Homepage Update: Stones tells Everton he wants Man City transfer

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

It's likely that his agent will have sounded out Man City before putting in a request. They'll have got an indication from City as to what they'd be prepared to spend. Noone is going to put in a transfer request unless his advisors are confident there's a willing buyer prepared to pay the likely asking price - why would you make yourself vulnerable in such a way?

Going to be an interesting one to say the least.

 

[mmmmsnouts]

Totally agree but it looks like he already has a lot of cash burning a hole in his pocket mate. Who would he buy ?

Can't spend as much as he wants to without selling Stones thanks to convoluted PL rules.

 

[Connor]

Just seen in a paper that's banned on here that negotiations for Stones will only start at 50 and could likely go higher.

 

[kithnou]

Just seen in a paper that's banned on here that negotiations for Stones will only start at 50 and could likely go higher.

Let's hope this time they are correct.

 

[Connor]

Let's hope this time they are correct.

That'd be a first.

 

[USABlue]

Just seen in a paper that's banned on here that negotiations for Stones will only start at 50 and could likely go higher.

Wait the mirror is banned on here too?

 

[Connor]

Wait the mirror is banned on here too?

Aye, pretty sure it is

 

[USABlue]

Aye, pretty sure it is

Oh thought it was just the 3 letter one. Good to know though they're all pretty tosh with transfers though.

 

[bluestevon]

Just seen in a paper that's banned on here that negotiations for Stones will only start at 50 and could likely go higher.

Yeah they did say Stones was 24 years old though as well, so wouldn't think it's high quality reporting that

 

[Khalekan]

Yep.

I empathize with him. I tend to empathize with employees over employers.

This is exactly what I mean.

Your empathy should be with EFC and not Stones.

Though I must admit you playing the downtrodden employee card raises the whole Uriah Heep aspect of this affair to new and farcical levels

It makes me

 

[RaleighBlue]

This is exactly what I mean.

Your empathy should be with EFC and not Stones.

Though I must admit you playing the downtrodden employee card raises the whole Uriah Heep aspect of this affair to new and farcical levels

It makes me

Who played downtrodden employee card?

Should I empathize with the billionaire accountant of a Post-Soviet strongman instead?

And how can I empathize with an organization? An organization does not feel. I empathize with a human wanting to better himself.

I support Everton. That doesn't mean I have to reject my understanding of other people.

Everton are wonderful, and I want them to win everything. That doesn't mean I'm willing to reject my principles for them...that's the way of a darker path. Is it a shame that there is so much money involved these days, and that it's spread so disparately that players feel like they need to go to a bigger club? Sure it is. Is it a shame that Champions League has begun to mean more to players than domestic leagues? Definitely. Do I place the blame for modern football at the feet of a 21 year old defender, with, again, no natural ties to Everton? Not so much.

He's done literally nothing wrong. I'm only defending Stones because I think the anti-Stones rhetoric is a bit over the top and ridiculous. It's just a bunch of jilted people lashing out at the former object of their affection because he doesn't love you as much as you loved him.

It's silly. Everton are greater than any one player. Accepting that John Stones doesn't want to play for Everton and not hating him for it doesn't mean I don't want Everton to succeed just as much as you.

It just means I don't think John Stones leaving is some deep implication of his character, nor do I believe it is the end of the world for Everton. And I don't think players should be forced to work in situations that they do not want to work...just like any employee. Regardless of wages. No one is beholden to enjoy their job or to not strive to (in their own opinion) better themselves.

The correct answer is to say, 'Fair enough. If we get the money, off you go. It's a shame, because you'll be great one day. And I think you're making a mistake. But that doesn't mean I think you're a bad person/footballer/cat/etc. just because you want to self-determine'.

 

[kithnou]

The correct answer is to say, 'Fair enough. If we get the money, off you go. It's a shame, because you'll be great one day. And I think you're making a mistake. But that doesn't mean I think you're a bad person/footballer/cat/etc. just because you want to self-determine'.

Please explain how he is making a mistake?

 

[RaleighBlue]

Please explain how he is making a mistake?

Hence 'I think'.

I.E. As a supporter of Everton, I believe he is leaving the best club in the world for a bunch of scruffy Manc's that belong in the third division.

 

[USABlue]

Who played downtrodden employee card?

Should I empathize with the billionaire accountant of a Post-Soviet strongman instead?

And how can I empathize with an organization? An organization does not feel. I empathize with a human wanting to better himself.

I support Everton. That doesn't mean I have to reject my understanding of other people.

Everton are wonderful, and I want them to win everything. That doesn't mean I'm willing to reject my principles for them...that's the way of a darker path. Is it a shame that there is so much money involved these days, and that it's spread so disparately that players feel like they need to go to a bigger club? Sure it is. Is it a shame that Champions League has begun to mean more to players than domestic leagues? Definitely. Do I place the blame for modern football at the feet of a 21 year old defender, with, again, no natural ties to Everton? Not so much.

He's done literally nothing wrong. I'm only defending Stones because I think the anti-Stones rhetoric is a bit over the top and ridiculous. It's just a bunch of jilted people lashing out at the former object of their affection because he doesn't love you as much as you loved him.

It's silly. Everton are greater than any one player. Accepting that John Stones doesn't want to play for Everton and not hating him for it doesn't mean I don't want Everton to succeed just as much as you.

It just means I don't think John Stones leaving is some deep implication of his character, nor do I believe it is the end of the world for Everton. And I don't think players should be forced to work in situations that they do not want to work...just like any employee. Regardless of wages. No one is beholden to enjoy their job or to not strive to (in their own opinion) better themselves.

The correct answer is to say, 'Fair enough. If we get the money, off you go. It's a shame, because you'll be great one day. And I think you're making a mistake. But that doesn't mean I think you're a bad person/footballer/cat/etc. just because you want to self-determine'.

Well said

 

[PITA]

Ambition is one thing... but this mad rush to fast-track a career to the next level is another. The is a long list of players who have over-reached themselves and damaged their reputations as a result. Personally I think he would benefit from at least another year under Koeman without the burden of a £50m price tag. Its a risk to chase this move now and get every error or below par performance dissected.

The key to successfully managing any career is to step up when you are ready… the problem is many young footballers let their inflated egos convince them they are ready too early. Time will tell on City but can you imagine the way the media would have crucified Stones if he'd been part of Chelsea's slump last year. Stones made the wrong call then and Everton rescued him its not a huge stretch to suggest he might have repeated the mistake.

Wow! You are so posting in the wrong thread. I'm surprised you've got away with it.