• 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.
Gmspurs said:
I'm still trying to get my head round why so many of our fans believe we're at fault here??


I mean the contract is between Forest and MGW? I fail to see how we could do anything that got us a penalty? I can see MGW or his agent getting one as he's signed the contract but us? We didn't sign any NDA with Forest, we don't have a legally binding contract with Forest do we? You can't get in trouble for enquiring about a player can you?

I mean, there's zero evidence (as in provable stuff) just conjecture and I can't think what evidence there can be that would get US in trouble.

Even if there's an email from us to an agent that says "We're interested in MGW, please tell us the lowest we have to go to get him" then the agent can just tell us no as that's private information.

But still, asking the question isn't wrong is it???



So many articles are reporting our "illegal approach" but not actually saying what that is and so many fans willing to accept that we must have done something wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The illegal aspect I believe is to do with the tapping up rule a rule every club ignores. Theoretically you are suppose to first speak to the club and ask permission to speak to the player then you can go from there. As Simon Jordan pointed out it is never done this way as why would you go through all that trouble to speak to a player who doesn’t want to come.

What happens is a club speak to the players agency who confirm if the player is interested. Then t they speak to the club and then finally the player directly. An article I believe in the athletic a while ago I think said almost all transfers are done this way even though it is against the tapping up. Forest would have built their entire squad probably by tapping up.

The owner is a Greek Donald Trump, he isn’t interested if it’s legal or not legal. He simply needs to create a drama that he feels can benefit him. Forest are clearly angry they put a £60m release on the player and are angry it got found out and are now trying to find a way to break a legally blinding release clause with the player. If they can find a way they what is to stop clubs ignoring their players contracts, even ignore paying players wages. I think Forest maybe hope the legal process is slow enough to prevent the transfer but from the players side there is nothing to stop them taking this to court and getting the contract null and void so he can go as a free agent and Forest get nothing. Breaking a contract clause is potentially a very serious matter.
 
Gmspurs said:
We can't - MGW and his team can sure, but we can't as it's nothing to do with us surely.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Even if we had a just verbal agreement with someone at Forest for MGW at £60m, then we have a contract of sorts, no? The reality is that we must have gone beyond that to some sort of written exchange that confirms terms (no way we book a medical without this)... so, even if the formal contract documentation hasn't been signed, don't we have have some form of contract (assuming there's no proof we did anything wrong)?
 
Tomo said:
The illegal aspect I believe is to do with the tapping up rule a rule every club ignores. Theoretically you are suppose to first speak to the club and ask permission to speak to the player then you can go from there. As Simon Jordan pointed out it is never done this way as why would you go through all that trouble to speak to a player who doesn’t want to come.

What happens is a club speak to the players agency who confirm if the player is interested. Then t they speak to the club and then finally the player directly. An article I believe in the athletic a while ago I think said almost all transfers are done this way even though it is against the tapping up. Forest would have built their entire squad probably by tapping up.

The owner is a Greek Donald Trump, he isn’t interested if it’s legal or not legal. He simply needs to create a drama that he feels can benefit him. Forest are clearly angry they put a £60m release on the player and are angry it got found out and are now trying to find a way to break a legally blinding release clause with the player. If they can find a way they what is to stop clubs ignoring their players contracts, even ignore paying players wages. I think Forest maybe hope the legal process is slow enough to prevent the transfer but from the players side there is nothing to stop them taking this to court and getting the contract null and void so he can go as a free agent and Forest get nothing. Breaking a contract clause is potentially a very serious matter.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If it doesn't go through then it will set a bit of a precedent.

MGW would be well within his rights to down tools and withdraw labour if Forest weren't honouring a part of his contract.
 
coughymachine said:
Even if we had a just verbal agreement with someone at Forest for MGW at £60m, then we have a contract of sorts, no? The reality is that we must have gone beyond that to some sort of written exchange that confirms terms (no way we book a medical without this)... so, even if the formal contract documentation hasn't been signed, don't we have have some form of contract (assuming there's no proof we did anything wrong)?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't know, maybe it only comes into contract with exchange when money or deposits are paid etc
 
Sometimes when I think I'm losing my grip on reality I come to this thread and it reminds me that there are lots and lots of people in way worse shape than me. Thanks TFC!
:frankthumbs:
 
Dragging people into Toilets, fingering them and whispering sweet words in their ears. That's tapping them up isn't it?
 
Last edited:
coughymachine said:
Even if we had a just verbal agreement with someone at Forest for MGW at £60m, then we have a contract of sorts, no? The reality is that we must have gone beyond that to some sort of written exchange that confirms terms (no way we book a medical without this)... so, even if the formal contract documentation hasn't been signed, don't we have have some form of contract (assuming there's no proof we did anything wrong)?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Verbal agreement means absolutely nothing, and anyway Premier League rules state permission must be granted in writing.
Everything else you have just said is just standard pre-contract stuff.
No contract exists or has ever existed for the transfer of MGW from Forest to Spurs, because if it did he would already be registered as our player.
 
Trotter said:
Verbal agreement means absolutely nothing, and anyway Premier League rules state permission must be granted in writing.
Everything else you have just said is just standard pre-contract stuff.
No contract exists or has ever existed for the transfer of MGW from Forest to Spurs, because if it did he would already be registered as our player.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm not sure the bold bit is true. This is from the website of solicitor Catherine Herries-Smith
Verbal contracts are legal in the UK, but in order for them to stand up in a court of law, there are several terms that should be agreed upon and completed, including:
  • An offer should be made by one party and accepted by another
  • Something of value should be exchanged in return of a promise
  • Intention for a legally binding agreement to be made
So how does a court of law know who to believe when there is a dispute of a verbal contract? Understanding and confirming what has been agreed upon versus what has been given can often be a very complex task, which is why it is always better to have a written contract of employment or services in place.

Firstly, evidence will be looked for to confirm the existence of a verbal contract. This could include witness statements, emails to confirm the discussion, proof of payments, and meeting notes taken. Once these pieces of evidence have been provided in court, the judge is likely to use common sense to approach the final decision.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
I think the reason why the likes of Ornstein, John Percy and Matt Law are quiet is because no one knows where things are truthfully.

The bid was for the release clause, so Forest can’t reject. The player agreed terms through his agent. No one is entirely sure what stage anything is at other than the two clubs, and they’re both probably waiting for the other to flinch first.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top