Toby signs for Spurs - official.

But it puts the Spuds in a difficult position - they are unlikely to hand over cash now for a player who's contract is in doubt and AM, having accepted he's going, will need cash to inject into new purchases/replacements. There is a level of leverage that could be applied.

 

If true, sounds like we were keeping everything low key until the date on the contract passed. Perhaps it wasn't Nicola who was the evil sneaky b*****d.

Sounds like fun, but I suspect it will all fizzle out.

 

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11700/9904455

Sky now picked it up.

 

I think it's good to see that the club can whip up quite a storm when need be. Think of last Summer, we sat here on this forum as info was leaked to the press for months on end, some of it not even being remotely true. If we believe we have grounds to do this, then let's do it.

 

That's not actually a bad shout.

Both of us, and others, are of the belief that any court case would not ultimately result in us being, effectively, given Toby. And quite possibly that might be the view of the club too. So maybe the reason behind this isn't to get Toby through the courts, but to scare Spurs from putting pen to paper just yet. And then whilst they're waiting, hope that either they find somebody else, or they decide that the start of the season is getting too close so they have to stop waiting and pull out to look elsewhere, or that we manage to convince Toby to come back to us.

 

This actually reminds me of when Arsenal bid £40,000,001 for Suarez a year or two ago. The owner of Liverpool has since admitted Suarez had a release clause and they should have accepted the bid. Liverpool just ignored it though, gambling that nobody would do anything about it. They were right.

 

What is the betting that the Red Tops will manipulate the stories to make us out to be the bad guys in the whole miserable saga?

 

If this is true and this amount has been accepted, surely we will go in with an improved bid if only to make the Spuds pay more for him.

 

Ah **** it. I'm now looking forward to us signing the new Franz Beckenbauer in two weeks time....

 

Any ITKers shed anymore light?

 

Blimey, this transfer has really got going....

 

If Spuds think they had an agreed deal and we get him, will they be the ones to sue AM instead?

 

And I was bemoaning earlier today on Not606 that nothing exciting seemed to be happening in the transfer market for us!

 

Would Saints do this if Toby didn't want to come here? I am assuming he won't mind if we try and enforce this clause.

 

With no legally binding contract in place it is unlikely Spuds could do anything about it. Any current agreement would be no better than a 'letter of intent' and would be caveated to allow either party to withdraw as the final agreement would need the players consent having agreed personal terms.

 

That's my concern.

 

Doubtful; an agreed fee is, as far as I am aware, non-binding. Unless the documentation for the transfer has been completed and submitted (after personal terms are agreed), I doubt there'd be anything over which they could sue.

 

OK thanks, just straw clutching!

 

Fran joked some time ago that this could be this seasons 'Gaston Thread' - certainly starting to look that way!

 

It's basic law. If Tottenham have made an offer and Atleti have accepted and Tottenham have promised to pay the fee then it would be legally binding.

However, if a predated offer and acceptance contract existed between us and Atleti then there would be no legal interest in the player from Spurs and the contract would be void