• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Morgan Gibbs-White

Supposedly this exact thing scuppered Olise to Chelsea in 23.

If there was some confidentiality clause alongside the release clause, then MGW’s agents should not have told Spurs about it. And then Spurs should not have bid that exact amount. So the theory goes.

I would still be surprised that risk averse, cautious Levy allows us to bid for a player and get caught up in this way. Equally I am not surprised that Forest’s Chairman saw the backlash from their fans and decided to show he’s putting up a fight.
 
Yiddo said:
How the fudge is that even a thing? You can go back through Romano’s tweets and see thousands of deals where he clearly says that the players agreed contract and that it was now upto the clubs to agree a fee etc.
Click to expand...
If we have spoken to the player's agent then we're fine. There is no way Forest could prove that anything specific was spoken about in terms of MGW's contract. If it can be proven that we spoke directly to the player without permission then that would be an illegal approach and we would be in trouble. Extremely unlikely that we would've spoken directly to the player however. Clubs speak to agents all of the time. MGW is represented by CAA and we would be having conversations about players with them daily, seeing as CAA represent more players at Spurs than any other agency.

Spurs could just say the conversation went a bit like this....

Spurs: We think MGW is a good player, do you think he would be interested in moving to Spurs?
CAA: Perhaps, though he is contracted to Nottingham Forest.
Spurs: Why do you think Forest would be prepared to sell him for?
CAA: I think they would likely consider bids over £60m
Spurs: What sort of wage demands do you think your client would have if we could agree a fee with Forest.
CAA: Around £100k a week plus bonuses.

Nothing there that could be determined as an illegal approach or disclosure of a release clause.
 
Last edited:
No way we're booking medicals to take place without Forest having knowledge of what was going on. Sounds like this is all just a bit of theatre.

Don't see how he'll play for Forest again regardlessif he comes to us or not.
 
It's tinkle poor management, why sell Elanga with knowledge that your other star player has a release clause about to come into effect.
 
BrainOfLevy said:
Supposedly this exact thing scuppered Olise to Chelsea in 23.

If there was some confidentiality clause alongside the release clause, then MGW’s agents should not have told Spurs about it. And then Spurs should not have bid that exact amount. So the theory goes.

I would still be surprised that risk averse, cautious Levy allows us to bid for a player and get caught up in this way. Equally I am not surprised that Forest’s Chairman saw the backlash from their fans and decided to show he’s putting up a fight.
Click to expand...
Didn't Olise just flat out turn Chelsea down and signed a new deal with a new clause
 
Also I don’t know a lot about MGW’s agents, but I’d assume if there was a confidentiality clause around the release clause, they wouldn’t just so readily tell Spurs about it knowing they were dealing with a volatile Forest owner who likes bringing legal action. I’d expect they would have been more cautious too.

I bet it’s not actually a ‘confidential’ release clause. It’s just a release clause and Forest’s owner is tinkled this is happening so soon after the Elanga deal.
 
Legohamster said:
Didn't Olise just flat out turn Chelsea down and signed a new deal with a new clause
Click to expand...

I heard Chelsea decided to pull back. Wouldn’t the new deal be a way of placating Olise - basically saying we know we fudged your move up so here’s some more money to play for us for one more year, and he’s a more transparent release clause so you can go more easily next time.
 
BrainOfLevy said:
Also I don’t know a lot about MGW’s agents, but I’d assume if there was a confidentiality clause around the release clause, they wouldn’t just so readily tell Spurs about it knowing they were dealing with a volatile Forest owner who likes bringing legal action. I’d expect they would have been more cautious too.

I bet it’s not actually a ‘confidential’ release clause. It’s just a release clause and Forest’s owner is tinkled this is happening so soon after the Elanga deal.
Click to expand...

It's ca isn't it. Which we have good relations with.
 
BrainOfLevy said:
I heard Chelsea decided to pull back. Wouldn’t the new deal be a way of placating Olise - basically saying we know we fudged your move up so here’s some more money to play for us for one more year, and he’s a more transparent release clause so you can go more easily next time.
Click to expand...
I only did a quick google so you maybe right, but do Chelsea strike you as a club that give a toss about rules?
 
I can't say much about Giibs-White as I havn't watched him much. Seems like a hard working player, more than a brilliant one? A grafter? 60m is a fair wack if that is the case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back