Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

John Stones transfer saga

Status
Not open for further replies.
As they say if it can happens it will happen. I suspect many a player has threatened this route and clubs really wouldn't want to lose a player asset for just compensation so the club will bite the bullit ensuring they still get a fee which inevitably will be bigger
The length of a ban is contained within the Article.
I said a week or so ago the who.e world of football transfers is a murky world
You do realise that post the Webster ruling most clubs now insert a clause into players contracts that states that if they break said contract then the harm caused will be deemed to be their market value don't you?
 
"CS: At Chelsea, he'll be playing and training every day with world-class players – it is impossible to overestimate the impact this can have on his development."

Trying to think of another centre half they've developed.....nope. Can't.
People say that but look at players like Rodwell who were training with 'world class' players and not getting a game. He hugely regressed while he was at City.
 
Agree with that. Personally I'd sell anyone who didn't want to be here but seen as I'm in the minority then this sums it up for me. We've lost much better players and will in the future.


I am not sure John "doesn't want to be here".

He wasn't unhappy to begin with then out the blue all this tapping up starts.

Sure he might have liked to go to Chelsea.....it doesn't mean he is unhappy staying put.

I would love to go to live in the South of France.....but I am happy enough living in Liverpool.

:)
 
I think if he puts in a couple of good performances most fans will forget about it.

I wasn't too arsed about the whole thing up until he had a pretty woeful game against Barnsley.

Assuming that he will still be here come Wednesday morning, a little "I have a long term contract with Everton and I'm here to play" statement would go a long way. If he regrets handing in the request, he can throw on an apology there too. None of us know the full story on that for sure.

We all (should) know that even if he stays and is unhappy, he has to perform if he wants to make the Euro squad next summer. And while you can talk about Martinez and the club making a stand and it's extremely relieving to see what they've done, I'm sure that little side note there is why they felt confident with keeping an "unhappy player" here.

For once, on one marquee transfer, the cards are actually in our favor.
The Euros will definitely concentrate minds. If this Mori deal goes through and he fits in the defence nicely, Stones might have a problem actually retaining his place. Which is what we want all over the pitch.
 

Thought this Bascombe post is spot on, esoecially the lack of public board support for Martinez until yesterday.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...-is-not-for-sale-they-can-really-mean-it.html
Chelsea did not help him or themselves with the timing of their offers. Universally praised for moving swiftly when they bought Cesc Fabregas and Diego Costa in 2014, bidding for Stones three weeks before the start of the season was always going to rile Martinez who is a far more belligerent than his affable exterior suggests. When Martinez said Stones would not be leaving in this window, he did not do so in the hope Jose Mourinho would return with a £40 million cheque.

Martinez’s response after Everton’s League Cup win over Barnsley was his most forceful to date. To be fair to the Spanish coach, until then he was a one-man media response unit over the whole saga, which might explain why Chelsea seemed unwilling to or incapable of taking what was said at face value. Encouraging Stones to hand in a transfer request when you have no idea if a deal will ever be struck bordered on the obscene (we must presume Chelsea had a role in that since they appeared to know it was on its way a week before Stones wrote it).

If you want cynicism, there appears to be a trend to encourage a 'hate mob' to mobilise and turn on a player so the cameras can focus on abusers or shirt burners, thus making a position untenable. Do not mistake a few publicity grabbers for the Everton fanbase, the overwhelming majority recognising Stones as an ambitious player understandably tempted by the move. Stones was put in an invidious position by the trail of events. Martinez had warned it would change nothing – once more, that matter of a long contract limiting the power of the player.

Chairman Bill Kenwright’s public statement on Thursday evening was a welcome intervention and seems to have made the London club back off.

That could have come sooner. The initial lack of a public response to Stones’s formal letter was baffling and may even have contributed to many (wrongly) concluding the sands had shifted. Martinez took the opportunity with his impressive and reassuring performance at Oakwell to correct that error and clarify that was not the case, but it was a mood shifter when Kenwright confirmed it. It should not always be left to a manager facing the microphones to reaffirm a club’s stance. The manager, after all, is an employee who is a hostage to fortune.

We now – finally – have the assurance Martinez was speaking entirely for his board. A fanbase increasingly wary of their club's history of selling high on the last day of the transfer window must be confident there will be no compromise this time. By Thursday evening we reached the point where Everton can not let Stones go. They left themselves no wriggle room. No Chelsea bid can be deemed acceptable before September 1, regardless of how high Mourinho is prepared to go or how many transfer records threatened.

By resisting, Martinez will offer a timely reminder to all clubs with players on long contracts that when they insist an asset is not for sale, it is possible to really mean it.

I can see what the board is trying to do here.

It undermines Martinez's position and power if they have to come in and "approve" his decisions by backing up that Stones isn't for sale. If they have to come out and speak every time on hot news such as this, it shows that Roberto really isn't in control.

That being said, given how things have gone at this club in the past, a nice little "We are 100% behind our manager's decisions" statement the day of the request would've been appreciated.
 
I can see what the board is trying to do here.

It undermines Martinez's position and power if they have to come in and "approve" his decisions by backing up that Stones isn't for sale. If they have to come out and speak every time on hot news such as this, it shows that Roberto really isn't in control.

That being said, given how things have gone at this club in the past, a nice little "We are 100% behind our manager's decisions" statement the day of the request would've been appreciated.
Fair point although Sky Sports was meant to have been told off record by one of the board that Stones wasn't going - iirc it was around the second bid. Might have been nice to have that assurance on the reocrd with a similar statement to your "we are 100% behind our manager's decisions" one...
 

Cheers.

I was reading that but gave up when he started going on about how Stones is going to become an "elite player" ergo he needs to move to an "elite club".

The forelock touching by Fleet Street toward Chelsea F.C. is just nauseating.

There is absolutely no way the rent boys are not boxing a lot of these journos off to write about them in such glowing terms.
 
You do realise that post the Webster ruling most clubs now insert a clause into players contracts that states that if they break said contract then the harm caused will be deemed to be their market value don't you?

I do that's why I quoted the other case where compensation of £10 million ish was awareded

if you track back the whole Sterling saga there was a doubt that such a clause existed in his contracts.If he left under Article 17 I guess Man City would never have had to pay £40 million or whatever so had Liverpool refused to let him leave it would have cost them a wedge. Their window of oppunity would have ended in January 2016 when he was outside the protected period. They had to sell him this window or in January 2016

It's not a given that such a clause is in Stones contract but the club and his agent will know so I guess that would mean any suitors would likewise know. I also understand that some agents are now refusing to have such clauses included it then comes down to who blinks ie the club or the players agent
 

The Chelsea approach still baffles me as they had several advantages in the negotiation - a player that was prepared to hand in a transfer request to force the move (and increase our profit/take the blame for the sale), previously good relations with the Everton board and enough money to be willing to pay a record deal for a transfer.

For all this talk on chelsea message boards of us "holding a player back" they didn't exactly make an easy offer for us to accept - we have 2 senior CBs yet they wait till 17th July before making their first bid of a lowball 20m and it took till 29th July before they even made their second bid.

If they really wanted Stones why on earth didn't they do the same as City did with Sterling - Raheem was signed before Chelsea even made their first Stones bid!
 
I can see what the board is trying to do here.

It undermines Martinez's position and power if they have to come in and "approve" his decisions by backing up that Stones isn't for sale. If they have to come out and speak every time on hot news such as this, it shows that Roberto really isn't in control.

That being said, given how things have gone at this club in the past, a nice little "We are 100% behind our manager's decisions" statement the day of the request would've been appreciated.

Personally, I think the board has been faultless throughout this.

Bill, remeember, is quite ill by all accounts so he would normally have been more to the fore.

The rest just let Bobby get on with it.

And then that man told the last last week neither he nor Bill would be selling John and despite the naysayers on here disparaging it, his words were golden.

Bobby himself had been exemplary.

The highest compliment I can pay him is he has been Catterick like.
 
Jose Mourinho has refused to comment on Chelsea's pursuit of John Stones but insists he will not be bothered if he does not bring in another defender before the transfer window closes.
Everton have turned down four bids from the Premier League champions for centre-back Stones, the latest understood to be in the region of £37million, and maintain they will not sell the 21-year-old this summer.
But Mourinho was in no mood to discuss Chelsea's interest in the England international ahead of this weekend's clash with Crystal Palace, as he declared himself happy with the strength of his squad.
“I don't speak about players from other teams," said Mourinho, when quizzed about Stones.
"I have a good squad. I'm happy with the squad I have. If I get another player until the end of the market, good. If I don't get, we go with what we have."
As well as Stones, Chelsea have also been linked with Paul Pogba, but Mourinho refused to entertain talk of a move for the Juventus midfielder either.
"I'm not going to do the 'like', 'I would like' of Pogba. He's a Juventus player, I'm the Chelsea manager," added Mourinho, who last week rebuked Juve boss Massimiliano Allegri for commenting on his fondness for Ramires and Oscar.
The Blues have also been linked with China right-back Zhang Linpeng from Guangzhou Evergande, an interest which is understood to be genuine. Once more, Mourinho was silent.
"He is a Guangzhou player, so it's the same story. I don't comment," Mourinho added

err am I reading that bit in bold correctly?


The FA have obviously had a word, they do favour the big clubs but not to that extent when something is blatantly being done wrong.

I can see what the board is trying to do here.

It undermines Martinez's position and power if they have to come in and "approve" his decisions by backing up that Stones isn't for sale. If they have to come out and speak every time on hot news such as this, it shows that Roberto really isn't in control.

That being said, given how things have gone at this club in the past, a nice little "We are 100% behind our manager's decisions" statement the day of the request would've been appreciated.

The day of the request would've been the day before or day of a game , adding to the circus before that match would've been a bad move I think. I completely agree with the stance of waiting til after the cup game.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Back
Top