senses tingling.
Specifically, certain sentences.
Blah blah "Dan Gosling is ready to leave Everton for nothing after he dragged (nb: dragged!) the club to a Premier League inquiry to prove he is a free agent".
Blah blah "wants to quit Goodison Park after delaying new contract talks".
Blah blah "..has enraged Goodison officials over his conduct during the acrimonious affair".
Blah blah "The Blues had wanted Gosling to sign a new deal, with a verbal offer believed to have been agreed, but a failure to put that in writing by the mid-May cut-off point meant he could walk out for free if he so chose"
Blah blah "..is thought to have deliberately stalled on a new deal because he wants first team football in his preferred central midfield position"
Blah blah "..It is understood Everton are aggrieved that Gosling has chosen this way to leave, after the club gave him his break in top-flight football and supported him to the half way point of his cruciate knee ligament rehabilitation".
Blah blah "..The scenario is a double blow for David Moyes, who has supported Gosling throughout his Goodison career and recent long term injury woes, and who would at least have been able to use a £4m fee to further his own summer transfer budget".
So there it is, the honourable Everton FC, fucked over by Dan Gosling (BOOOOO!!) purely for more money.
Except......this is the Echo and Kenwright is Kenwright.
To me, the tone of the article stinks of smoke-screen, smear tactics and bullshit.
"Problem? Let's muddy the water Everton style!"
I don't know what really happened, but these days, when I read a piece like this in the Echo, my first thought isn't "Gosling, what a greedy twat" it's "Everton have fucked up and now they're going to do ANYTHING to deflect the blame".
123 Posted 08/07/2010 at 09:00:57
Then you have the "wait and see" people, which I am probably with, although I am siding against Gosling a little, they wait until all the information is aired before shouting for someone's head. The interesting point for me is who actually called for the enquiry, there has been conflicting reports suggesting that Everton called for it to clarify the legal stance and others are staing that Gosling "dragged" Everton to one.
All bullshit until it is finalised. I won't lose too much sleep, if any, if he goes.
124 Posted 08/07/2010 at 09:26:29
125 Posted 08/07/2010 at 10:06:19
126 Posted 08/07/2010 at 10:21:12
I think he'll have a decent career; this will be a real coup for Newcastle, it's win-win for them... even if he doesn't win a regular first-team place, they can always flog him back to us for about £3 million next summer.
127 Posted 08/07/2010 at 10:31:31
128 Posted 08/07/2010 at 11:19:30
His highlights include a twice deflected "wonder" goal against the RedShite and a shinned goal against ManUre, both brilliant goals to us fans but can you remember a game where he has come on from the bench and actually changed the game? I can't.
129 Posted 08/07/2010 at 11:18:44
Absolutely not. Many people have said it all along. Maybe we'll get proven wrong but he's just never looked that special. If he wants to play central midfield then I can understand him leaving, because he's never going to be good enough to get into a midfield where Fellaini, Rodwell, Arteta, Osman and Cahill (and possibly even Bilyaletdinov) compete for places.
I'm puzzled over why he wants to leave. I said before he left that, just because he can leave doesn't mean he will, and was genuinely surprised when the news broke. He's injured, so where's he going to go, what's he going to do and who's going to want him?
The Sheff United lad is Kyle Naughton, he's a very good player and he didn't turn us down for Spurs, Sheff United refused him permission to talk to us because Spurs made a higher offer.
130 Posted 08/07/2010 at 12:02:54
He is obviously not in Australia. If he is still an Everton player then he would be at Finch Farm getting treatment.
If he is no longer a blue, I hope we have put the contents of his locker in to a skip and fucked him off. In which case, his rehabilitation is at a standstill which I am sure will make him less of an attraction to another club.
Mind you, he will get plenty of exercise running around all the clubs who are lining up to talk to him... not!!!
131 Posted 08/07/2010 at 12:11:44
Next we'll hear he's been shagging half the squad's birds and sending ridiculous naked texts!!!
132 Posted 08/07/2010 at 12:21:49
Thanks for the goals against the RS and Man Utd, Dan, but apart from that you won't be missed.
133 Posted 08/07/2010 at 12:29:10
Theoretically, Gosling could have been the best prospect since Maradonna and we could have lost him because of a monumental cock-up! The fact he is not that good is really not the point. The Club need to wake up.
134 Posted 08/07/2010 at 12:24:57
hy would any other team pay him a signing-on fee and wages during his time out injured without knowing if he'll actually return to playing? It's a hell of a gamble for a team like Newcastle when that money could be better spent on a better player or on a player of the same quality but not injured. Who the hell signs seriously injured players?
Something really doesn't sit right about this rather than it just being a clerical oversight. Is Gosling really that stupid that he doesn't realise the seriousness of his injury or are Everton just not arsed about him leaving?
135 Posted 08/07/2010 at 12:40:38
136 Posted 08/07/2010 at 12:42:04
a) Once Gosling saw the pink away strip he decided he was off.
b) As it was unlikely Gosling would play this season because of his injury and subsequent struggle for fitness, the Club weighed three things up.
How good is he.....no better than average.
How much will he earn while recuperating and not making a contribution....a lot (especially if we have to offer him more dosh for doing shit all)
What is the solution.....arrange a cock-up, break the rules, and with a bit of luck he'll fuck off. We'll get nothing for him anyway while he's injured.
So there you have it. Kenwright is not a dickhead, he has just saved the Club a fortune!
137 Posted 08/07/2010 at 12:51:29
I wonder how good his rehabilitation on the NHS will be. If he is gone, I wouldn't let him near Finch Farm treatment.
On second thoughts, give him Baz Rathbone's home number!!
138 Posted 08/07/2010 at 13:29:58
If Newcastle or West Ham want to offer a huge weekly wage for someone who probably won't be fit to play until the end of the year, then good luck to them, we all know how successful both those teams and the players who have done just that have been recently.
I hope that we use the money we were going to waste on Gosling wisely on either tying up existing players or putting it towards a decent package for a 'headline' signing this pre-season.
139 Posted 08/07/2010 at 13:46:07
140 Posted 08/07/2010 at 13:50:51
141 Posted 08/07/2010 at 13:50:09
Gosling signed a 3½-year contract in January 2008, therfore contracted to the club until June 2011. A club is prohibited from offering a player under the age of 20 a contract of more than this length.
Gosling is offered a 'verbal' contract extension, which he accepts, and a deadline of mid-May is agreed for having it in writing. (Who agreed this? Presumably his agent with the club?)
Mid-May passes, someone in Everton admin has made a cock-up and the agreed deadline is not met.
Therefore, Gosling remains an Everton player until the end of the 2011 season, as was agreed when putting his name on the dotted line in January 2008.
This story has not gone official on our website, and none of the daily rags are able to explain where this final year of his contract has disappeared to.
Gosling remains an Everton player, whole thing blown out of proportion.
142 Posted 08/07/2010 at 13:54:58
"An independent hearing, convened under Premier League Rules, was held last week to look into the contractual status of Dan Gosling,"
"Having looked into the matter, and considered the arguments of both Everton and the player, it was determined that the player is unattached and entitled to a free transfer.
"This is subject to a right of appeal by Everton which must be brought within 14 days of the decision."
So sure now Tom?
143 Posted 08/07/2010 at 13:58:39
We just show he still has 1 year left on his original contract and he is still our man.
Gosling and his agent can't play anything against that.
144 Posted 08/07/2010 at 13:56:33
145 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:01:16
It's a Fifa ruling apparently.
146 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:05:19
Looks like he fucked them over too.
147 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:00:53
148 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:01:24
Personally I reckon it may have become void when the new verbal one was agreed, but... then again, maybe not.
149 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:07:50
150 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:08:28
Once contract discussions are opened, the current contract IS NOT void. Where have you heard that from? You are telling me that when Man Utd started negotiating a new contract with Ronaldo in 2008 (a process which took them 2 months to complete), he was a 'free agent' during that time. Rubbish!
The 6 months still stands, hence why nothing on the OS as they are now going to show that in the appeal and Gosling stays until at least January. But I am presuming he will be sold anyway for how he has handled himself throughout this.
151 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:20:53
It's not right but that is what has happened. Either Gosling has been very clever or, as I believe, the agent, an ex-red, told him of the ruling and they acted.
152 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:18:22
If the verbal agreement occurred and his wage increased, acceptance can be inferred with Gosling accepting the extra pay.
Something not right about this story.
153 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:32:58
154 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:03:41
However, if it is true, Dan Gosling needs his head read and wants to change his agent pronto.
He's 20, has made 22 appearances for a "top 6" club who've not only illustrated that they give youth a fair crack of the whip with every chance also of international recognition if you make the grade.
He's crocked for another 4 months and has (reportedly) been offered a wage rise from £7k to £15k per week.
As far as 1st team football's concerned there's plenty of potential for him to make the right wing (or right back) berth his own. Is he just admitting he's not good enough for us?
And (this is without even getting started on loyalty) he's prepared to tear that up on the chance of getting a better deal somewhere else? If it is true, you've got to think that he's got assurances verbally from another club ? and, well, if it is true, can he really take the risk on a "verbal" agreement......?
He must be mental. I hope its all paper talk ? if it's not, then good riddance and good luck, he's going to need it.
If it is true and I was BK and he came up and said "you didn't put it in writing...." I'd just say "D'you know what? Just fuck off."
But ? like I say, let's wait for the official word.
155 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:33:19
156 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:36:43
No point cutting your nose off to spite your face is there.
157 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:41:51
You'll just have to wait and see. When you do, you'll see I am right.
I wish I wasn't though.
158 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:45:44
Yes, the last offer he accepted, and the club offered him the contract in a written form before the expiry date.
159 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:39:38
No contract has been made void. It has simply expired.
This is a royal balls up by the club for failing to send a contract extension before the deadline.
Gosling now has a chance to play regular football in the PL, so I fully understand his leaving.
160 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:50:16
How do you sign a verbal contract... IT'S VERBAL!
This is the club's fault, they missed the deadline for offereing a contract.
Why is he deluded?
Its not like he has said... "I'm signing for Man Utd or Real Madrid." That would be deluded. He is/wants to move to a smaller club so he can play regular football during a period of his career when playing is the most important part. What is deluded? I would actually call it realistic.
161 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:51:25
Stop making things up!
162 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:55:20
Finch Farm should be closed to him and he should be told to fuck off to the Royal in town and get on the waiting list for physio or give him BUPA's number.
163 Posted 08/07/2010 at 15:01:12
This is the crux of this argument. These 6 months will still stand, therefore, he will still be an Everton player come 14 days time when the appeal has to be heard.
164 Posted 08/07/2010 at 15:01:27
A verbal contract has no legal grounding... it's mearly a conversation. Otherwise everyone would say 'we agreed verablly' there is no way to prove or disprove it.
Agreement of a verbal contact means nothing... no contract is made void. The contract was made void due to details in previous contracts (that's the written kind, not the verbal kind).
165 Posted 08/07/2010 at 15:05:29
166 Posted 08/07/2010 at 15:05:35
From all the sources I have seen, it says 3 season... I do not have a copy of his contract at hand, so if you do then apologies, but, if it did have 6 months left to run, this wouldn't be happening, would it?
167 Posted 08/07/2010 at 14:56:19
By the way, on my Sky box the Shite channel is now free - I happened to spot it whilst flicking through the sports section a few weeks ago, and it is still free as of yesterday.
Now if this is not someone at HQ taking the piss (they might have seen my succession of paid Everton games from a few seasons back), this smacks of desperation by the Dark Side.
Has anyone else got this problem? I am going to have to ring Sky and tell them that, "I have a Shite problem with my Sky box."
168 Posted 08/07/2010 at 15:09:26
Ergo, 6 months remain. We offered him a two-year extension to this, verbally, which was not put in writing. Therefore, he is under no duty to accept this verbal agreement anymore. The appeal will then show that he has 6 months remaining which he has to fulfill. End of!
We don't want this getting to 200 really do we!!
169 Posted 08/07/2010 at 15:14:15
According to The Guardian his contract expired on June 30th.
170 Posted 08/07/2010 at 15:32:39
Why haven't the club or the player actually said anything yet?
171 Posted 08/07/2010 at 15:32:59
Don't say that to my tutor, he would have a heart attack and then proceed to give you a two-hour lecture confiming that you are in fact mistaken in that assumption.
172 Posted 08/07/2010 at 15:35:55
Gosling won't say anything for the same reason.
173 Posted 08/07/2010 at 15:41:19
174 Posted 08/07/2010 at 15:53:38
175 Posted 08/07/2010 at 15:56:29
176 Posted 08/07/2010 at 15:55:54
Yet another classless Premier League footballer and as someone, quite rightly, pointed out, he wouldn't have known about this legal loophole, he would've been informed by his agent.
So Dan (again, only if this is true), clear out your locker and fuck off. We currently have enough problems holding onto our good players without jumped-up wannabes, like you, believing your own hype.
Caveat ? I know it's his profession, I know he has a right to change employer... yadda yadda yadda, but each year I get more and more disillusioned by professional footballers, and now the likes of Dan Gosling are acting like prima donnas. What next.... a fucking revolt from the Under-16s?!?
177 Posted 08/07/2010 at 16:16:31
Is he moving to a smaller club to get first team football or a bigger club to warm the bench?
How is that believing the hype?
Yes, the agent will be looking at making a quick buck, but I don't hear anyone going beserk about Beckford rejecting Leeds United's last contract offer? I hear quite a few people suggesting we should go for Ledley as his contract is running out and a few others. Do you think that is immoral? Are they twats?
IMO, Gosling has probably looked at things since not extending his contract and thought, with my injury its unlikely I will play much this season, maybe the odd sub appearance and the odd league cup game, while the likes of Newcastle have stated their interest and said you'll play 20-30 games if you sign for us. He's looked at that and thought, yeah, that will be better... fair enough I think.
Newcastle are not going to give this lad £3 million and £30k a week, they're skint too, remember.
Someone at Goodison has dropped a bollock here; BK and Co will try and make Gosling look like scum to turn attention away from their poor management, but that is what we should focus on.
178 Posted 08/07/2010 at 16:32:08
If he wanted to leave, I believe, he should have stated that and his intentions to do so. Doing it this way leaves a bitter taste in many fans' mouths.
179 Posted 08/07/2010 at 16:20:40
Gosling isn't happy as a second string player. Understandable.
It seems other clubs might be prepared to offer him first team football. Understandable.
He's been made aware by his agent that because of this loop-hole, he can leave now and pocket what would have been the transfer fee, possibly a million or two. Understandable.
Everton fans feel hard done by because... Everton have been providing treatment for his injury sustained in a match for Everton, where he was asked to stay on the pitch and play on?
Apart from the loss of a mind numbingly average player, and the possible transfer fee we might have got for him, what's the big fuss?
In my view the player's done no wrong and someone at Everton in "legal" has had a bit of a shocker with contract law.
If this is this summer's disaster I don't think we could have wished for a better one.
180 Posted 08/07/2010 at 16:38:04
The bottom line is, if this is true, the club clearly thought they had an agreement with the player - the player seems to have "gone back on his word" and basically shat on them.
It stinks of his agent saying "you know what Danny... they've not backed it up in writing you know... I've just had West Ham on and they'll give you £500k up front and match the £15k..... what do you say... be mad to turn that down... there's no loyalty in football nowadays lad... EFC would shit on you before look at you twice if they didn't rate you.. but they do... becuase YOU'RE GOOD DANNY!!! YOU'RE BETTER THAN GOOD!!! YOU'RE BRILLIANT!!!! NOW LETS GET DOWN TO LONDON AND SHOW THEM WHAT YOUR MADE OF ? THATS IT DANNY GET YOUR BOOTS ON WE'RE LEAVING!!!!"
181 Posted 08/07/2010 at 16:32:12
It shouldn't come as any surprise ? the vilification of players who, for one reason another, fall out with the club, is a common theme going back through many cases where the same modus operandi has been employed ? a right pasting through the pages of the Echo. The Club seem to see it as their duty to set the fans against the player, as, of course, the club itself can do no wrong.
Just to cast a somewhat different light, I read this today:
The lad was hanging on for a contract. He kept telling Everton his contract was up, they insisted it had a year to go. He was right. He?s then been on weekly deals for months, they supposedly were going to give him an increase and if they had he would?ve signed, he likes it and wants to stay. In the end, they basically only offered him what he was on. Less than Vaughan or Anichebe.
The bit about weekly deals doesn't help very much, as I'm certain The Guardian is correct regarding his contract: it expired on 30 June 2010. That at least is one of the few facts about this bizarre case that makes any sense. Otherwise, if it was valid for another 6 months or a year, we simply would not be at this point here and now. (Tom Astley, PLEASE take note: normal contracts expire in June of each year; I believe the Echo was being typically lazy using the phrase 'three-year' to mean 'all or part of three years'.)
It's all really very sad. I would strongly suspect that Gosling and his agent have acted somewhat rashly, in large part out of frustration. And I cannot rule out the possibility that the club is being somewhat reticent given the player's injury and the apparent lack of any real need or desire to resolve his contract... even to the possible thought that there could be issues or concerns regarding the long-term prognosis over his full recovery.
Will Everton appeal? We've assumed they will, but the Premier League have already studied the case, taken testimony and given their verdict: why would that change? If a written contract was required by a certain date, but was not forthcoming from the Club, that is pretty clearcut.
As Fran says, the cock-up here is the administrative one that allowed this to happen. The pained language of the Echo piece merely underlines how hurt the club are for having their mistake shown up. Whether they are losing a great player or not in the process, we will not know for a number of years...
182 Posted 08/07/2010 at 16:52:25
183 Posted 08/07/2010 at 16:56:15
184 Posted 08/07/2010 at 16:36:01
"Also, Plymouth fans are outranged because this move has potenially cost them £1m and £250,000 was due in three games time.
Looks like he fucked them over too."
Hmmm...I did not realize Peter Reid had recently signed on as Argyle's manager.
Terrible news for The Pilgrims (the monumental cock up, not Reidy taking over) that quarter million soon due being not an insignificant amount for a League 1 side.
185 Posted 08/07/2010 at 17:03:45
186 Posted 08/07/2010 at 17:09:30
That is absolutely mind-boggling if true. Heads must roll.
187 Posted 08/07/2010 at 17:15:00
What a hoot. So the Shite fans are paying for Shite when the rest of us don't even want their Shite for free.
You clearly need an IQ somehwere up in the thirties to support that lot.
188 Posted 08/07/2010 at 17:39:55
You'll be glad to know I've started my remedial classes already ? I'm writing out longhand the Echo piece 50 times until I get it into my head:
Everton ? GOOD; Dan Gosling ? BAD
189 Posted 08/07/2010 at 17:41:43
I have had enough. I?ve decided to ring Sky and complain that my children could potentially get access to this disgusting channel and as a gesture of goodwill could they please replace it with some hard core pornography for free.
190 Posted 08/07/2010 at 16:52:58
Say the lad did indicate he would be willing to accept a new contract. He toddles off, duly expecting receipt of a written contract offer, as is surely standard practice. He then gets fucked up in the Wolves game and finds out he's got a really serious injury. Oh well, at least his new contract should be sorted soon and his future will be secure.
The weeks pass and no written offer is forthcoming. What the fuck's going on? What's the delay in putting the deal in writing? It's a simple procedure surely. The May deadline's fast approaching and things still aren't sorted. The club seemed pretty eager before. Are they now considering backing out because of the injury? Maybe they think I'm not going to recover properly and they don't want to be stuck with another lame duck like fat Yak.
Meanwhile, the agent's cogs start turning and it clicks that he can get both himself and his client a better deal elsewhere. Gosling's obviously not important to them because they can't even be arsed picking up a pen, for fuck's sake. Other clubs are then tipped off that Everton haven't bothered to put his contract offer in writing and as such Gosling could be available on a free. After they stop pissing themselves laughing, the other clubs indicate they would be very interested in these circumstances.
Everton eventually hear about this, realise they will now lose out on a much needed transfer fee, and say "Woah, wait on a minute, you can't do that. We mentioned a new contract months ago didn't we? It surely doesn't matter that we never put forward a formal written offer. Does it? Does it really? "We've done it before you know and it's always turned out alright in the past. C'mon Dan, be reasonable, you know uncle Bill was gonna sort you out in the end. You know what I'm like... I'd forget my head if it wasn't screwed on. "Bollocks, I've done it again, haven't I? Why do things like this always happen to me?"
191 Posted 08/07/2010 at 17:57:39
192 Posted 08/07/2010 at 17:08:01
It's early 2010. Your contract is running out and has less than 6 months left. You've informed the club of this on several occasions but they are, which is standard Everton procedure, incredibly slow when it comes to transfer/contract matters.
As the season draws to a close, you suffer a serious knee injury. It's a big blow to you and you're really down and depressed. Getting back playing will require lots of hard work and a long rehabilitation. You probably won't be back on the pitch until the end of the year, at best.
Finally, a boost as the club eventually put forward a verbal offer, which you happily accept. However, the club never gets back to you with a written contract offer, so in the end there's nothing for you to sign. A rollercoster of emotions and you feel even more down and are starting to feel unwanted at the club ? Why won't they re-new your contract?
A few months later your contract inevitably expires and all of a sudden you've become a free agent. What on earth to do? You've not asked for this at all. All you wanted to do was get your new contract sorted and focussing on overcoming your injury. Instead, you find yourself crocked and without a club. You're in a bit of a shock.
Then, what if you logged onto ToffeeWeb or other similar fans' websites and read all the bile, abuse and nasty comments about you. What then? Would you even want to stay at Everton after that? Or would you look elsewhere?
193 Posted 08/07/2010 at 18:10:04
As for the questionable mental and psychological state of Dan Gosling, whom I described using the term 'deluded' ? the lad is out injured my friend and shall be out injured for a considerable amount of time. Who, one may ask, should want to sign a crocked player, pay him an obscene amount of money in relation to his talent & also pay for his rehabilitation while he sits on his arse for how long?? Realism eh???
194 Posted 08/07/2010 at 18:45:06
Unfortunately it might seem that this affair highlights just how badly run the club is. Time for a regime change. If we can't get someone with money perhaps we could get someone with a semblance of a brain.
195 Posted 08/07/2010 at 19:13:55
Apologies for being a pedant, but you know some people think no actual contracts existing to sign is important. But hey, guess we're not all so pedantic.
196 Posted 08/07/2010 at 19:51:42
My theory (135) was tongue-in-cheek for the most part but it occurs to me that perhaps there really is a case for believing that Everton did not want to offer Gosling a new contract. That left the possibility of telling a young player, crocked while playing for the club and out of action long term, that it didn't wish to employ him any longer.
That would have been untenable and the club would have been rightly villified. The other option is to appear temporarily stupid... but that doesn't taint the same as being evil, does it?
I have a strong suspicion, the more I think about it, that the club wanted rid and that the least damaging option was to suffer a brief period of looking incompetent. Everything else is just going through the motions to look as good as possible, including an appeal I am sure the club knows it can't win.
197 Posted 08/07/2010 at 20:31:30
This simply isn't true.
Here is a direct quote from a number of legal websites regarding unwritten contracts:
"There is always a contract between an employee and employer. You may not have anything in writing, but a contract will still exist. This is because your agreement to work for your employer and your employer?s agreement to pay you for your work forms a contract."
There are 3 issues when deciding whether a contract has been formed whether it be written or verbal. Offer, acceptance and consideration. The acceptance must also mirror the offer. i.e. "I will pay you £10 grand a week"; "I accept £10 grand a week" is offer and acceptance. "I will pay you £10 grand a week"; "I accept £15 grand a week" is not.
It appears from the "facts" in this case that the offer was made by Everton and the acceptance was made by Gosling. The question is whether Everton then started paying Gosling the agreed amount under this new contract, as this would mean that there had also been consideration, thus making the contract complete, regardless of whether it was written down or not.
Knowing Everton, I suspect the answer is No!
198 Posted 08/07/2010 at 21:07:08
The poor guy is only offered £15k a week, he's injured, he's only 20 years of age, he's a non regular in the first team... poor sod!!
How long will it take the average person to earn that sort of money?
I'm afraid my appetite for the Premier League has dwindled an awful lot during this World Cup.
199 Posted 08/07/2010 at 21:23:40
Among the list of newbies was one Ross Barkley and, by the time Gosling has recovered from his injury, Ross will have taken his place in the squad.
200 Posted 08/07/2010 at 21:43:24
(Sorry for now turning this into a 200 post-thread!)
201 Posted 08/07/2010 at 21:40:50
(Note to Ed: his contract expires in June 2012 according to the TW players' page).
202 Posted 08/07/2010 at 21:48:25
Gosling was to sign a "three year contract" (two and a half year term expiring in the summer of 2010) for Premier League team Everton
I've seen nothing to refute that (other than what we have on our pages... but I've no idea where that came from!)
Seems the main story is consolidating into one strand, summed up here externally by Jonathan Ellis at The Transfer Tavern. The mystifying part remains the role his current injury may play in him being a free agent.
203 Posted 09/07/2010 at 00:01:08
I imagine the scenario went something like this; Club offer new deal, never get it in writing. Agent smells a pay-day, starts telling Gosling he could double his wage, get a huge signing-on fee, and of course inflates his ego :"You should be starting, in your preferred position in the centre. You're better and worth more than Rodwell, Fellaini, Arteta, Cahill and Pienaar put together". Gosling and agent then go to Premier League and (no surprise from that bunch of Everton hating idiots) he's given his free transfer.
So he can't have signed for Newcastle or West Ham or whoever yet, but I guess his agent has sounded them out and has got some agreements in principle, high wages, promises of first-team action etc...
Of course, now that he has no club, is out for at least 3 more months with a serious injury which may take double that time to recover from... he's not in the strongest bargaining position.
I know it sounds bitter, but wouldn't it be a bit of justice if the Barcodes or Hammers turned round and said, "Oh you know that promise of £25k pw, £1m signing fee and guaranteed first team place... well, we didn't offer it in writing, so I'm afraid we're going to have to have another look. How about £8k, no signing fee, and you don't get paid until you're fit?"
Be nice if what went around came around.
204 Posted 09/07/2010 at 01:29:11
From what I remember of the conversation, I said "I wouldn't like to cross David Moyes" (which is what he must have just done); he then said to me nervously "Yea... but he's not very approachable." But he still spoke about Everton as if they were still his team, he said "We actually have a really good side now."
We chatted about the World Cup, England and what a shambles it was, and I said "I bet there's no Bigtime Charlies at Everton with Moyes around" ... and, after a nervous cringe-like laugh, he said "No, none of them."
We wished each other luck, shook hands and I said "Hopefully you'll get more first team football next season", which will probably be the case... but unfortunately with another club.
It's a shame, i personally rated him quite highly as a potential talent coming through. I think over the next 5 years we will see him develop into a player something like a Barry or Parker, maybe even a Lampard type player.
205 Posted 09/07/2010 at 02:12:28
"I think over the next 5 years we will see him develop into a player something like a Barry or Parker, maybe even a Lampard type player".
Are they serving magic mushrooms now at Euston station? Now as much as I can understand those who feel he might develop into a good player, those sort of comparisons are, ahem, wide of the mark.
Sounds from what you are saying that he was so happy with the tribunal's outcome that he brought the bleeding sofa and chairs with him as a souvenir!
David Moyes 'not very approachable'? "Och aye, Danny. Ah didnae 'no' ye wanted more dough."
206 Posted 09/07/2010 at 05:12:51
Then along came Newcastle...
There is a reason why Danny wasn't getting very much first-team action. He wasn't very good. One goal does not a good player make. Not bothered losing him, just a bit upset that we could have got a rumoured £4million for him. Having said that, what club are stupid enough to pay that sort of money for an average at best, slow.... hold on a minute...
207 Posted 09/07/2010 at 06:10:15
208 Posted 09/07/2010 at 08:58:23
If only Newcastle, for example, wants to take him off the dole queue, why would they want to pay him this fee? Surely all they would have to do is offer him a "paltry" £20k+ per week and say, "Take it or leave it, son!" Why would they offer him a one-off multi-million-pound gift if no-one else is prepared to bid for him?
209 Posted 09/07/2010 at 09:29:43
210 Posted 09/07/2010 at 09:45:26
Perhaps a pink away shirt signed by Dan himself!
211 Posted 09/07/2010 at 10:13:51
So Gosling should watch out as Geordies are also capable of making "unsubstantiated" verbal offers!
Incidentally the nickname that I was given by my colleagues was "Billy Bingham" (our manager at the time), so that gives you an indication that it didnt happen recently! They were also very proud of the fact that we had a Geordie goalie on our books (David Lawson?).
212 Posted 09/07/2010 at 10:38:58
213 Posted 09/07/2010 at 10:52:52
Yeah, I'm running a bit short on baby nappies for my youngest one, so it would come in handy right now. ;-)
214 Posted 09/07/2010 at 11:22:55
215 Posted 09/07/2010 at 12:09:32
216 Posted 09/07/2010 at 12:43:38
217 Posted 09/07/2010 at 12:59:00
I have read people on here comparing Rodwell to Beckenbauer. I have read many people write off Fellaini. I think my comparrison is less outrageous.
If you think about it Barry was playing left back up untill a couple of season ago. He was hardly pulling up trees. Now all of a sudden in his late 20's he is an automatic starter for the England team, so important to the team that the manager took him to South Africa injured. Barry is also very slow like Gosling, you must have seen Orzil leave him for dead the other week? Lampard also didnt make a name for himself and become an international untill his mid 20's when he went to Chelsea
Gosling is still very young with lots of time to improve, he has shown me enough to believe he has what it takes even though it is clear his best position is not at full back. Although i do believe the best chance he had to reach his full potential would have been at Everton under David Moyes.
218 Posted 09/07/2010 at 14:22:51
Agree with you about Barry. But I just can't see Gosling, despite his potential which as you say has been developed by DM, ever being like Parker or Lampard. Love him or loathe him (especially as turned us down once), Parker is a real tigerish type of player, closing opponents down and having a big influence on his own side's play. And further up the pitch, Lampard has a goal scoring record to match any midfielder. Gosling does not have a great first touch and seems to make wrong decisions quite a lot when in possession.
I think we can agree though that he probably won't turn out to be as good as he would have been under Moyes's tutelage.
219 Posted 09/07/2010 at 15:59:39
Gosling might argue that Moyes will not get the best out of him by playing him out of position but a lot of players develop in unfamiliar positions untill the time is right for them to move to their prefered position.
At 19 Schweinsteiger used to play on the right and now he is playing in the centre and one of the star players at a World Cup. Arteta was played on the right to begin with and now he is one of the best players in the league in that position. Gosling should have been more patient and, if he wanted to play more games, why not ask to go on loan? I think he has made a huge mistake and will regret it over the next few years.
220 Posted 09/07/2010 at 17:18:08
"I have another season to go on my contract and have been offered a two-year extension. Everything seems fine with it and it's just a question of when I do sign it."
"This is a top-five club in the Premier League and there's no other club where I'd rather be. This is a great place for young players. It's harder at the top four clubs, with all their money, because they tend to just go out and buy the top foreign players.
"Here the gaffer gives you a chance and I'm very grateful for that. With the squad size and money here, he has to look at youth and the lads who have come through have done him proud. That was certainly a major factor in coming here because I knew I would get a chance, and I have".
I'm very grateful for that? Bullshit; unloyal prick.
221 Posted 09/07/2010 at 17:32:45
"I have another season to go on my contract and have been offered a two-year extension".
So Gosling himself said that his contract expired this summer.
Yet Tom Astley (#216) is still telling us that the expiry date is June 2011.
Which is it? On what basis are you sticking to June 2011 Tom, even though all the evidence now points to an expiry date of June 2010, including from the man himself?
222 Posted 09/07/2010 at 19:12:45
223 Posted 10/07/2010 at 01:37:10
And as I've already said, the lose usage of "three years" in the Echo does not cut it I'm afraid. Is it just your conviction that it expires on January 2011 or do you have some evidence you can put before us?
And how do you explain the player's own belief that his contract ended in June 2010?
Ponder this: how else could he now be a free agent?
224 Posted 10/07/2010 at 11:22:32
225 Posted 10/07/2010 at 23:25:09
226 Posted 11/07/2010 at 18:36:20
Ian (#225), I would imagine that the Club is remaining true to their side of the story, that they have not surrendered the player's registration, and that the matter is still pending an appeal. So the normal thing would be to say nothing, admit nothing, until it is resolved.
So... when's the appeal?
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment to the MailBag, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and MailBag submissions across the site.