Luke Garbutt

[davek]

Would he though? Or would Baines just play every single game?

Baines cant play all games now. Those days are long gone. Even this season he's played 37 of 50 games. He's beginning to break down with injury. But that's up to Garbutt also: he'd need to play out of his skin and force a rethink. Is he really going to walk into a better team than Everton and hold down a F/T starting spot?

 

[Barkley1878]

But everton did offer Garbutt a good deal, I could see this argument if Everton didn't offer him a contract but supposedly they did. they can't force him to sign it

It's not about money that's the point people keep missing the lad wants to play football and right now is 3rd choice behind 2 LB's and has had Hibbert and Galloway played ahead of him at times.

Ideal situation for me would be to make garbutt 2nd choice LB with promise of games and send oviedo out on loan to another prem club like a west Brom, Bournemouth etc. then in this year see how Baines is playing alongside how garbutt develops with playing 15+ games including cup matches, you can also use that season for Bryan to have a full season under his belt and it gives the club the chance to see if that leg break has took its toll on him similar to what Monaco have done loaning Falcao out imo

 

[Big Fat Sam]

Baines cant play all games now. Those days are long gone. Even this season he's played 37 of 50 games. He's beginning to break down with injury. But that's up to Garbutt also: he'd need to play out of his skin and force a rethink. Is he really going to walk into a better team than Everton and hold down a F/T starting spot?

Who do Spurs have at LB? He's easily as good as Rose if it's him. What about Southampton? They're both 'better' than Everton based on this season. One thing that might work in our favour is he's a northern lad. Maybe he doesn't want to go down south with no family, etc, there.

 

[MikeH72]

Baines cant play all games now. Those days are long gone. Even this season he's played 37 of 50 games. He's beginning to break down with injury. But that's up to Garbutt also: he'd need to play out of his skin and force a rethink. Is he really going to walk into a better team than Everton and hold down a F/T starting spot?

Garbutt won't want another season of covering injuries though will he. And I honestly don't think he believes he'll walk into a better team than us. If he joins someone like Palace and becomes their first choice left back, I'd say that's a good move for him at this stage of his career. And then if he develops as expected, he will move on for big-ish money in the future

 

[roydo]

I see him as current 2nd choice, and when the 1st choice is an established English international, but with a nasty injury to get over, the lad might see more starts than he thinks. That is what I would tell him anyrate.

 

[Tubey]

He'll move and, to be honest, fair play to him. He's a talented lad and he should be playing regular at this stage in his career, and he's good enough to do so in this league.

 

[Dithering Dougie]

He's clearly gone but the clubs blameless in all this and the player has done nothing wrong either.

It's a shame but it's not the end of the world and it won't hinder our future progress.

The only thing I'd be suspect about is Garbutts agent not seeing the young potential in our squad and how sticking around to be part of a team with Stones, Barkley, Besic and Lukaku plus this summers additions and promotions from in house isn't a good career path to the top.

Both short and long term Garbutts got more to lose from this decision than we have.

 

[davek]

That's one way of viewing it. Another is that Leeds developed him up to the age of 16. We poached him (for a decent price) and have continued that development. He's shown he's an ambitious lad by moving on from Leeds.

He was then sent out on a variety of loans, where he did well. However we weren't willing to put our neck on the line and give him a longer contract, probably thinking he could go this season. He has surprised the club with his progress and we are left in a tricky situation.

He is a player who was allowed to head into the last 12 months of his current deal before being offered a new one. That's not his fault, it's the clubs. He obviously now wants first team football, which I think is admirable and we can't offer it to him. Unfortunately we are in a weak negotiating position if we wanted to flog him on.

In many ways the decent thing for him to do would be to sign. But who does that benefit? Everton obviously as we can ask for more money, but probably not Garbutt. As I said above we poached him from Leeds so we can hardly get on our high horses about people behaving in a similar way back to us, you reap what you sow. If I was Garbutt I'd be thinking, well they weren't willing to offer me anything last season and have left it all last minute, I'll do whats right for me.

As Evertonians we can obviously portray that as poor behaviour and paint the club as the victims in the piece. In many ways we are. And we are subjective in all of this. However if we are to look at it objectively the club have behaved in a similarly snide manner on two occasions. Firstly in poaching him against Leeds wishes and secondly only offering him the security of a long term Contract once he showed he was a first team starter. It's a bit rich for us to get on our high horse about players who show a similar fickleness.

When all is said and done though we will get some money from a Tribunal probably with a nice sell on attached. We are very well covered at Left Back, with Baines and Oviedo as well as Galloway. It's an area of the pitch we could afford to move someone on. The situations not ideal, but we are not going to implode going into the summer knowing we have Baines and Oviedo at left back and a few million quid to strengthen in other areas.

Leeds were well compensated for a player they had from age 8/9 to 15/16. The value added expertise for top flight football was put in all by Everton. I cant see where the exploitation of Leeds came into that. On the other hand, another PL club will be getting a bargain at Everton's expense.

The other thing is that, unlike Moyes, Martinez has underlined his future at Everton. He loaned him out only briefly to Colchester and recalled him as soon as Oviedo picked up an injury, which must have emphasised how highly he was thought of. He had no excuses about thinking Everton only offered a contract later rather than sooner: he hadn't proven himself. When he was given that chance to prove himself and took it, only then was a contract justified.

A tribunal wont do Everton any favours, I suspect.

But my view is simply this: let him go. If he doesn't want to sign, let him walk off. Get the cash for him and put it toward a player who can do a job and does want to play here.

 

[jinkyali]

The part in all this is that Roberto gave him a two year programme upon coming to the club which included development and loan.

He came from the academy into the first team squad and played games.

Bobby has done nothing wrong in my opinion, especially considering the value Baines holds to Everton as well as his loyalty in turning down UTD.

 

[TheFinnFan]

He might sign if Oviedo goes to Real S.?

 

[jinkyali]

saturday's decision have any barings on contract negotiations jinks?

Dunno. Doubt it.

 

[Woolly Blue]

He's clearly gone but the clubs blameless in all this and the player has done nothing wrong either.

I pretty much agree with this. The lad's talented and wants to play first team football on a regular basis. Our first choice left back will, unless long term injuries dictate otherwise, be first in the pecking order. Some minor mistakes might have been made on both sides but really, it's just one of those situations which is unfortunate.

If we knew Oviedo was going to come back fully fit in the form he was last season then none of us would be getting remotely stressed about the situation.

I'd love for Garbutt to sign a new contract and give it another twelve months to see how it goes. If it didn't work out then we'd be likely to get a decent fee for him. But, assuming he has ambitions to play more regularly, then good luck to him if he leaves.

 

[catcherintherye]

Leeds were well compensated for a player they had from age 8/9 to 15/16. The value added expertise for top flight football was put in all by Everton. I cant see where the exploitation of Leeds came into that. On the other hand, another PL club will be getting a bargain at Everton's expense.

The other thing is that, unlike Moyes, Martinez has underlined his future at Everton. He loaned him out only briefly to Colchester and recalled him as soon as Oviedo picked up an injury, which must have emphasised how highly he was thought of. He had no excuses about thinking Everton only offered a contract later rather than sooner: he hadn't proven himself. When he was given that chance to prove himself and took it, only then was a contract justified.

A tribunal wont do Everton any favours, I suspect.

But my view is simply this: let him go. If he doesn't want to sign, let him walk off. Get the cash for him and put it toward a player who can do a job and does want to play here.

Well yes, just as we will be compensated for the development of a young player between the ages of 16-21, a player who has made more appearances for Cheltenham and Colchester than Everton.
It's not really a case of "exploitation" but I suppose having a consistency in the standards towards young players. The decent thing to do for a young player at a club is contact the club directly and ask them how much they wanted. While Leeds got a 1 million or so, they wanted a lot more. We were able to exploit a loophole in the system that exists that 16 year olds can't sign a pro contract.

We breached no rules, and as you say Leeds were compensated, but we got him at a knockdown price due to the loophole. Likewise a loophole exists if players are out of contract. Clubs can go directly to the player and negotiate with him, and again we will receive compensation for developing him, thought it will be a lot less than we'd have liked. Subjectively this is annoying for Evertonian's but objectively we are merely being screwed over due to a loophole in the same way Leeds were. I think it's inconsistent to view it in any other way.

Garbutt is highly thought of by Martinez. I think the club should have got his contract tied up last season though, if that was the case. We waited until his final season, and we are always susceptible to this situation. He wants regular football which I think is fair enough. The club should have offered him a contract before this season and then we'd be able to move him on our terms. We didn't so we lose that opportunity. Expecting Garbutt to sign, potentially jeopardising his chance of first team football would be a very foolish move on his part. Yes it's shitty on his part but ultimately the club have let that situation develop.

And yes I agree with you. Even if we only get a couple of million for him with a sell on fee, we are fortunate it's an area of the pitch we are greatly covered in. We will move on as will he.

 

[Eric Djemba-Djemba]

It's like Shane Duffy all over again.

 

[SpurtingLesbian]

There is no 'Garbutt Conundrum'. He either signs for us or he fecks off and we get compensation. Not much we can do except offer him a competitive contract (done) and assure him he'll get games (tricky but with Oviedo and Baines with their injury record and the Oviedo to Moyes rumour, it shouldn't be too difficult)