Thanks for the vote of confidence everybody, greatly appreciated ... but I already spend way too much time on the forum and if I spend anymore I'm going to be in deep, deep trouble.
Good thoughts, Yankee and well stated. The glaring weakness, however, is the confidentiality aspect of the player's contract. By definition the player and his agent will obviously know the terms and conditions, so it would be the simplest thing in the world for either of them to leak the details to ANY third party of their choice if they felt it was in their interests. Taking the Joe situation as a hypothetical example, let's say that Rodgers had NO knowledge whatsoever of his contract details. Then let's say that during his tenure Rodgers, working in close daily contact with Joe, learns that Joe is ambitious and wouldn't be averse to a move in the future. Fast forward and, lo and behold, Rodgers is offered a move to a bigger club and knows that Joe could do a job for him. It is now the easiest thing in the world to let Joe know this. Joe and agent mull things over, decide in principle that the prospect sounds good, so then divulge the details that Rodgers needs to know. In other words, there is no way on earth, no confidentiality agreement ever created, that could prevent this sort of situation occurring. As it happens, Rodgers WAS aware of what it would take to release Joe but, even if he hadn't been, it is all too easy to circumvent it. For me, the only way around this situation is to outlaw the use of release clauses. A three year contract between player and club should remain just that unless both parties mutually agree to terminate it for whatever reason. Of course it will never happen. Too much power has been vested in the greedy players and their agents and it will remain that way until their wings are clipped.
As Ivor correctly stated, there are some practical considerations and limitations in all of this, but this happens everyday in regular business and confidentiality clauses with penalties for disclosure are part and parcel. You cannot enforce what isn't in place, and perhaps the existence would be deterence enough especially when penalties for disclosure are written in and governing bodies add muscle through the threat of revoking licenses etc in the event of a breach, and the player suspended without pay until resolved. All it would take would be one action in court with hours and hours of painstaking discovery, the player suspended for a good chunk of a season, an agent's license revoked, a manager's license revoked and the industry would be recalibrated nicely. Threat of license revocation would be sufficient to scare most people straight. For us, the monetary amounts are now at the level where such effort would be worthwhile. It's not a pretty path to go down, but after this last experience, we clearly need to get control of our own destiny in these matters and ensure that our exposure is minimal.
Owning my own business for many years with a large client base, many of them national concerns, I have been party to a number of such confidentiality clauses, Yankee, which contained severe financial sanctions if breached. Needless to say, there were breaches on a few occasions but nothing happened. The problem was proof. In a couple of instances we suspected, knew, beyond any doubt who was responsible, but could do nothing as it could not actually be proved because there was no evidence or paper trail. In such cases it takes the guilty parties to admit that they were in default, which of course did not happen. The same applies to insider dealing. It is totally illegal but happens all day and every day in business. The authorities are aware that it goes on but are powerless to act in the absence of definitive evidence. Now and again they strike lucky and get a conviction such as that guy in the Guinness case. But for the most part they are helpless onlookers. I am so in favour of what you say regarding sanctions, Yankee, but sadly it would be too difficult to impose them in my view.
What a fantastic idea! Liverpool cough up another £2 million to take the club mascot to Anfield. Special offer - Cyril & Cybil for £3 million.
But doesn't that really mean we'd be on our way to selling our identity? Dai would have to change is new name!
WTF is going on in this thread??? We sell Joe Allen for £15m. A player that we all said (or should have) might go on to bigger and better things. A great talent indeed. It looks like Scott Sinclair may go to Man City for a supposed £8m. A player that did well for us, but most of us would say under-performed last season. Neither deals are going to destroy our club or even our Premiership dream. We've bought De Guzman and Michu who both look decent pre-season. Routledge did a pretty good job when Sinclair didn't play last season. Allen and Sigurdsson (who wasn't even ours) are covered. We even covered Caulker (who also wasn't ours) with Chico. And then we get back to the reported £23m for Allen and Sinclair. We have a little bit of room to play there, eh? This thread has been sprinkled in places with the most pessimistic misery I've seen in a very long time. Chill out guys. Exodus, my ass! Two f**king players does not, nor will it ever, constitute an exodus. Now, can we just get on with the cowin' season?!
What constitutes an exodus, 1, 2, 3 players or more. If we had been relegated then yes, we might (quite likely) have had an exodus. So far only one, probably two and perhaps three, if you listen to speculation. Shaper [video=youtube;BWw_gP0vDfE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWw_gP0vDfE[/video]
Let's be honest, £15m both us (Norwich) or Swansea should bite off the hand offering it. My personal feeling is that aside from Ryan Bennett and our midfield which is our secret weapon (Pilkington, E.Bennett, Howson, Snodgrass, Surman, Fox, Hoolahan), that everyone else in our team can be replaced. These players were sourced with a lot of effort and would be difficult to replace. Holt and Ruddy could eventually be replaced should it be needed, for example Butland and Rhodes. Aside from Holt, we rely on those midfielders for goals and they are quite reliable, Snodgrass will offer that much more. For £15m, you can buy 3 x £5m players who would be more than capable of filling in Allen's void. Easy.
"Chill out guys. Exodus, my ass! Two f**king players does not, nor will it ever, constitute an exodus." Well said that man. "Exodus" is a misused word in the media that is completely inappropriate to our situation. 24/07/12 (the font gives away the poster): “Joe Allen is going no where, how many times have I got to come on here, and spell it out! man the world is full of trolls.” Keep going with the predictions, mate.
