New deal for Ross Barkley after Christmas

The consensus rumor is that Barkley will get a significant raise and an additional year added to his current contract, which still has more than two years to run. According to John Percy of the Telegraph, the objective is to "deter any potential interest from clubs in the summer."

That hardly seems likely. Any clubs in for a 20-year-old England international would expect to pay a high price for him, no matter the contract. Seems more likely that the idea is to deter Barkley's interest in departing... which makes it a wise move indeed for Martinez, since Ross is destined to be the face of our club for a decade or more if he stays.

Hope it happens.

As I have said a million times, Do what Spanish and Portuguese clubs do, load in a absurdly large release clause.

Its one of the few ways in which clubs like us, can spike the belly of the appalling, "if you cant beat them buy them" trend of the modern game.

Jean Marc Bosman – If I ever happen to bump into that guy I am going to smack him one.

"As I have said a million times, Do what Spanish and Portuguese clubs do, load in a absurdly large release clause."

A release clause does nothing to prevent a player leaving for less. There seems to be a huge misconception (also peddled by the tabloids) that thinks release clause = sale fee. It’s untrue. A release clause can be 80 million, but that player can still leave for 10.

In Spain it is a rule, to not break workers laws, a player must have a release clause in the contract. In the UK this is not the case, so the only reason to have one would be at the players insistance.

As regards to the Barkley contract, get him signed up for as long as possible.

Steven, if you put an absurdly large release clause into the contract, then is it not most likely that his agent will make him refuse to sign it? Those clubs that do put huge release clauses into players contracts, have to pay 100K-200K a week for the privilege. Which is why we have never been able to stop big clubs snapping up our players via the release clause route.

I think Ross genuinely loves the club, unlike a certain little fatty from Crocky who jumped ship faster than a randy docker.

I don't expect him to start causing trouble or getting his head turned by so-called richer clubs.

"...jumped ship faster than a randy docker."

Colin, that's a beauty. Can I license the US rights to it?

Cheers Dan. Hmm Interesting. Where will his agent, Moyes jnr, fit into all this?

Kinda mad to think that a footballer who is earning tons of cash needs to be rewarded with more cash, but, he's a goodun and I don't begrudge him a pay rise. Notice zero mention of Baines, he's deffo on his way.

Fran #935
you do make a fair point in terms of their effect being limited, and I do know that they are not a silver bullet, but at least they can partially shield your players from an approach, they can at least enable you to be a bit more legally stubborn - they are no substitute for not letting a star player go into their final year, but every little helps.

Dan #940
I don't know for certain , but I'm sceptical to you suggestion that a large release clause puts 100K-200K o the bill, because looking at some of the clubs that have done it, they are clubs that clearly cant afford to splash out too much (mid level La leiga teams are what I have in mind)

Steven #933 :Do what Spanish and Portuguese clubs do, load in a absurdly large release clause"

Don't you know that release clauses are for the benefit of the player not the club????

(Note to LL, you've omitted the sarcasm font from the bottom of this comment box)

Would prefer more than just a one year extension tbh. Get him to sign another 5 year deal.

Better to have no release clause at all. He will leave one day anyway so let's have him for at least another 3-4 years.

Eric #933
if it's for a low amount, it favours the player; but if it's a high amount, it favours the club.

I know Steven, it's not me you have to convince.

Eric #597
Maybe some misunderstanding.