The Dan Gosling scenario....

Peegee · 27th July 2010, 05:14 PM

SSN Breaking news:

Everton say claims they were late offering Dan Gosling written contract are "ludicrous, without substance and grossly misleading"

have Newcastle just illegally signed a player...??

Walmo · 27th July 2010, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peegee

SSN Breaking news:

Everton say claims they were late offering Dan Gosling written contract are "ludicrous, without substance and grossly misleading"

have Newcastle just illegally signed a player...??

Not really, he was free to sign for other clubs just means they may have to pay some compensation if that is the case.

Joe-B · 27th July 2010, 05:18 PM

Basically Gosling didn't want to sign a contract with them and go somewhere he will get 1st team football.

safc_graeme · 27th July 2010, 05:19 PM

Yes and no.. They shouldn't be punished for it, because he was signed in good faith by the mags.

MyMotherIsAMackem · 27th July 2010, 05:20 PM

Premier League had a chat and it's all kosher, apparently.

Daydream Believer · 27th July 2010, 05:21 PM

Everton already lost the original tribunal for compensation so I doubt they are doing any more than trying to cloud the issue before the appeal.

Definitely Maybe · 27th July 2010, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peegee

SSN Breaking news:

Everton say claims they were late offering Dan Gosling written contract are "ludicrous, without substance and grossly misleading"

have Newcastle just illegally signed a player...??

Everton made a verbal offer last year which Gosling agreed to. Under the FA rules the club has to make a written offer by the end of May to be entitled to compensation. Everton didn't bother as they assumed it had all been agreed and he'd sign once they sorted the paperwork.

Meanwhile Gosling decided he didn't want to play for Everton anymore and left when his contract expired. Everton aren't entitled to any compo as they didn't make a written offer.

Gosling's agent claimed Everton told him they didn't want him and weren't bothered about the compo as he's injured and wouldn't find another club. Everton say that is bollocks as a deal had already been agreed.

So no, everything was by the book and Everton look a bit daft.

TartanMackem · 27th July 2010, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by safc_graeme

Yes and no.. They shouldn't be punished for it, because he was signed in good faith by the mags.

no and no. The mags have done nowt wrong. It's just a matter of whether they will have to pay training compensation to Everton or not. There is no "punishment", merely an obligation to pay the previous club for the years they trained the young player.

Daydream Believer · 27th July 2010, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TartanMackem

no and no. The mags have done nowt wrong. It's just a matter of whether they will have to pay training compensation to Everton or not. There is no "punishment", merely an obligation to pay the previous club for the years they trained the young player.

They already lost that tribunal , the stage they're at now is appealing against that decision.

Enfield Exile · 28th July 2010, 10:08 AM

All smacks of an agent doing the best for himself again.