Baines: Transfer window was difficult for Stones

by | 09/09/2015  103 Comments  [Jump to last]

Baines said of his Everton team-mate, Stones: "It's dragged on for such a long time and he'll be happy now to see the end of it."
Describing the media scrum surrounding Chelsea's pursuit of his young team-mate last month as "relentless", Leighton Baines says that John Stones has had plenty of support from within Everton to help him through what was a novel situation for the 21-year-old.

Stones was publicly courted by the reigning Champions over the last month of the window and then, when three bids for his services were knocked back by the Goodison Board, he submitted an official transfer request a week before the transfer deadline.

That request was denied by the Blues who were determined to keep hold of Stones this summer and the window closed without further overtures from Stamford Bridge to lure him away.

Baines, who went through a similarly media-driven transfer saga in 2013 when ex-boss David Moyes tried to lure him to Manchester United on the cheap, has sympathy with Stones and says that it's up to the young defender to now pick himself up and move on.

"It has been relentless, particularly for John, Baines told "Seeing him first-hand on a daily basis, it's been difficult for him to deal with. He's still a young lad.

"It's dragged on for such a long time and he'll be happy now to see the end of it.

"John knows how to play football. He's being doing it all his life, but he hasn't had to cope with situations like this before.

"It's John who has to pick himself up now, dust himself down and move forward, and we've supported him all the way through it as a club and inside the dressing room.

"I think there's a misconception sometimes – people think that when a footballer hands in a transfer request they do it and go off and play a game of golf or whatever.

"But it's actually been such a tough thing and, as a young lad, you do lean on other people a bit more for advice at these times."

The 30-year-old England international also concurred with manager Roberto Maritnez's views on the timing of the transfer deadline which feel a week deeper into the Premier League season this year to accommodate an earlier finish next May ahead of the European Championship Finals next June.

"[T]he window shouldn't be open [during the season] and I think pretty much everyone in football would agree with that," Baines continued.

"It's just a source of entertainment for people on the outside now and it doesn't help anybody in the game. We've seen it first-hand with John and we're just glad the club took the stance they did and we've been able to keep him."  

Reader Comments (103)

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

Darryl Ritchie
1 Posted 09/09/2015 at 07:40:36
From what I've been reading; same again in January. According to some accounts, Stones, Coleman and Barkley are all gone in the new year. Goodison definitely has a target painted on it by a lot pundits. It's like they're pissed off their predications didn't pan out in the summer and they're taking it personally.

We don't historically do much buying or selling in the January window, so it will be interesting to see how the board handles it, if it does happen.

Liam Reilly
2 Posted 09/09/2015 at 08:48:14
I think a lot of that will depend on where we sit in the League and progress in the League Cup, Darryl.

If we are just treading water, the players will want to leave for better opportunities and to ensure that they are picked for the Euros.

That's hard to argue with.

Eddie Dunn
3 Posted 09/09/2015 at 08:56:10
Money is the corrupting factor here. The Premier League brand is all-important, and is propped-up by Sky, BT , TalkSport and all of the pundits thus employed. They see their own future depending on the prospects of their big teams and so try to influence anything they can to facilitate the status quo.

The sad thing is, that John Stones did put in a transfer request. Whatever spin our club (and good servants like Baines) put on it, he made up his mind to go, so presumably he will leave before too long, as long as we have defensive cover lined-up, or if Jose has a meltdown and Chelsea no longer look so attractive.

What we are now seeing is an attempt to get the fans onside. Give us a break, please. He wanted to jump into that snake pit and we refused to let him. I don't want to hear how terrible it was for poor lickle Stonesy. Get on with the season. I will forgive John when I see him clatter Costa and plant a header past Courtois.

Dave Pritchard
4 Posted 09/09/2015 at 09:26:13
I do worry a little about how Stones will perform on Saturday. It certainly will be a test of his character. Chelsea will no doubt have a plan to unsettle him as well as testing out whoever plays at left back. With their shaky start I hope that it is more a case of us getting in their faces and putting them under pressure.
Tony McNulty
5 Posted 09/09/2015 at 09:30:03
This has all been a terrible mistake. Chelsea actually made an offer for "drones." And money can't buy them.
Matt Traynor
6 Posted 09/09/2015 at 09:33:50
Liam #2, Darryl mentioned buying as well as selling. In Martinez's first season (and more than one of Moyes's 11 before) we were still in with a realistic shout of top 4 at the half-way point, and yet nothing significant was done in the January window (McGeady aside).
Peter Morris
7 Posted 09/09/2015 at 09:35:35
The obvious and stark difference between the situation of Baines and the situation of Stones is that, despite a period of equally frantic lobbying from the press, the former kept his dignity and did not submit a transfer request.

So my view is that Stones must live with the consequences of his actions. I feel no sympathy for him whatsoever. Indeed, I would be surprised if he expected any from Everton supporters. This article is merely an attempt by the club and it's PR advisors to send a message of togetherness and unity. Fair enough.

The pinch point of Saturday's confrontation with Chelsea aside, it is reasonable for us to expect the dust to settle, until perhaps the pre-Christmas run-in at least, when the frantic lobbying will start again no doubt. Stones could curtail it all of course, by withdrawing the transfer request, but I won't hold my breath.

Sam Hoare
9 Posted 09/09/2015 at 10:11:26
It's not a conspiracy against Everton so let's not take it personally. Transfer rumours work. They sell. I nearly always open any article I can find linking Everton with the next Macedonian wunderkid.

The big clubs have the most fans and media outlets know that they will get the clicks they want by peddling stories about these clubs buying up X and Y. Man U were supposedly buying about 50 different players this Summer!

The gossip about our best players being bought will never stop and it's up to them to rise above it and play or if they are incapable or unwilling to do that then for us to get the best result out if we can.

I've said before that I think it's highly unlikely that more than two of Stones, Barkley, McCarthy, Lukaku, Deulofeu and Coleman will still be here in 3 years time and we will have some big transfer revenue coming in that the club will have to work out how best to use....

Michael Polley
10 Posted 09/09/2015 at 10:13:11
I don't suspect he will go in January, but holding onto him next summer could prove a bit optismistic.
Rob Hooton
11 Posted 09/09/2015 at 12:15:32
The summer transfer window was tough for us Evertonians too!

Let's cheer John and the lads to the rafters and get a win against Chelski that will get that whining prick Mourinho closer to the exit door.


Tony J Williams
12 Posted 09/09/2015 at 12:44:21
He will be gone next year without doubt. Mori will take his place and Jags will go back to his preferred side on the right.

I felt for him for a millisecond and then thought that he earns more in a week that I do in a year and as stated above, no matter how bad the media flurry got, Baines did not submit a transfer request.

(Possibly because he wouldn't buy into the board's plan of making every player leaving the bad guy... taps nose conspiratorially.)

Drew Shortis
14 Posted 09/09/2015 at 13:25:16
Like Baines said, John is a young lad and was under massive pressure. He kept his mouth shut throughout the saga and didn't do a Sterling. He's not an Everton supporter and it is only natural that, when the Champions make a bid and everyone in the media is saying he should go, he would be tempted.

I think the pressure built so much that he felt he had to make a decision and hand in a request. The club quite rightly turned it down and he accepted their decision. No sulking, no drop in form, he just got on with things. I have a lot of respect for him because of that. Anyone holding a grudge because of the request (not demand) is extremely immature, in my opinion.

He's just played for England again and has a very good chance of being in the starting lineup for the Euros. I don't think we will sell in January, but next summer will depend very much on how we do on the field this season.

Mark Boulle
15 Posted 09/09/2015 at 13:44:14
Good point, Peter Morris #7. Amidst all the furore of us refusing to allow him to leave, the fact remains he submitted a transfer request which presumably hasn't gone away. I don't suppose footballers limit these things by time such that it was only valid until the end of the summer transfer window! Maybe he has privately done so now that our stance is clear and his opportunity to leave has gone for the next few months.

I have always sort of wondered how these things work in real terms – it would be fascinating to be a fly on the wall in the office of a Premier League manager around transfer deadline day, especially when a saga like this happens!

Nev Renshaw
16 Posted 09/09/2015 at 14:04:21
I agree with Drew (#11). The pressure must have been tremendous on the lad, and his head was turned by Chelski. He's not sulked about it and got on with learning his trade with our beautiful club.

It's now up to the board to do their bit and release funds and prove they mean business by building a team around the likes of Stones, Barkley, Lukaku etc and get us back to whence we were, one of the best teams in the league. COYB.

Jay Harris
17 Posted 09/09/2015 at 14:06:54
There are big differences here.

Bainsey is older and an Evertonian and probably more capable of "handling" his agent.

Stonesy would have been under intense pressure from his money-grabbing agent telling him his international career would be enhanced. He will never get another chance like this, you don't turn a club like Chelsea down, etc etc.

IMO, the law should be changed that agents cannot take a cut of any transfer fee and that they submit an invoice for services to the player on an ongoing basis for representation and advice.

Why should the clubs pay a huge fee for these parasites to hawk their players off to other clubs?

Harold Matthews
18 Posted 09/09/2015 at 14:06:57
Can't remember the last time Stones had a good game and our defence looked safe. We kept a clean sheet against Spurs but they had more than 20 shots and Howard's legs saved the day. Of course, Stones wasn't helped by Coleman being completely mesmerized by Chadli's step-overs. One of the worst right back "refuse to close down" defensive displays I've ever witnessed.

So that's how it is with me right now. Never mind January, next year or whenever. I want him out of his daze and back to his best. The Chelsea game will be a big test but we know he has the ability to cope. All eyes will be on him. Fingers crossed he does well.

Frank Crewe
19 Posted 09/09/2015 at 14:11:35
Agree with Baines. The winter and summer transfer windows have become an entertainment. Sky Sports have built an entire programme around the final day that is nothing more than twelve hours of relentless speculation, repetition, and pointless blather from a host of has-beens and never-weres.

Transfer hype appears to have become an industry of its own. As soon as one window shuts, the media speculation starts about the next one. The nearer we get to January, the more the rumours regarding Stones and who knows who else will get more hyped up. Every red top and internet rumour site will feed off each other claiming "exclusives" that are just made up and transfers that are never going to happen.

There should only be one window in the summer. No January window at all. Give everyone a chance to calm down. Let's see them keep up the transfer prattle if they had to wait the best part of a year between each window.

Peter Cummings
20 Posted 09/09/2015 at 14:24:00
It's hard to feel sympathy for a player who, despite owing everything to the club and the fans who have nurtured and helped him on his way to potential millionaire status and a guaranteed International future, can decide none of it matters when the big bucks are dangled.

But then. as we all well know at Goodison from past events, this is now par for the course. Shrek, Lescott, Gosling are just a few examples who have flown the coop, but never for the money to hear them talk, just medals and trophies.

I firmly believe that it was only pressure and protest from our long suffering fans that decided the board and BK from making a deal with the most detestable piece of garbage in the Premier League. Unfortunately this is not the end of the matter unless EFC can turn us into real contenders for European 'honours' and to do this we must keep our best an brightest.

Alan Bodell
21 Posted 09/09/2015 at 15:19:56
The lad has handled stuff so well at his young age... probably no thanks to his greedy agent (Bosman and agents are the scourge of any football decency).

If John does leave us then I pray to the gods it is not to Chelski; preferably to the other money team that will piss of Chelsea and Man Utd, who it's been said he was a supporter of, but we want £40M+.

Oliver Molloy
22 Posted 09/09/2015 at 15:38:17
Sam @8
If we get a decent offer for McCarthy I hope we take it.
His first season was decent,but he has gone backwards in my opinion.
He was awful for Ireland in both games and his "engine" seems to slowing down also

We should call him " sideways " for that is all he seems to be able to see !
John Stones will of course leave,it is only a matter of when.

James Marshall
23 Posted 09/09/2015 at 15:44:05
To all the people who complain about players earning more than they do in a year, what does that really have to do with anything? You lap up the Premier League, you watch it, live it, breath it, and love it. You go to the games, you buy the shirts, the lot - yet you suddenly turn on players purely because they earn a lot of money?

I fail to see any logic.

You want the product, but you don't want the protagonists to reap the rewards? Would you prefer them to be old cloth capped pros riding to the stadium on their bikes, or maybe driving an old Ford Mondeo like yours?

Reality check required. Money doesn't have anything to do with whether John Stones was tapped up, unsettled, had his head turned or whatever other bullshit term you want to put to the situation - the kid was clearly given bad advice, and genuinely upset by the whole affair yet you think he should just get over it because he earns more money than you ever will?

He has talent, and he's worked hard since he was a child to get to where he is today - what did you do from childhood until now to make that happen for you? Nothing. Like the rest of us you probably dicked about at school, or went to University and smoked dope & drank beer, discovered girls, then discovered pubs and larked about while John Stones was doing none of that and working his arse off to become a highly paid professional footballer at the club you love - yet you turn on him when he's had his head messed with. I feel nothing but sympathy for the kid to be honest.

I suddenly find myself feeling quite angry on this thread, which is weird because I'd started to fee much better about the Stones thing lately.

He has my full support anyway, for what it's worth.

Sorry, I'll shut up now.

Dave Pritchard
24 Posted 09/09/2015 at 16:06:34
I see many comments that Stones received bad advice. This may have happened, I don't know. Question for those saying this - how do you know?
James Marshall
25 Posted 09/09/2015 at 16:17:48
Dave, the club had already stated he wasn't going to be sold = bad advice.

Net result - he wasn't sold = bad advice.

Do you think John Stones made the decision all on his own? Do you think he has an agent? Maybe some other advisors who saw pound signs?

Do you think he was well advised to make a transfer request, given that Everton had stated on a number of occasions prior to that, that he would not be sold?

Dave Pritchard
26 Posted 09/09/2015 at 16:37:02
James, it is highly likely that he received advice, good or bad, from his agent/family. My point is that it is all surmising unless you are directly involved with Stones' personal circumstances.
James Marshall
27 Posted 09/09/2015 at 16:42:35
But Everton had already stated he wasn't going to be sold, and so it transpired, he wasn't sold. Now the fanbase is divided on him as a player and as a person = bad advice, no?

How on any level was it good advice, given the club's public standpoint at the time, and subsequently keeping the player?

I haven't heard, seen, read anywhere that anyone thinks he was well advised to hand in a transfer request - aside from Paul Merson who one would imagine still has trouble tying his own shoelaces.

Mike Gaynes
28 Posted 09/09/2015 at 16:45:02
We have no idea where Stones was getting his advice, but given his age I'd guess his parents, agent and previous coaches were all providing input -- not to mention his current teammates. If Roberto is correct that Stones himself didn't want to put in the transfer request, then the advice to do so could have come from any or all of those sources.

But I'm with the majority here in supporting the lad, and I'm convinced he'll do just fine this season now that the transfer insanity has ebbed for the moment. One thing Stones has never lacked is confidence. And when he has a bad game from time to time, I'll chalk it up to his being 21 and in his first full season as a starter. Not the Chelski crap.

Dave Pritchard
30 Posted 09/09/2015 at 16:56:22
I too will support Stones while he is an Everton player and is giving his best for the club.
Rahul Sreekumar
31 Posted 09/09/2015 at 17:04:46
Who amongst us here was making only 'good' decisions at 21?
Give the kid a break.

That said, I really hope he nets one against Chelsea & spits on Mourinho as part of the celebration!

Paul Newton
32 Posted 09/09/2015 at 17:24:56
Surely Stones could have stopped all the nonsense quickly and easily. All he had to say was 'I am an Everton player and I have a long contract. I have no intention whatever of leaving this club'. That is, if he really wanted to stay.
James Hughes
33 Posted 09/09/2015 at 18:00:45
Peter C - don't talk bollocks,

Stones has been with us for just over two years and played less than 50 games- BUT he owes the club and the fans everything?? Big leap in your thought process mate.

We BOUGHT HIM with the hope he would turn into a player just like lots of other players, don't know how the fans help in his development. Unless you count the people calling the team 'fucking useless' every time they misplace a pass as encouragement. That lad and the rest of them are honing their skills just to shut up the muppet in Row G who abuses them all game long.

Now I am in full on defence mode, the lad is just 21 and having too much pressure put on him.

Yes, he now plays regularly for the mighty Blues and is playing for England,

Yes, he seems to be getting better each game.

Yes, he is hot property

No, as a group of supporters, fans, in my case obsessive idiot, should we give them grief if they want to leave. With the exception of Nick Barmby, as we definitely put him back on the radar and then announces he was always a RS, He still deserves MAJOR GRIEF

You redeem yourself by saying we shouldn't deal with the west London club and they deserve a warm welcome on Saturday.

Jon Cox
34 Posted 09/09/2015 at 19:17:47
Frank (17)

"Transfer hype appears to have become an industry of its own. As soon as one window shuts, the media speculation starts about the next one. The nearer we get to January, the more the rumours regarding Stones and who knows who else will get more hyped up. Every red top and internet rumour site will feed off each other claiming "exclusives" that are just made up and transfers that are never going to happen."

Wouldn't it be nice ("to get on wiv me neighbours...") come Jan, to start rumors about journo hacks being head hunted by rival newspapers.

Can you imagine it? Not only that radio and tv twats could have the same scenario.

Machiavellian? You bet your arse!!

ps: Couldn't resist a tribute to a great band. One of Englands finest.

Alan Bodell
35 Posted 09/09/2015 at 20:03:06
Last night on the England game (which I only ever bother to watch is when our players are involved) the ITV commentator said he reckoned the home support would give it a large rendition of the Beatles song on Saturday more than a few times.

Maureen will soak it up though, he is so coooool... at least in his own head and it's gonna be interesting but he went to a do last night about music or something with his daughter's tits hanging out and never looked too happy then either so let's make it a shite week for the one who truly believes he is special... special needs maybe.

Alan Bodell
36 Posted 09/09/2015 at 20:09:02
Jon #31, Steve Marriot, Small Faces? What do I win for that?

In the late '60s we played in a nice shade of yellow shirts, blue shorts and Donovan had a song 'Mellow Yellow' we used to belt out....

[Memories from an oldie.]

Jon Cox
37 Posted 09/09/2015 at 20:17:55
James Marshall,

Totally agreed with comment 21.

Thought you "amplified" it very succinctly my friend.

Alan McGuffog
38 Posted 09/09/2015 at 20:24:42
Alan let's hope we give it All Or Nothing against Chavski and create a fire for that Little Tin Soldier to jump into.

Talking of Donovan we had a toe curlingly awful song to the tune of Jennifer Juniper... Everton, Everton, Everton FC. Thankfully most people have forgotten this one.

Jon Cox
39 Posted 09/09/2015 at 20:29:28
Alan, yep, good stuff. I'm sure we'll talk soon.

But, back to reality,

I'm going the game on Saturday and I'm gonna give the pile of shite shit live from the Gwladys St.

Mourinihore ain't gettin' away with this one.

I don't want Stonsey to play. What a smack in the mouth for Chelscum if we beat them without Stones.

ps: Forget the Beatles... the track by the Small Faces called "What you gonna do about it" would be more appropriate.

Jay Harris
40 Posted 09/09/2015 at 20:45:20
Yeah, let's hope Mourhino is eating some "Humble Pie" at the end of the game.

James, very well written. I agree totally.

I have no doubt from the comments made that he was advised to put a written request in but what if it was one of our own (eg, Elstone) who told him the only way he would be allowed to go would be if he put a written request in and he stupidly read that as EFC wanting him to do it?

January will reveal a lot.

Oliver Molloy
41 Posted 09/09/2015 at 20:54:53
John Stones will not be an Everton player after this season is finished.

My opinion is it is never a good idea to hand in a transfer request when you know you are going to move anyway if not this window, then the next or the next.

I do believe that Stones does owe Martinez a debt of gratitude for having the likes of Chelsea offering mega money for him.

How many games did he play for Moyes? Moyes needed some serious convincing to sign him, just like Coleman. So yes, Stones going to Everton other than Wigan was our gain and Wigan's loss and we have to take it on the chin what goes around comes around when Chelsea or whoever come calling again, and they will.

If Martinez had not become Everton manager then Stone's development would have been slower.

And you watch Mourinho on Saturday with his mind games with John Stones by the way. It's guaranteed that he will go out of his way to piss us all off.

Jon Cox
42 Posted 09/09/2015 at 21:05:11

"It's guaranteed that he will go out of his way to piss us all off."

And you don't think the Gwladys Street won't find out anything to do with his family? Just like Everton is our family,

Don't forget, he started it... the little TWAT!

Oliver Molloy
43 Posted 09/09/2015 at 21:11:16
Lol John, nothing rude I hope!

No seriously, I can see Mourinho standing on the pitch waiting for Stones or doing something like that no matter what the result.

Alan Bodell
44 Posted 09/09/2015 at 21:39:29
Well, Jon and Oliver, his daughters tits were flapping at yesterday's music awards so surely there's something that won't go unmentioned when he takes his seat.
Tony Abrahams
45 Posted 09/09/2015 at 21:57:53
Harold, I thought Stones was exceptional at Southampton the other week. After watching him play that day, I believed that Everton would have been stupid, to sell the kid for 㿊 Million.

He's still got loads to learn, but now this saga is over, hopefully he can get back to doing what he does best; playing football.

Brian Cleveland
46 Posted 10/09/2015 at 00:23:09
All this talk about Maureen's daughter flapping her tits and no links? Come on, that's got to be more interesting than this continuing Stones saga!
Matt Traynor
47 Posted 10/09/2015 at 03:07:20
Brian #43, that's not funny. I sincerely hope our fans don't come up with chants about his wonky-titted daughter - she's only 18, and has to put up with a lot - him for a father for one!
Paul Kelly
48 Posted 10/09/2015 at 04:03:24
Think the transfer window was harder on us fans, yet, 21 or not, the final decision to hand in transfer request was his, nobody else's. He'll live with it as we all do.

If certain sections of the crowd get on his back because of it, he only has himself to blame, but he's pulling on the Royal Blue of Everton and while he does he'll get my support... until that first misplaced pass, then he gets dog's abuse. ;)

Darren Hind
49 Posted 10/09/2015 at 05:05:56
I thought Seamus's performance against Spurs was disciplined and professional. Dive in against Chadli and he will skin you and will be into your penalty area. Stand in front of him and make him cross and you will expose his weakness.
Most of Chadli's cross's ended up in the crowd Just as Seamus (and seemingly every Spurs fan) knew they would.

Interesting to see the tussle between Kane and Stones. Two young men who for very different reasons, were put under unfair and unnecessary pressure from an increasingly intrusive "sports reporting" industry. As Tony Williams points out, these kids will earn more in a week than most of us do in a year... but for two young men with the world supposedly at their feet, they didn't half look miserable from where I was sat.

Brian Cleveland
50 Posted 10/09/2015 at 06:37:59
Matt, I didn't know she has wonky tits... and I wasn't advocating bad taste songs about Maureen's daughter... I think a rendition or two of "Money Can't Buy You Stones" is more than adequate.

Let's get behind the kid... he plays for us and I want him to stay, so we have to convince him he is still loved.

Dave Pritchard
51 Posted 10/09/2015 at 07:54:02
Agree Brian (47). We should just concentrate on supporting our team to help them beat Chelsea on Saturday. Chants about Mourinho and his family won't do that.
Rahul (28). I hope that was a 'joke'.
Colin Glassar
52 Posted 10/09/2015 at 08:06:41
So according to the rags today, Stonesy is insisting on a £38m buy out clause in his 'new contract'? What new contract? He only signed one last year!! And would we be so stupid to let him go for that price when we could start a bidding war next summer at £40m?
Phil Sammon
53 Posted 10/09/2015 at 08:19:36

I'm convinced there's a lot of journos out there who genuinely don't understand buy-out clauses.

In this scenario Everton pay Stones MORE money each week and can demand no more than £38M in transfer fees, be that this summer or whenever. Considering we were reportedly unwilling to do business at £40M, how exactly does any of this benefit Everton?!

If any deal is on the table for Stones, which there really shouldn't be at this stage, then it would be absolutely insane to put in a clause of any less than £50-£60M.

Dave Pritchard
54 Posted 10/09/2015 at 08:34:45
A new contract with a very large buy-out clause, say £60 million, might not be a bad idea. Would have to up his wages though. Offer him an extra tenner a week, which in Premier League terms means an extra £10 grand a week.
Colin Glassar
55 Posted 10/09/2015 at 08:43:18
My point exactly Phil. Why would we agree to a buyout clause lower than our own valuation of the player? Don't these morons think before they write? And agreeing to pay the buyout clause doesn't necessarily mean the player is sold (see Arsenal's bid of £40million and a pound for Suarez turned down).

By all means, give him improved terms (he's on £30k a week, poor lamb) but no player should be setting the price for a buyout. Fuck him, fuck his 'advisors' and most of all, fuck the journos who want to set the agenda in this matter!! He's our player and we set the terms.

Mike McLoughlin
56 Posted 10/09/2015 at 08:59:53
Totally agree. Seems nonsensical that a club as big as Everton would pay more money to a player who wants a buy out clause equal to what we have just turned down.

I am convinced we have the worst sports journalists in the world. The game now is poorly represented as a sport now or in any descriptive way so people who don't go to the match can get a feel for how the game went. Journalists are to engaged in sensational inexactitudes in the hope they get to be the first to predict a transfer or indeed to influence one.

I love to read about the game and how it is described similar to Ken Buckley, entertaining and factual. I don't know why they don't get back to that.

Jim Lloyd
57 Posted 10/09/2015 at 09:29:41
Hang on a mo Colin! He hasn't said anything as far as I can see. No quotes from him, the Club, or anyone...nothing, except some twatty reporters or "pundits" who want to see him in the news for their own reasons.

For the life of me I cannot see Stones demanding any sort of condition which would be working against him. As he gets better and I think he will, then it won't only be Chelsea coming in for him, United and City for starters.

So, unless I read that John Stones " is quoted" as demanding such a clause, then I'll not believe it and we don't need to get fans jumping on a bandwagon about him unless it's proven.

Reporters...pundits, horrible, and mainly unintelligent ex players, or wannabee pundits for the telly. Gobshites most of them and love causing bother if it gives them a "story" Bastards!

Jim Lloyd
58 Posted 10/09/2015 at 09:31:20
Who put some angry juice in me porridge?
Colin Glassar
59 Posted 10/09/2015 at 09:33:45
You're right Jim, I shouldn't have mentioned Stonesy in the same breath as these low-life, scumbag journos.
Jim Lloyd
60 Posted 10/09/2015 at 09:44:53
It gets you angry though. Well understandable. Those gets, won't be happy until they justify their own miserable existence and see Stonesy playing for a so called "Big Club". Scumbags is right Colin!
Tony George
61 Posted 10/09/2015 at 09:59:25
Jim, I just wonder if Barnsleyites said the same things about Everton when we 'pinched' the same guy from them half way through the season.

Pots and kettles?

Ray Roche
62 Posted 10/09/2015 at 10:16:30
Tony, there have been numerous posts about us "doing the same to Barnsley" when we signed Stones. We didn't. We made an offer which Barnsley accepted. A bit different to Chelsea's unwanted pestering.

Let them get one of the 33 players they've loaned out back or, better still, bring a young lad through the ranks, something they haven't done since Terry emerged, apparently.

Tony George
63 Posted 10/09/2015 at 10:22:38
Fair comment, Ray. We are so inactive in the British market we don't seem likely to upset anybody, ever!
Alan Bodell
64 Posted 10/09/2015 at 10:28:53
I can't wait for the day that Abramavich pulls the plug, it'll be one of the best days I've experienced and it'll be back to days when they scrambled to get a child molester on their training staff, Mr Rix, total class that London mob, sack a physio for helping an injured player... the list of demeanours is endess.
Tony J Williams
65 Posted 10/09/2015 at 13:37:48
Why would we offer a player with 4 years left on his contract a new deal?

On top of that why would we ever allow a clause to be entered which meant he would be off in January/Next August.

So let's get this straight! We will pay you more a week from now on so we can allow you to leave in the next transfer window for an amount we rejected last time?
Common sense anyone... I fucking hate journos.

Also James, I mentioned the wages because I said I felt sorry for him...until I realised etc

I will support him and I am glad he stayed.

Ray Roche
66 Posted 10/09/2015 at 13:47:23
Tony George@60
"we don't seem likely to upset anybody," apart from our own fans due to the inactivity you mention.
Ray Roche
67 Posted 10/09/2015 at 13:49:29
Tony J@62, and if we gave him a new contract with such a clause and then agreed to sell him we'd also have to pay his contract up if he didn't ask for a move. The more you read the more ridiculous it gets.
Rahul Sreekumar
68 Posted 10/09/2015 at 13:56:16
Dave (48): Yep that was a joke. I am a few past 21 but still not making the best of decisions (or jokes). :)
Les Martin
69 Posted 10/09/2015 at 14:14:18
Once a player puts in a transfer request, he is on borrowed time at his current club; like it or not, history shows that eventually player power wins. Who would have thought that Campbell would have moved from Spurs to their dreaded enemy Arsenal, Tevez from Utd to City and so on?

Yes, I am pleased we have shown a statement of intent but tell me how many times do players actually say to suitors "Clear off; I am happy where I am"? More likely to hear the word "flattered " being used.

Unless we really win something or show European qualification, Stones will be off, I have no doubt (sadly).

James Marshall
70 Posted 10/09/2015 at 14:17:28
It's all bollocks, so let's all calm down again shall we?

The scum who write for those rags can just say anything they like, and the others will follow. They can cite 'sources' because nothing they're writing is going to be disproved or proven at this point by anyone.

Who cares? I've just started ignoring it all, if only for my delicate heart to keep ticking along for the next 40 years (if I'm really really lucky).

All this stress is enough to turn a man to drink.

Colin Metcalfe
71 Posted 10/09/2015 at 14:59:26
Slightly off tack but I recently stayed at a hotel near Heathrow and went down to the bar to watch the Wales v San Marino game and I got talking to the fella on the next table who turns out to be a Chelsea man.

Chatted to him quite a bit about Stones etc; however, he did mention a rather amusing rumor going around the Chelsea fans that the very beautiful ex medic / physio was shagging one of the players and yes you can guess who's name is top of the list ........?? Good old JT!

Ray Roche
72 Posted 10/09/2015 at 15:00:26
Les, Campbell moved on a free for a big signing on fee under the Bosman ruling. Not surprising at all. Still a shit in many eyes, though.
Dave Abrahams
73 Posted 10/09/2015 at 15:18:10
Colin (68),

It should come out in the court case, she is taking advice about sueing Chelsea, will make interesting reading if she goes ahead.

Guy Hastings
74 Posted 10/09/2015 at 15:52:14
Jon 31 - also from the same song - 'Musn't grumble' - the antithesis of TWers, some might say.
Alan Bodell
75 Posted 10/09/2015 at 17:53:16
Ray R., after all he shit on his own doorstep with moving to Arsenal the overated twat when his Portsmouth days were numbered had the cheek to say he did not want a move in England, he said ' I see my future in Italy or Spain'. Campbell really rated himself somewhat higher than the rest of us.

Sorry for the off topic.

Ray Roche
76 Posted 10/09/2015 at 17:57:04
True Alan. One of a long list of players with a high regard for themselves.
Alex Bonnar
77 Posted 10/09/2015 at 18:31:18
What puzzles me about any possible JS transfer is that Chelsea were fiddling about with offers around £30 million. Surely when they sold David Luis, who clearly wasn't good enough for them, for the reported £50 million to PSG then JS who must be good enough, then logically must be valued at around £60 million. Chelsea want him on the cheap!

Do not interpret this as wanting JS to be sold.

Jon Cox
78 Posted 10/09/2015 at 18:44:38
Guy, if we beat Chelscumski we'll all be "sitting in a rainbow"

What a band eh?

Alan Bodell
79 Posted 10/09/2015 at 19:53:01
Jon and Guy, it'll be doobie doobie do - doobie doobie di doh, if we can beat them a smile on our face oh.. lazy...
Jon Cox
80 Posted 10/09/2015 at 20:55:19
And get this! It's being played on "Sunday Afternoon". Ha ha....
James Hill
83 Posted 11/09/2015 at 04:26:21
Maybe he put in the transfer request knowing it would be rejected just to take the heat off from the other side and that what is meant when Matinez says it was a mistake.
Eric Myles
84 Posted 11/09/2015 at 05:28:15
Latest reports say that Stones wants a £38 M release clause in his contract which would be a mistake as it immediately says he's for sale.
Rob Young
85 Posted 11/09/2015 at 06:59:15
@Eric. It would make no sense for the club to offer him a new contract with a release clause for that amount. He still has 4 years to go on his current deal on which we can ask whatever we want for him and definitely more then £38M.

According to that report we would double his wages and he would demand a release clause. Makes no sense at all. We would have to pay him more and earn less if we would sell.

If that's what he would want (which I do not believe as this was just another piece of lazy journalism) then we're better off keeping him on his current deal for at least another two years. His value will not go down and by that time he will still have another two years left on his contract.

Phil Sammon
86 Posted 11/09/2015 at 07:12:32
Fancy a chat about buy-out clauses, Eric?
Ian Bennett
87 Posted 11/09/2015 at 07:29:40
Surely any buyout clause has got to be sizeably more a than the deal Everton rejected and include McGeady...
Eric Myles
88 Posted 11/09/2015 at 07:49:58
Rob #80, he doesn't need to have a new contract to have a release clause put in it, there only needs to be an amendment to the contract to add a release clause and not necessarily altering the wages. I would expect that all "new contracts" are just amendments to the existing contracts varying some clauses and maintaining the majority.

Any time Phil.

Phil Sammon
89 Posted 11/09/2015 at 08:03:29
Talk about semantics, Eric. if there are new terms in it then it is a 'new contract'.

I'm racking my brains to try remember what exactly we were arguing regarding Fellaini's release clause.

All I can remember is that you thought Moyes was deliberately waiting for the release clause to expire before bidding for him.

It's so nonsensical I can't even come up with any possible explanation you could have had.

Rob Young
90 Posted 11/09/2015 at 10:35:44
Eric, maybe true but I think I read the same bogus report which claimed an increase in his wages.
Anyway, if he wants to amend the contract to include a release clause I am sure we will simply shrug our shoulders and say 'no'.
Eric Myles
91 Posted 11/09/2015 at 10:52:55
Phil, to be semantic about it only an amendment is required to an existing contract to vary some terms, it doesn't make it a new contract as it can be done on 1 page.

And yes, you're right, I stated Moyes, or anyone else for that matter, would wait until Fellaini's release clause expired before bidding for him. And that is exactly what happened!!

Jim Lloyd
92 Posted 11/09/2015 at 11:11:58
Tony (58) sorry didn't respond sooner. I don't think it was the same situation at all. Stonesy was on his way to Wigan for a medical, so obviously he was being allowed to go. We came in on the last minute and he chose to come here.

I think that's normal transfer activity and I don't think it would be unreasonable to guess that Stonesy might be the subject of enquiries from wealthy clubs in the future. I don't see anything wrong with a club making an enquiry for a player, as long as it is abiding by the rules. And if the lad turns out to be the Captain of England I think he will become, then it is highly likely he will go to a rich and successful club.

The difference and it's a major one, is the public courting of a player. Now I'm not sure if that is within the rules, or not. What I would say though, is that it is a deliberate unsettling tactic, and uses the Press to kick up a feeding frenzy.

Mourinho knew exactly what he was doing and will fully deserve the welcome he gets tomorrow.

Phil Sammon
93 Posted 11/09/2015 at 12:50:32

If a contract is changed it has to be signed by both parties. Semantics, but most would call that a 'new contract'.

Haha... the release clause argument still makes me laugh. You think Moyes deliberately waited til after the release clause expired... despite him being able to get him cheaper while it was in place.

Anyone can see that Moyes was after other targets and went back to Fellaini in desperation.

And yet you feel vindicated....

Tony J Williams
94 Posted 11/09/2015 at 12:55:49
If there is an amendment to a condition/warranty to an existing contract, surely the first contract fails to exists and the new amended one takes its place?
Eric Myles
95 Posted 11/09/2015 at 12:56:49
Phil, most people who don't know about contracts would maybe mistakenly call an amendment a new contract, but a new contract isn't a new contract until the old one has expired, before that it's an amendment.

Moyes said that's exactly what he did do, and yes as I was perfectly correct, I do feel vindicated.

Eric Myles
96 Posted 11/09/2015 at 13:42:48
Tony J, no, the original terms and conditions still exist, only the revised ones are included in the amendment, in this way you can amend a 2,000-page contract in only 1 page instead of having to do it all again.

You can also have an extension to a contract which is not a new contract, it basically says the existing contract is extended for a period of x years and is only a few paragraphs long.

Phil Sammon
97 Posted 11/09/2015 at 13:49:04

A contract has to expire before a new one can be signed?!?!

So if John Stones signs a contract til 2020 tomorrow, do you think he stays on £30k til his current 4 year contract expires?


Why did Moyes wait til a buy out clause expired to bid for Fellaini, if not out of desperation?

Please don't let the results of that fiasco support your argument. The whole situation was only 'farcical' because Moyes could have bought the player cheaper if he'd have just bid before the release clause expired!

Moyes tried to get Felli for under £20M and it failed. Last minute, all other targets gone, he paid up....more than he would have had to just a few days before.

Supporting evidence:

If you remember, Everton insisted that the release clause expired a good 10 days before the transfer window closed. If someone met Fellaini's price, it gave them a chance to at least replace him.

Eric, how do you explain that???

Eric Myles
98 Posted 11/09/2015 at 14:07:19

A contract has to expire before a new one can be signed?!?!
Yes, otherwise it's an amendment or an extension.

So if John Stones signs a contract til 2020 tomorrow, do you think he stays on £30k til his current 4 year contract expires?
It would depend on what the wages are stipulated in the terms of the amendment to the contract, if he agrees to £30k until 2020 then yes, you would be correct.

Why did Moyes wait til a buy-out clause expired to bid for Fellaini, if not out of desperation? Because he could offer less than the buy-out clause figure.

Moyes could have bought the player cheaper if he'd have just bid before the release clause expired! He couldn't as we could have justifiably turned it down as not meeting the valuation.

Moyes tried to get Felli for under £20M and it failed. See, you answered your own question there, he bid £16M after the clause had expired.

Supporting evidence:
If you remember, Everton insisted that the release clause expired a good 10 days before the transfer window closed. If someone met Fellaini's price, it gave them a chance to at least replace him.

So why did we sell him on the 11th hour of the transfer window with no chance of replacing him?

Phil, how do you explain that?

Phil Sammon
99 Posted 11/09/2015 at 14:49:09
I'm on my iPhone tonight, Eric, I'll get back to you in the morning.

If anyone has access to a desktop and a brain in the meantime then please feel free to fill Eric in.

Eric Myles
100 Posted 11/09/2015 at 14:59:40
Maybe you should get a good 'phone then Phil, I'm using a Samsung SII myself and having no problems filling you in.
Phil Sammon
101 Posted 12/09/2015 at 06:27:20
Worth a read, Eric

I can't find any posts online that agree with you.

And I can't be arsed discussing it anymore.

Eric Myles
102 Posted 12/09/2015 at 06:38:44
Phil, the link you posted is EXACTLY what I said at the time of the Fellaini transfer saga.

And there are lots of reports online that agree with my point of view, but feel free to remain uninformed.

Phil Sammon
103 Posted 12/09/2015 at 07:08:53

You said Moyes was waiting for the minimum fee to expire so he could bid less. That is untrue. He could bid less at any point. Everton could, of course, reject it at any point too.

Don't you understand that Moyes was a laughing stock because he paid MORE than the release fee?

I can assure you I'm not uninformed. If you remember, everyone disagreed with you when you last put your argument forward.

A release fee is added to a contract by the player, so that he has an exit route. It doesn't benefit the club at all. The only thing they can do is try get the fee set as high as possible so at least if they lose the player it is for an inflated price.

When that fee expired, the ball was firmly in Everton's court. We could have demanded £40M if we wanted. Obviously BK got the fee he was happy with and the player wanted to go.

Phil Sammon
104 Posted 12/09/2015 at 07:13:03
From the link-

'Players with a minimum fee release clause can still be sold for less than the set fee, at the club's discretion.'

That is something have you argued against many times. You said that Moyes waited for the fee to expire before offering a lower fee.

Eric Myles
105 Posted 12/09/2015 at 09:19:58
Phil, the 'definition' of release clause that you linked to (from Football Manager FFS??? Is that the source of your 'knowledge' of football transfers? Really??) states.

"Minimum fee release clause
A minimum fee release clause is a clause in a player's contract which sets a minimum fee that a club must bid in order to be able to buy that player. If a club bid's the minimum fee set in a player's contract in an initial payment, the player's club cannot block the bid and must allow the bidder to talk to the player. Players with a minimum fee release clause can still be sold for less that the set fee, at the club's discretion."

In the original discussion I posted
"Eric Myles
469 Posted 03/08/2013 at 08:05:48
I think the correct way to look at Fellaini's clause is that if someone offers more than the set fee within the time period then the Club has to advise him of the interest and cannot stop him from leaving if he agrees terms.


"Eric Myles
518 Posted 03/08/2013 at 11:47:04
Of course we could sell him for less than the release clause any time we want but it means that if a lower offer is made we don't have to inform the player."

So you have posted a link in an attempt to prove what I said is wrong, but it only supports exactly what I said. Thank you for proving yourself wrong.

"You said that Moyes waited for the fee to expire before offering a lower fee." And that is EXACTLY what he did, he bid £16M for Fellaini AFTER THE CLAUSE EXPIRED.

Phil Sammon
106 Posted 12/09/2015 at 09:59:30
He could have bid it before, Eric, that's the point you continually miss. He only left it so late because he was after other targets.

No, Football Manager is not my source of knowledge. It just happened to describe it well.

Eric Myles
107 Posted 12/09/2015 at 10:53:57
"He could have bid it before (less), Eric, that's the point you continually miss" That's what you said in the thread Phil to which I responded.

Eric Myles (#806)
Phil, they can't unless the Club agrees to accept less, if another club offers the clause value the player MUST be informed and it MUST be accepted, if less is offered then it can just be binned if the Club aren't interested.

And what part of

"Eric Myles (#518)
Of course we could sell him for less than the release clause any time we want

Eric Myles (#161)
But you are right that we could sell him for less than the value in the clause at any tme (sic) but that would be up to the Club to decide, not the player.

Eric Myles (#369)
Mike #332, of course the Club can sell him for less now if they want to, count the number of times I've said that previously.

Eric Myles (#644)
Wayne #589 "but most release clauses contain a figure which the club must accept. The club is still able to accept a lower fee if they wish at any time" and that's exactly my understanding so what do you disagree with?

Suggests to you that I don't get that a lower fee could have been offered before the clause expiry????

Eric Myles
108 Posted 12/09/2015 at 11:01:47
So Phil your whole argument quoting your FM Wiki 'source' is that I don't know that

"A minimum fee release clause is a clause in a player's contract which sets a minimum fee that a club must bid in order to be able to buy that player. If a club bid's the minimum fee set in a player's contract in an initial payment, the player's club cannot block the bid and must allow the bidder to talk to the player. Players with a minimum fee release clause can still be sold for less that the set fee, at the club's discretion."

When that is EXACTLY what I said in the original thread as proven by the above extracts.

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

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 Talking Points submissions across the site.

About these ads

© ToffeeWeb