John Stones transfer saga

[Professor Toffee]

It's not logic, it's fans of a football club reacting emotively after a player of that club takes a steaming dump on them 6 days before the end of the transfer window after an entire summer of speculation.

The best and worst of this game is in the emotion. The abuse he gets now from a few goes hand in hand with how he would be mobbed for scoring a winner in the derby.

Additionally some football fans are not very nice and some are not very intelligent
Abusing someone because of their decisions seems to be part of life in general now, especially on social media
Id expect a footballer who plays international football in a football mad city is often the focus of a lot of unpleasantness
If you ply your profession in the public eye and your opinions are broadcast as "breaking news" I guess this stuff happens

 

[terraloon]

I think most would agree with that mate, although based on the unambiguous comments Martinez has made last night, it seems plausible that (see what I did there?) Stones put his request in half heartedly, in some state of confusion and under poor advice, and so he may not have maintained the stance. I hope that's what has actually happened as that would considerably help his rehabilitation with us fans.

Thank god someone read what I said

A worldwide definition of a 'contract' is: a written or spoken agreement, especially one concerning employment, sales, or tenancy, that is intended to be enforceable by law.

A contract is a contract. You agree to play for someone for a set period of time. Some contracts have buyouts clauses. Some don't.

Stones is not being held against his will. He signed a legally binding agreement.

Whether a club chooses or not to say, "Awwwww, you want to leave? You're really sad about it? Oh.... go on then, we'll agree to sell you" is entirely up to the club.

The idea that Everton are the bad guys in all of this is entirely asinine and totally skewed from a Chelsea point of view who are aghast at not getting what they want, so accustomed as they are to stamping their feet, yelling loud, and throwing money at something until they get what they want. The very fact they're now resorting to the 'It's just not right, it's morally wrong' (ha! coming from arguably the most morally bankrupt club in the country) simply illustrates how rattled they are, not how wrong we are.

The point I have been trying to make is that footballers are employees and a such are covered by the very same employment legislation as everyone else.

If you look back at my posts this all kicked off by someone suggesting that Everton would be going to law and my point, although I guess not made well,was that such a course would fail although there were grounds to complain re tapping up

Footballers contracts of employment are what I believe are categorised as fixed term contracts. employees who are on such contracts can give notice to quit. the issue then would be around the players registrations and that's where compensation would kick in

 

[deipnosophist]

Came here expecting crude hostility towards Chelsea and pure speculation about our precocious defender's future in light of recent anouncements.
Instead I got pages of debate about employment law and the history of slavery.
Stay weird GOT.
It's marvelous.

...weirdness is GOT's gyroscope lol

 

[bluejohn66]

Out of interest did he get a box of Ritz crackers at the services or the standard quavers n kit kat?

 

[oldblue]

Slavery is a far wider matter than just about freedom of where they are or indeed receiving remuneration

There would be no consequences if Stones walked away from Everton and went to work at say Mc Donald's the consequences revolve purely around his registration to play football . so the argument goes full circle in that there is a valid arguement around football rules re tapping up but the suggestion that Everton would go to law is doomed to failure

yeah but you keep picking up on one point and ignoring the others. 'unilateral' is the crucial word. He has negotiated this agreement and was happy with it. The terms haven't changed and he can renogotiate them. Indeed if he wants to go off and train to be a nurse that is fine. But that very point means it is not slavery. It is a contract. some contracts have been signed without a person having full knowledge of a situation or being misled and can be challenged. Even that is not slavery. John Stones really would struggle to argue that the contract was misleading. He can walk away, probably without the usual months notice. He can negotiate things within the contract that give him the chance to break it under many circumstances. I assume just wanting more money isn't one of them. In four years he can do what he wants. Now, he could buy out the contract. He won't, because he is very rich thanks to a contract he negotiated.

 

[Professor Toffee]

...weirdness is GOT's gyroscope lol

and its periscope, in fact its pair of scopes

 

[TomDixie]

Additionally some football fans are not very nice and some are not very intelligent
Abusing someone because of their decisions seems to be part of life in general now, especially on social media
Id expect a footballer who plays international football in a football mad city is often the focus of a lot of unpleasantness
If you ply your profession in the public eye and your opinions are broadcast as "breaking news" I guess this stuff happens

I agree with your last two sentences.

However, some people full stop are not very nice and not very intelligent and people have been abused for their decisions throughout the history of our species.

The only difference here, in it having happened now, is that we can all view a video mere minutes/hours after the event and then remotely have this debate.

 

[hetion]

you can bully me on the internet as much as you want for thirty-forty grand a week whatever he is on. Crying!!!??? what a shame lad when I was 21 I was in the armed forces taking home about a £900 a month he needs to get a grip. This drama is going to go to the wire with no doubt leaving Everton in a crap position as usual with plenty for the media to ramble on about. Thank God last nights game was a good old fashioned cup tie that was entertaining and exciting because modern football really is starting to put me off, its sad not just being about 90 minutes on a saturday afternoon anymore.

To be fair, hard men like you never cry. How could he possibly live up to such standards of manliness?

 

[deipnosophist]

you can bully me on the internet as much as you want for thirty-forty grand a week whatever he is on. Crying!!!??? what a shame lad when I was 21 I was in the armed forces taking home about a £900 a month he needs to get a grip. This drama is going to go to the wire with no doubt leaving Everton in a crap position as usual with plenty for the media to ramble on about. Thank God last nights game was a good old fashioned cup tie that was entertaining and exciting because modern football really is starting to put me off, its sad not just being about 90 minutes on a saturday afternoon anymore.

+1000

 

[Furey1878]

Looks like this was true ...

View attachment 13052

Several people on Twitter stating that they were there when it happened

View attachment 13053

Sounds too dramatic to be true, that. Kinda heartbreaking if it is, though.

 

[Steve Wigan]

One thing I've noticed in the current scenario and previously. The figure in the background doing the 'minding' of John Stones, in a subtle way, is Steven Naismith, and it was Naismith who almost instantly made exactly the right comments to the media after the Mirallas penalty incident. I think there is an indication that the value of Naismith to Roberto goes beyond any value on the pitch.

 

[TomDixie]

To be fair, hard men like you never cry. How could he possibly live up to such standards of manliness?

I personally don't have any issue with Stones crying and nor do I think it is shameful in any way, but on the flip side I don't have any empathy for him either.

 

[TheFinnFan]

Anyone who blames our board in this case is having an agenda. I know it feels bad to criticise Stones him self but for gods sakes get a grip...you cant always blame the suits.

My feelings towards Stones are on hold. In deep freeze.

 

[deipnosophist]

One thing I've noticed in the current scenario and previously. The figure in the background doing the 'minding' of John Stones, in a subtle way, is Steven Naismith, and it was Naismith who almost instantly made exactly the right comments to the media after the Mirallas penalty incident. I think there is an indication that the value of Naismith to Roberto goes beyond any value on the pitch.

...not too difficult...

 

[terraloon]

yeah but you keep picking up on one point and ignoring the others. 'unilateral' is the crucial word. He has negotiated this agreement and was happy with it. The terms haven't changed and he can renogotiate them. Indeed if he wants to go off and train to be a nurse that is fine. But that very point means it is not slavery. It is a contract. some contracts have been signed without a person having full knowledge of a situation or being misled and can be challenged. Even that is not slavery. John Stones really would struggle to argue that the contract was misleading. He can walk away, probably without the usual months notice. He can negotiate things within the contract that give him the chance to break it under many circumstances. I assume just wanting more money isn't one of them. In four years he can do what he wants. Now, he could buy out the contract. He won't, because he is very rich thanks to a contract he negotiated.

Indeed unilateral is the key for it means either of the parties on their own could end the agreement.