I think there's a balance to be had. In my opinion clubs shouldn't be allowed to cherry pick talent that has been nurtured elsewhere without serious compensation, both initially and then based on appearances, success, international call-ups etc etc but equally when they are of an age to justify a proper fee and contract, 18 say, it's fairer for a tribunal to step in if needed. At the moment the system is too weighted in the favour of the buying club and it makes sense to snap up the best kids for a pittance if you can get away with it, which all the big clubs do, but Chelsea and Spurs seem to be the worst for it. We've lost a few players down the years to bigger clubs such as Raheem Sterling, who has gone on to do well so far, and Dean Parrett, who flopped at Spurs, which wasn't so terrible at the time as we were skint and the money, little as it was, was much needed, but I don't think it's right that a club that doesn't need to sell can have a young kid of 15.
Chelsea haven't done anything wrong and they've now got a potentially brilliant player. My gripe is with the agents who are too keen to make a quick buck which more often than not hinders the player's development imo.
