|
Post by rat on Jul 14, 2017 22:52:39 GMT
You're being silly now . Are you suggesting they just forgot ? No! Read the thread. They thought we had a binding deal. What went wrong? If it wasn't binding then we can only blame ourselves as the manager thought he could sign and it'd be a foregone conclusion as late as March. Then the tone changed like he'd be told that actually it wasn't so straight forward. We fucked up. It happens. Far too often with us. "They thought we had a binding deal"
Any more detail on this key point ?
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 14, 2017 22:53:41 GMT
No! Read the thread. They thought we had a binding deal. What went wrong? If it wasn't binding then we can only blame ourselves as the manager thought he could sign and it'd be a foregone conclusion as late as March. Then the tone changed like he'd be told that actually it wasn't so straight forward. We fucked up. It happens. Far too often with us. "They thought we had a binding deal"
Any more detail on this key point ? Yes go back through the thread and see the quotes from the manager who clearly thought we had a deal to sign him.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 14, 2017 22:54:36 GMT
You're being silly now . Are you suggesting they just forgot ? My theory, which is based on nothing, is that Porto dragged it out intentionally past the deadline because they knew that they could get more from another club. These option clauses are often complex and may include little phrases that allow a party to weasel out of the deal or change the terms of the deal. In addition, even if the clause was straightforward, the only way Stoke could enforce it would be to take them to court. That would certainly not be resolved within the window and would be subject to Porto bribing the court system. So our lawyers are shit then? It should have been water tight.
|
|
|
Post by rat on Jul 14, 2017 22:55:41 GMT
You're being silly now . Are you suggesting they just forgot ? My theory, which is based on nothing, is that Porto dragged it out intentionally past the deadline because they knew that they could get more from another club. These option clauses are often complex and may include little phrases that allow a party to weasel out of the deal or change the terms of the deal. In addition, even if the clause was straightforward, the only way Stoke could enforce it would be to take them to court. That would certainly not be resolved within the window and would be subject to Porto bribing the court system. That would be my guess as well . Somebody else has enquired ...... Porto have managed to dig out and enforce some sort of stalling caveat from the contract detail.....
|
|
|
Post by generationex on Jul 14, 2017 22:57:24 GMT
There are 20 clubs in the richest league in the world. Let's say two or three individuals at each of those clubs have responsibility for player signings.
In other words they ought to be in the top 30- 40 most talented, most connected recruiters in world football.
Ermm .. .Has anyone on here ever meet Scholes or Cartwright or the rest of the agent team in person?
|
|
|
Post by sanmarinostokie on Jul 14, 2017 23:02:37 GMT
There are 20 clubs in the richest league in the world. Let's say two or three individuals at each of those clubs have responsibility for player signings. In other words they ought to be in the top 30- 40 most talented, most connected recruiters in world football. Ermm .. .Has anyone on here ever meet Scholes or Cartwright or the rest of the agent team in person? No but it doesn't take a genius to work out that they are as good as Oscar pistorius' court defence.
|
|
|
Post by bhp on Jul 14, 2017 23:03:52 GMT
I'm not sure why we're worrying about Bruno signing. Our back four last season was terrible! One because our midfield was shocking and two because we had no pace in our backline. Bruno was a shining light in a poor outfit but if we're sticking with Shawcross then we need pace alongside him. I like Bruno but I'm not sure he's a natural fit for us at this time. He's an absolute must, he had a decent partnership with Shawcross. In front and by the side of them were not the best, full backs and midfield didn't help. Obviously BMI was the shining light from the back 4 last season so to not sign him would be mad, then buy better players around him in the next windows would be the best outcome of course. Sunderland had a shocking defence but their keeper was highly rated and flogged him for a fair amount of cash. People keep banging on about conceding 4 goals 7 times, the top 7 are now a different animal from what they've arguably ever been. The amount each of them teams has spent in one window is not far off what we've spent in our whole premier league career. They're quality teams and conceding 4 goals against them although is not pleasing it is not a disgrace by any means given the amount they've invested compared to us and the difference in ability. The only embarrassing game out of them came against Palace conceding 4 against them is truly truly unacceptable. If you're going moan about conceding fours next season I'd start moaning now, there's going be more to come.
|
|
|
Post by rat on Jul 14, 2017 23:05:15 GMT
There are 20 clubs in the richest league in the world. Let's say two or three individuals at each of those clubs have responsibility for player signings. In other words they ought to be in the top 30- 40 most talented, most connected recruiters in world football. Ermm .. .Has anyone on here ever meet Scholes or Cartwright or the rest of the agent team in person? If another club decides to not time honour or stall a contract , then I suspect that there's very little anybody can do about that . Porto knew he'd had a good season with us , so they will also know that Bruno is now worth more than the old valuation . That's life . It's money , millions of pounds of the stuff . It's clearly very lucrative to stall and nullify contracts when so much is at stake ..... but maybe lessons do need to be learned .
|
|
|
Post by duckling on Jul 14, 2017 23:06:58 GMT
My theory, which is based on nothing, is that Porto dragged it out intentionally past the deadline because they knew that they could get more from another club. These option clauses are often complex and may include little phrases that allow a party to weasel out of the deal or change the terms of the deal. In addition, even if the clause was straightforward, the only way Stoke could enforce it would be to take them to court. That would certainly not be resolved within the window and would be subject to Porto bribing the court system. So our lawyers are shit then? It should have been water tight. Wasn't the loan done kind of last minute? If it was rushed, a Porto attorney could have covertly inserted a few words into the final draft of the contract. It's easy to overlook an extra sentence snuck into a 100 page contract, especially a contract that may have been in another language. The legal team might also have been working on other deals simultaneously. Yes it's malpractice on the part of the lawyers, and if so the lawyers should never work for the club again and may even be legally liable to compensate the club, but I can see how it could happen under time pressure.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 14, 2017 23:08:35 GMT
So our lawyers are shit then? It should have been water tight. Wasn't the loan done kind of last minute? If it was rushed, a Porto attorney could have covertly inserted a few words into the final draft of the contract. It's easy to overlook an extra sentence snuck into a 100 page contract, especially a contract that may have been in another language. The legal team might also have been working on other deals simultaneously. Yes it's malpractice on the part of the lawyers, and if so the lawyers should never work for the club again and may even be legally liable to compensate the club, but I can see how it could happen under time pressure. That's ok then. It's not like we mess other transfers up. Time after time.
|
|
|
Post by maliciousdamage on Jul 14, 2017 23:09:48 GMT
There are 20 clubs in the richest league in the world. Let's say two or three individuals at each of those clubs have responsibility for player signings. In other words they ought to be in the top 30- 40 most talented, most connected recruiters in world football. Ermm .. .Has anyone on here ever meet Scholes or Cartwright or the rest of the agent team in person? No but it doesn't take a genius to work out that they are as good as Oscar pistorius' court defence. Mate I've met Tony Scholes and thought this bloke will get eaten alive by agents in this day and age at some point looks like I may have been right. I also know someone who's had dealings with him and they tell me he's a real weasel so make up your own mind where this fiasco of a transfer went pest shaped 👍🏻
|
|
|
Post by sanmarinostokie on Jul 14, 2017 23:11:53 GMT
No but it doesn't take a genius to work out that they are as good as Oscar pistorius' court defence. Mate I've met Tony Scholes and thought this bloke will get eaten alive by agents in this day and age at some point looks like I may have been right. I also know someone who's had dealings with him and they tell me he's a real weasel so make up your own mind where this fiasco of a transfer went pest shaped 👍🏻 Hence the analogy.
|
|
|
Post by rat on Jul 14, 2017 23:13:51 GMT
So our lawyers are shit then? It should have been water tight. Wasn't the loan done kind of last minute? If it was rushed, a Porto attorney could have covertly inserted a few words into the final draft of the contract. It's easy to overlook an extra sentence snuck into a 100 page contract, especially a contract that may have been in another language. The legal team might also have been working on other deals simultaneously. Yes it's malpractice on the part of the lawyers, and if so the lawyers should never work for the club again and may even be legally liable to compensate the club, but I can see how it could happen under time pressure. It sound like Porto have broken the spirit of the agreement , if this contract was as last minute stuffed into the fax , as everyone seems to say . Happens all the time , especially when there's £5million at stake .
|
|
|
Post by maliciousdamage on Jul 14, 2017 23:14:48 GMT
Mate I've met Tony Scholes and thought this bloke will get eaten alive by agents in this day and age at some point looks like I may have been right. I also know someone who's had dealings with him and they tell me he's a real weasel so make up your own mind where this fiasco of a transfer went pest shaped 👍🏻 Hence the analogy. Bang on the money mate, not sure if Scholes employs a legal team but I wouldn't bank on them even getting your ppi back after this debacle
|
|
|
Post by sanmarinostokie on Jul 14, 2017 23:16:44 GMT
Bang on the money mate, not sure if Scholes employs a legal team but I wouldn't bank on them even getting your ppi back after this debacle I wouldn't trust them to run to the shop to buy a sodding newspaper let alone close a transfer deal worth millions of pounds.
|
|
|
Post by proudstokie on Jul 14, 2017 23:24:18 GMT
If you're going moan about conceding fours next season I'd start moaning now, there's going be more to come.[/quote]
Unless we get some pace alongside Shawcross we'll concede four with either Bruno or Wollschied there. Shawcross is here to stay so might aswell spend the £15mil elsewhere or on a pacier alternative! I want Bruno to sign only if to play in a back three of Zouma, Shawcross and Bruno, if that doesn't pan out im not sure we need him right now and money can be spent elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Jul 14, 2017 23:34:23 GMT
So our lawyers are shit then? It should have been water tight. Wasn't the loan done kind of last minute? If it was rushed, a Porto attorney could have covertly inserted a few words into the final draft of the contract. It's easy to overlook an extra sentence snuck into a 100 page contract, especially a contract that may have been in another language. The legal team might also have been working on other deals simultaneously. Yes it's malpractice on the part of the lawyers, and if so the lawyers should never work for the club again and may even be legally liable to compensate the club, but I can see how it could happen under time pressure. Sorry, but it's not anymore, lawyers use software to highlight minute differences in marked up drafts
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Jul 15, 2017 0:22:47 GMT
Depends how good the lawyers are and, maybe even more importantly, how good the clients are (bad instructions can produce a bad outcome). Yes we use pdfs not word docs to send to the other side so they cannot tamper with them and also word comparison software to highlight changes and ensure nothing untoward has been added.
When there is significant time pressure, like close to the end of the transfer window, things may be pushed through without proper review or just signed without further recourse to legal advice at all.
If we thought the option said something different than Porto did, that is a matter of interpretation and open to argument. If Porto reneged on the deal or ignored to follow the letter of the contract, that is a matter for the courts. Neither would be resolved quickly, so we may have thought we'd just get on and agree a deal separately, but they upped the price.
Porto clearly are sharp practitioners in transfer dealings and for the second time we have been caught out by them. We either smarten up and fast or steer clear of them and their like in future.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jul 15, 2017 0:25:00 GMT
Depends how good the lawyers are and, maybe even more importantly, how good the clients are (bad instructions can produce a bad outcome). Yes we use pdfs not word docs to send to the other side so they cannot tamper with them and also word comparison software to highlight changes and ensure nothing untoward has been added. When there is significant time pressure, like close to the end of the transfer window, things may be pushed through without proper review or just signed without further recourse to legal advice at all. If we thought the option said something different than Porto did, that is a matter of interpretation and open to argument. If Porto reneged on the deal or ignored to follow the letter of the contract, that is a matter for the courts. Neither would be resolved quickly, so we may have thought we'd just get on and agree a deal separately, but they upped the price. Porto clearly are sharp practitioners in transfer dealings and for the second time we have been caught out by them. We either smarten up and fast or steer clear of them and their like in future. I think sharpen up is the option here, Jezza. We are owned by a multi-billion company who must use some of the best legal folk around. Do the club use the same people?
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Jul 15, 2017 0:32:21 GMT
Depends how good the lawyers are and, maybe even more importantly, how good the clients are (bad instructions can produce a bad outcome). Yes we use pdfs not word docs to send to the other side so they cannot tamper with them and also word comparison software to highlight changes and ensure nothing untoward has been added. When there is significant time pressure, like close to the end of the transfer window, things may be pushed through without proper review or just signed without further recourse to legal advice at all. If we thought the option said something different than Porto did, that is a matter of interpretation and open to argument. If Porto reneged on the deal or ignored to follow the letter of the contract, that is a matter for the courts. Neither would be resolved quickly, so we may have thought we'd just get on and agree a deal separately, but they upped the price. Porto clearly are sharp practitioners in transfer dealings and for the second time we have been caught out by them. We either smarten up and fast or steer clear of them and their like in future. Mmm. I've encountered situations where contracts are under considerable time constraints to be signed. A player loan agreement should almost be a boiler plate template with maybe a couple of tweaks. Any lawyer worth his salt should be very quickly able to hone in and prioritise important clauses such as fees, termination and option to buy clauses even if no comparison software is available. It isn't rocket science so either we've got shit lawyers or a commercial team that take unnecessary contractual risks
|
|
|
Post by Gary Hackett on Jul 15, 2017 0:33:11 GMT
Depends how good the lawyers are and, maybe even more importantly, how good the clients are (bad instructions can produce a bad outcome). Yes we use pdfs not word docs to send to the other side so they cannot tamper with them and also word comparison software to highlight changes and ensure nothing untoward has been added. When there is significant time pressure, like close to the end of the transfer window, things may be pushed through without proper review or just signed without further recourse to legal advice at all. If we thought the option said something different than Porto did, that is a matter of interpretation and open to argument. If Porto reneged on the deal or ignored to follow the letter of the contract, that is a matter for the courts. Neither would be resolved quickly, so we may have thought we'd just get on and agree a deal separately, but they upped the price. Porto clearly are sharp practitioners in transfer dealings and for the second time we have been caught out by them. We either smarten up and fast or steer clear of them and their like in future. I doubt it's as complicated as you make out.
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Jul 15, 2017 0:35:41 GMT
Having spent the last 25 years working on multi-million/billion pound deals around the world, I would gladly come home, for the right price, and knock our legal function into shape!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2017 0:49:20 GMT
Not over until he's signed for...?
Title of this thread needs to be changed though
|
|
|
Post by duckling on Jul 15, 2017 0:57:02 GMT
Porto clearly are sharp practitioners in transfer dealings and for the second time we have been caught out by them. We either smarten up and fast or steer clear of them and their like in future. Who was the first time, and what happened?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2017 1:12:05 GMT
No but it doesn't take a genius to work out that they are as good as Oscar pistorius' court defence. Mate I've met Tony Scholes and thought this bloke will get eaten alive by agents in this day and age at some point looks like I may have been right. I also know someone who's had dealings with him and they tell me he's a real weasel so make up your own mind where this fiasco of a transfer went pest shaped 👍🏻 Well he's either a weasel or inept so make your mind up. Agents are weasels. So are players. What do you want him to be? I think some of you are proper Walter Mitty's.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2017 1:13:03 GMT
Porto clearly are sharp practitioners in transfer dealings and for the second time we have been caught out by them. We either smarten up and fast or steer clear of them and their like in future. Who was the first time, and what happened? Gianelli "The Lemon" Imbula? Sold to us by Arturo Dalio.
|
|
|
Post by duckling on Jul 15, 2017 1:14:44 GMT
Who was the first time, and what happened? Gianelli "The Lemon" Imbula? Sold to us by Arturo Dalio. I thought that was just a case of buying a player that turned out to be shit, not that they reneged on an agreement.
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Jul 15, 2017 1:19:30 GMT
Gianelli "The Lemon" Imbula? Sold to us by Arturo Dalio. I thought that was just a case of buying a player that turned out to be shit, not that they reneged on an agreement. They wanted rid after only a few months of seeing him in action and managed to get more money from us than they paid for him themselves. Nothing illegal done, but they presumably hid their own disappointment with him as a player very well in extracting a gobsmacking 18.3m pounds out of us. They saw us coming, that's for sure.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2017 1:24:12 GMT
Gianelli "The Lemon" Imbula? Sold to us by Arturo Dalio. I thought that was just a case of buying a player that turned out to be shit, not that they reneged on an agreement. Biggest rock n'roll swindle since Winston Palaceious.
|
|
|
Post by duckling on Jul 15, 2017 1:33:51 GMT
I thought that was just a case of buying a player that turned out to be shit, not that they reneged on an agreement. Biggest rock n'roll swindle since Winston Palaceious. Palacios's brother was kidnapped in a targeted kidnapping in order to extort money from Wilson. Wilson paid the ransom, and then his brother was found tortured and murdered. That experience can really fuck you up. He was a decent player before that.
|
|