• The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Player Morgan Gibbs-White

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Status
Not open for further replies.
yes said:
Why the fuck is it that every time I click on this cursed thread, people are asking THE SAME FUCKING QUESTIONS THAT WERE BEING ASKED 130 PAGES AGO.

The most interesting topic of conversation we've had on here in days was yesterday when people started talking about shagging dogs.

PLEASE STOP. GO OUTSIDE. MUM WILL TELL YOU WHEN DINNER IS READY. YOU DON'T NEED TO KEEP ASKING.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I hate to be pedantic, but talk was about rimming dogs.

Shagging dogs would be disgusting.
 
Don Pedro said:
If they had already gone to the league and instantly reported us then I'd agree with your assessment. But its 7 days on and all they are doing is threatening to go legal on us. Feels like they've nothing concrete and are just creating this big smokescreen to stall the deal.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They reported us and the agent 2 days ago to the league. On top of that a legal notice threat has been issued for potential loss of revenue and we have been put on notice for that.
It always take a while for PL to set up a panel to adjudicate these things (usual timeline would take it until after window shuts), and in all likelihood the case won’t get heard, as will be pulled when Spurs settle things by offering more money, with or without an admission of guilt.
 
Last edited:
yes said:
Why the fuck is it that every time I click on this cursed thread, people are asking THE SAME FUCKING QUESTIONS THAT WERE BEING ASKED 130 PAGES AGO.

The most interesting topic of conversation we've had on here in days was yesterday when people started talking about shagging dogs.

PLEASE STOP. GO OUTSIDE. MUM WILL TELL YOU WHEN DINNER IS READY. YOU DON'T NEED TO KEEP ASKING.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
There should be a banner on this thread with "Nothing has changed" until it actually does.
 
FightingIllini said:
They've told MGW that the breach of confidentiality with respect to the release clause renders it null and void and they no longer have any such obligation.

Can Forest do that? That's what courts of law exist to decide.

But the Anglo-American legal paradigm is an adversarial system, an injured party must bring a lawsuit in order for there to be a resolution.

MGW, the injured party, is clearly not willing to do that, for whatever reason. Could that change? I suppose, but a world in which we're talking about bids above the release clause is one in which all parties have accepted Forest's position.

WHY things have happened this way is absolutely mystifying to me, EVEN IF Forest's accusations are 100% true. But WHAT has happened and where things stand is crystal clear.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
None of this has happened.
Nowt!
Forest have reported Spurs to the EPL for not giving them written notice of our interest. We are waiting for the EPL to make a ruling.
Precedent (Zeige and Liverpool) means a fine for MGW and THFC and a delay to the transfer.
 
Wellsey said:
There should be a banner on this thread with "Nothing has changed" until it actually does.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Nothing To See Here GIF by Giphy QA
 
sudoku said:
None of this has happened.
Nowt!
Forest have reported Spurs to the EPL for not giving them written notice of our interest. We are waiting for the EPL to make a ruling.
Precedent (Zeige and Liverpool) means a fine for MGW and THFC and a delay to the transfer.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
In that precedent however Liverpool also made an out of court settlement on the eve of the trial date, for the difference between what they paid Middlesbrough per his release clause, and his “market value”


So precedent here would say if it followed (and not saying cases are the same by the way)

Spurs would get a 7 figure fine, but escape a transfer ban
MGW would get a fine
Spurs would probably have to pay greater than the 60m
 
sudoku said:
Forest have reported Spurs to the EPL for not giving them written notice of our interest. We are waiting for the EPL to make a ruling.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
One would be unwise to rely too heavily on the reporting (transfer journos are out of their depth on this stuff), but this is not what has been reported.

Forest HASN'T formally registered a complaint with the league, they have threatened legal action in letters to Spurs and MGW's agents, alleging that the bid they received could only have been made as a result of breaching the confidentiality of the contract (the claim against MGW), and that the breached information could only have been acquired via an approach to the player without permission in violation of PL rules (the claim against Spurs).

The message is not "Premier League, come tell these guys they've been bad", it's "we will not honor this clause, whose execution represents an unlawful conspiracy against us".

They aren't asking, they're telling.

This is a breach of MGW's contract, and MGW has responded by doing nothing. Why? Search me. Seems like an admission of guilt, but who knows.
 
FightingIllini said:
One would be unwise to rely too heavily on the reporting (transfer journos are out of their depth on this stuff), but this is not what has been reported.

Forest HASN'T formally registered a complaint with the league, they have threatened legal action in letters to Spurs and MGW's agents, alleging that the bid they received could only have been made as a result of breaching the confidentiality of the contract (the claim against MGW), and that the breached information could only have been acquired via an approach to the player without permission in violation of PL rules (the claim against Spurs).

The message is not "Premier League, come tell these guys they've been bad", it's "we will not honor this clause, whose execution represents an unlawful conspiracy against us".

They aren't asking, they're telling.

This is a breach of MGW's contract, and MGW has responded by doing nothing. Why? Search me. Seems like an admission of guilt, but who knows.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The Times has stated that an official complaint was made to EPL a few days ago. Other news outlets have repeated this.
 
sudoku said:
The Times has stated that an official complaint was made to EPL a few days ago. Other news outlets have repeated this.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Fair enough.

Regardless, no substantive investigation of those claims can be done before the end of the transfer window, and compelling Forest to complete the transfer wouldn't be an applicable or available remedy anyhow.

"PL clears Spurs, transfer to proceed" will not be an outcome here.
 
scarletjim said:
Jeez, this question has been asked and answered about 50 times. Such a clause would protect the player by enabling him to insist on the move if a club happened to bid on or over the clause amount and he wanted to go - the fact that the bidding club wouldn't know that is irrelevant, it would still enable the player to insist on the move. It doesn't contradict anything (I don't even know what you mean by that sentence - the clause is between MGW and Forest, there is no need for us to be aware, we are not party to the contract, we just happen to be a triggering event via our bid).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I dont be on this forum every single day mate sorry about that.
 
FightingIllini said:
One would be unwise to rely too heavily on the reporting (transfer journos are out of their depth on this stuff), but this is not what has been reported.

Forest HASN'T formally registered a complaint with the league, they have threatened legal action in letters to Spurs and MGW's agents, alleging that the bid they received could only have been made as a result of breaching the confidentiality of the contract (the claim against MGW), and that the breached information could only have been acquired via an approach to the player without permission in violation of PL rules (the claim against Spurs).

The message is not "Premier League, come tell these guys they've been bad", it's "we will not honor this clause, whose execution represents an unlawful conspiracy against us".

They aren't asking, they're telling.

This is a breach of MGW's contract, and MGW has responded by doing nothing. Why? Search me. Seems like an admission of guilt, but who knows.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They are reporting the offical complaint went in

www.standard.co.uk

Nottm Forest submit Spurs legal complaint as Gibbs-White makes return

£60m Spurs transfer for England midfielder delayed with Premier League rivals unhappy over conduct
www.standard.co.uk www.standard.co.uk
 
r-u-s-x said:
They are reporting the offical complaint went in

www.standard.co.uk

Nottm Forest submit Spurs legal complaint as Gibbs-White makes return

£60m Spurs transfer for England midfielder delayed with Premier League rivals unhappy over conduct
www.standard.co.uk www.standard.co.uk
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Others are saying they havent. I suspect nobody really knows.

I would think the longer there is silence the less likely it is going to be good news. Who knows, we might drop interest and then come back in a month's time. Could play out in a number of ways. It depends on how much Gibbs-White wants the move I think.
 
enfield1985 said:
Like I said nothing has changed this deal is dead and burried. We are all just living on pure copium.

Levy hasn't changed from the man who thought Mourinho and Conte were silver bullets to winning trophies whil insufficently backing them. We will likely make one more signing this window and it probably be for someone who is too young to shave again.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Thanks for your input Mr Marinakis.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top