Taylor and the 'tapping up' saga

[Bar BS3]

17 minutes ago, Fiale said:

 

 

Was it not put onto the gas forums at about that time as well. So their own speculation would have more than justified a punt- £300,000 is not a lot of money in this context.

It was widely speculated on, well before our offer was made. It's an easy enough theory to test...

LJ- "Hello Darrell, its Lee here. What would you say to an offer of £290k for Matty Taylor..?"

DC- "No. He's worth £10million, Lee. You know it and I know it"

LJ- "Only kidding! How about £300k..?"

DC- "Bugger!" 

[Fiale]

 

4 minutes ago, Bar BS3 said:

It was widely speculated on, well before our offer was made. It's an easy enough theory to test...

LJ- "Hello Darrell, its Lee here. What would you say to an offer of £290k for Matty Taylor..?"

DC- "No. He's worth £10million, Lee. You know it and I know it"

LJ- "Only kidding! How about £300k..?"

DC- "Bugger!" 

 

Only did they not actually agree to it and also not inform the player of the offer as they should have ? Which makes the £2m thing even more ridiculous as it was Rovers who were in breach of the rules.

[Bar BS3]

7 minutes ago, Fiale said:

 

 

Only did they not actually agree to it and also not inform the player of the offer as they should have ? Which makes the £2m thing even more ridiculous as it was Rovers who were in breach of the rules.

There was nothing for them to "agree" once the release clause was offered. It was just up to MT then to decide if he wanted to go or not. 

[myol'man]

2 hours ago, Ivorguy said:

This whole sorry saga is a terrible condemnation of how our club treat us - like the proverbial mushrooms.  Sadly so for the many of us who remain deeply sceptical of the way the club is run.  This is one of the worst examples.  I would like the club's lawyers and accountants to make a statement on the Taylor transfer so that rumours are laid to rest and the full and accurate story is in the public domain.

Wake up, The Board ! and join the 21st century of openness and transparency. You will find that this will prove beneficial in every way for Bristol City, owner, Board, management, players and, not least, fans

Shirley you cant be serious

[Ivorguy]

1 hour ago, Vincent Vega said:

Please point me towards this mythical  football club that is open when it comes to transfer dealings ..

And your point exactly?

[Ivorguy]

1 hour ago, RedRaw said:

Mate, you just carry on supporting the club in the best way you see fit and let the board run the club accordingly.

football transfers and relationships between clubs are generally a closed shop. No club is going to come out and publicly disclose intricate details of transfers and agreements other than what they are happy to be out there in the public domain i.e fees, loan agreements etc

To suggest the board should disclose this sort of information just to appease some people's inquisitive mind is ludicrous 

If only our Board did run the club!

I am not talking about the need to conduct transfers in private, I am discussing the unique situation of the so-called gentleman's agreement

It is not people's inquisitive minds that bother me but the prevalence of exotic, and potentially damaging, rumours

PS  I never cease to be surprised by the large number of our fans who show little interest in the way the club is run. Mushrooms indeed!

[Fiale]

21 minutes ago, Bar BS3 said:

There was nothing for them to "agree" once the release clause was offered. It was just up to MT then to decide if he wanted to go or not. 

 

but the club did not inform MT - we had to remind them that they had to. 

[Loosey Boy]

They really do need to get over the fact that we took their best player for £300k! ;-)

Bodin next?  

[Phileas Fogg]

22 minutes ago, Ivorguy said:

If only our Board did run the club!

I am not talking about the need to conduct transfers in private, I am discussing the unique situation of the so-called gentleman's agreement

It is not people's inquisitive minds that bother me but the prevalence of exotic, and potentially damaging, rumours

PS  I never cease to be surprised by the large number of our fans who show little interest in the way the club is run. Mushrooms indeed!

I don't think there's anything worth commenting on. We activated Taylor's (relatively well known) release clause. Wael allegedly discussed this with our board and claimed we have now an agreement in place whereby we won't bid for their players.

Appeasement for their fans more than anything I suspect. Transfers between the two clubs are remarkably rare anyway and I bet Rovers won't make the mistake of allowing such a release clause again.

There's always going to be rumours about this and that. Nothing you can do about it. They're not 'damaging' if they're easily disproven. No need for the club to comment on random rumours.

[redcityman]

39 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

I don't think there's anything worth commenting on. We activated Taylor's (relatively well known) release clause. Wael allegedly discussed this with our board and claimed we have now an agreement in place whereby we won't bid for their players.

Appeasement for their fans more than anything I suspect. Transfers between the two clubs are remarkably rare anyway and I bet Rovers won't make the mistake of allowing such a release clause again.

There's always going to be rumours about this and that. Nothing you can do about it. They're not 'damaging' if they're easily disproven. No need for the club to comment on random rumours.

Exactly this for me, highly doubt this so called clause even happened, just an exercise to stop gas fans from bleating, but hey some like to cling on to any so called misdemeanour in order to have a pop at the club.

[RedRaw]

51 minutes ago, Ivorguy said:

If only our Board did run the club!

I am not talking about the need to conduct transfers in private, I am discussing the unique situation of the so-called gentleman's agreement

It is not people's inquisitive minds that bother me but the prevalence of exotic, and potentially damaging, rumours

PS  I never cease to be surprised by the large number of our fans who show little interest in the way the club is run. Mushrooms indeed!

Yet it only appears to be you that is bothered about these "exotic" rumours......that's not because other fans are not interested in how the club is run but because most sensible fans accept that in the case of Taylor-gate, the board acted in the best interests of the club and  got the best end of the deal and the rumours are nothing more than bitter and feeble attempts of face-saving by the sags......from the clown, sorry, president of the club down to the fans.

If you choose to believe these rumours or think there is a case to answer then it is you my friend that is being "fed the shit"

[Guest]

5 hours ago, RumRed said:

Still don't get the 'gentleman's agreement' though, very odd and not sure if legal?

The £300k was posted on Gaschat when he signed his contract with them though so this £2m stuff is obvious BS.

A gentleman's agreement = basically only worth your word. 

[Bar BS3]

5 hours ago, 29AR said:

A gentleman's agreement = basically only worth your word. 

Based on the word of someone who promised Rovers a new stadium, new training ground, Acadamy set up and money for players..! 

[42nite]

8 hours ago, Ivorguy said:

If only our Board did run the club!

I am not talking about the need to conduct transfers in private, I am discussing the unique situation of the so-called gentleman's agreement

It is not people's inquisitive minds that bother me but the prevalence of exotic, and potentially damaging, rumours

PS  I never cease to be surprised by the large number of our fans who show little interest in the way the club is run. Mushrooms indeed!

Who was it that mentioned thls gentleman's agreement?

I may be wrong but don't think it came from our side did it?

 

 

[Crackers Corner]

10 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Back to the original question.  Only 4 parties could've known / divulged the release clause.

1. Taylor

2. His Agent

3, Rovers

4. EFL (FA whoever)

Spot the missing party!  Bristol City.  Unless we were present how could we have possibly known it.  If someone wants to leak it, that's their problem not ours!

I really don't see how we can be called to account.

Tapping up Taylor and asking him what his release clause is, is however a different matter 

5 the rovers fan who posted it before we brought him

[Marina's Rolls Royce]

No disrespect meant to Matty Taylor ( who I think will come good) but may I suggest that if BCFC actually paid £2.3 million for him that El Wally would be demanding a gentleman's agreement that we bought all brfc players in the future not the other way around.

[Vincent Vega]

9 hours ago, Ivorguy said:

And your point exactly?

Point being you seem to be struggling with how modern transfers work.

[Phileas Fogg]

5 minutes ago, Vincent Vega said:

Point being you seem to be struggling with how modern transfers work.

Exactly, I think Ivorguy and glos old boy are of the older generation and perhaps haven't acclimatised to how transfers are done or football clubs are run in 2017. (I hope that doesn't sound patronising; @cidered abroad said something similar he other day - he put it much better.)

I've no doubt that 50 years ago transfers were simpler and completed with more integrity.. but it's not how things are now. 

There's so much noise these days that it would be absurd if clubs had to 'comment' on rumours that anyone could make up, especially if it's not in the clubs best interests to do so.

[Ian M]

I'm not even sure how Wally claiming to have sought a gentlemen's agreement even appeased his fans, it basically boils down to him dropping to his knees before us and begging us not to take his best players. How is that meant to raise their self esteem?

[Monkeh]

12 hours ago, Ivorguy said:

This whole sorry saga is a terrible condemnation of how our club treat us - like the proverbial mushrooms.  Sadly so for the many of us who remain deeply sceptical of the way the club is run.  This is one of the worst examples.  I would like the club's lawyers and accountants to make a statement on the Taylor transfer so that rumours are laid to rest and the full and accurate story is in the public domain.

Wake up, The Board ! and join the 21st century of openness and transparency. You will find that this will prove beneficial in every way for Bristol City, owner, Board, management, players and, not least, fans

stop talking bollocks

[RedM]

He sounds like he's trying to say don't come back for any more of our players. What is he afraid of, other players on flimsy contracts? We might not want any other of theirs for a long time, but in any case I don't think he can afford to be fussy about whose money he takes can he.

[City Ben]

13 hours ago, Ivorguy said:

Well we have to assume they sought legal advice and was told all was ok.  But I still challenge that advice even if it was sought and given.  I cannot imagine The PFA would be happy about such a restraint of trade agreement between two clubs

 

As I said in an earlier thread we don't know if this odd gentleman's agreement has a cut off date, whether it will last the change of owner in either club, whether it applies to loans or academy players as well as first team squad, etc.

 

What I want is for our Board to be far more open.  Only in this way will mad rumours be denied the oxygen they need to take off

 

Can we just stop this "restraint of trade" nonsense. Assuming that this gentleman's agreement exists, it is not illegal. 

What do you propose would happen? Gas player says "I'd like to move to City". Rovers say "you can't". I'm afraid that's the end of the story and it's got nothing to do with gentlemen's agreements... it's because Bristol Rovers hold his registration and can decide if they sell him or not. Are Liverpool about to get sued by Coutinho for not letting him go to Barcelona and "restraining his trade"? Are we, over not selling Aden Flint? No restraint of trade I'm afraid, that's just how registrations and transfers work. 

Next scenario, and it's an unlikely one anyway - there's a release clause in a Gas player's contract, who we'd like to buy. However we respect this agreement, and decide not to bid. What happens next? The player sues... who? What law has been broken? Does he sue the Gas? No - see above, they've done nothing wrong. Does he sue City? What - to force us to buy him!? We respond by just saying we don't want him. 

This illegality point is laughable. I'm a little annoyed with myself that I bit and actually responded to it. Please just let it go. 

[spudski]

When talking about 'Tapping up' in the true sense of the word, then it happens in all transfers.

There are two transfer windows.

A player is given a contract.

If 'Tapping up' didn't occur, then all players would run their contracts down and have to become free agents.

Club officials and players agents will be talking about players all the time, whilst they are contracted.

The 'tapping up' happens, just through 'third parties'....the agent and the Club 'official'.

It's a ridiculous situation where the FA impose a ban on talking to players...especially with the way transfers work these days.

'Tapping up' has to occur, especially under FFP, when negotiating and knowing what budgets are available.

If anyone thinks players haven't been 'tapped up' then they'd be wrong.

[View from the Dolman]

11 hours ago, Ivorguy said:

If only our Board did run the club!

I am not talking about the need to conduct transfers in private, I am discussing the unique situation of the so-called gentleman's agreement

It is not people's inquisitive minds that bother me but the prevalence of exotic, and potentially damaging, rumours

PS  I never cease to be surprised by the large number of our fans who show little interest in the way the club is run. Mushrooms indeed!

Perhaps you should do the noble thing and report your wholly substantiated concerns to the authorities. That would be the noble thing to do. You won't sort it by dribbling words on here.

[RedM]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

When talking about 'Tapping up' in the true sense of the word, then it happens in all transfers.

There are two transfer windows.

A player is given a contract.

If 'Tapping up' didn't occur, then all players would run their contracts down and have to become free agents.

Club officials and players agents will be talking about players all the time, whilst they are contracted.

The 'tapping up' happens, just through 'third parties'....the agent and the Club 'official'.

It's a ridiculous situation where the FA impose a ban on talking to players...especially with the way transfers work these days.

'Tapping up' has to occur, especially under FFP, when negotiating and knowing what budgets are available.

If anyone thinks players haven't been 'tapped up' then they'd be wrong.

Exactly right. I fully expect players who have got their contracts running out next Summer (and some of course with even longer contracts, we can totally guess who those are) to be exploring their options through their Agents right now.

[Curr Avon]

16 hours ago, Bar BS3 said:

Did you know that when we signed Peter Beadle from Port Vale, we had to pay Rovers £500k because he used to play for them..? 

No..? Probably because it's not true either. 

Even your lies aren't true. 

[Septic Peg]

5 hours ago, 42nite said:

Who was it that mentioned thls gentleman's agreement?

I may be wrong but don't think it came from our side did it?

 

 

Came from Wael himself during an RB interview. http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/sport/15103572.FOOTBALL__Bristol_Rovers_owner_Al_Qadi_and_Bristol_City_counterpart_Steve_Lansdown_make__gentleman_s_agreement__over_future_cross_city_transfers/

Rovers made complaint about tapping up to FA/EFL and then withdrew it...

This was after Wael's attempt at banter...

 

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

4 hours ago, Ian M said:

I'm not even sure how Wally claiming to have sought a gentlemen's agreement even appeased his fans, it basically boils down to him dropping to his knees before us and begging us not to take his best players. How is that meant to raise their self esteem?

Yep.

I can't imagine too many of our players secretly hoping the Gas try and sign them up and it's not like they've got a spare £5 million or so sitting around that would let them afford players like Flint or Bryan.

As for Woodsy's mate and his theory that we've bunged them an extra £2 million to stfu....That would make both clubs look bad if it were true....which it isn't. The £300k figure was even mentioned in the Sun months before the January transfer window as well as countless times on social media, that bonehead Al Qadi even confirmed it on Twitter which eliminated the chance that the release fee was something different.

 

[BanburyRed]

They really are delusional fools, aren't they? If they keep peddling this nonsense for long enough, eventually they'll start to believe it.....oh dear!

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

4 minutes ago, Septic Peg said:

Came from Wael himself during an RB interview. http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/sport/15103572.FOOTBALL__Bristol_Rovers_owner_Al_Qadi_and_Bristol_City_counterpart_Steve_Lansdown_make__gentleman_s_agreement__over_future_cross_city_transfers/

Rovers made complaint about tapping up to FA/EFL and then withdrew it...

Clearly an attempt to try and appease their seething fans who couldn't bring themselves to accept the fact that their best player wanted to play for us.

Others would follow if they were given the chance, Dopey knows this, Wally knows this, even deluded Sagheads know this.

If they have anyone worth signing in the future this 'gentlemans agreement' will mean sweet Jack shit.