Redman

Redman, you keep going on about a refusal to negotiate, but I fail to see any evidence that this is actually the case. I've no doubt that MON has been difficult to deal with throughout all of this (I wonder why?) but to suggest he's sticking his fingers in his ears and going 'la la la la la' is frankly ludicrous.

The latest reports point to MON putting a proposal to Liverpool last week some time. As far as I know, nothing has been heard back from Liverpool since. So who is it here who isn't negotiating?

I think we can consider O'Neill's letter to be more of a ransom note than a starting point for negotiation.

Really? What did it say? That sounds awfully ITK...

Not ITK buddy, just good old-fashioned common sense.

I think we can consider O'Neill's letter to be more of a ransom note than a starting point for negotiation.

OK, so you're not willing to discuss this seriously I take it? First the problems were with MON refusing to negotiate, now they're with MON not negotiating in exactly the way you'd like him to.

I really can't see what else you are proposing here apart from: 'We are Liverpool, so you must sell us this player at less than the value you have placed on him.'

I am willing to discuss it seriously.

I haven't seen the contents of O'Neill's letter but I'm fairly sure it offers Liverpool no encouragement whatsoever and was not designed to spark a round of negotiations.

I fail to see why Villa need to offer any encouragement to Liverpool - the only thing that needs to be offered is cash. If Liverpool don't have the cash, then why should Villa care?

That's the whole point - some are claiming that O'Neill's letter was designed to open negotations. To do that, it would have to offer encouragement.

I don't remember O'Neill claiming that he wanted to open negotiations. Have I missed something?

All that happened was I suggested that O'Neill is unwilling to negotiate and others responded that he sent Liverpool a letter last week to which I responded that the content of the letter isn't likely to encourage the opening of negotiations.

The transfer request is designed to protect a club from having to lose a player against it's wishes and also settle his contract. What is the point of having an official transfer request if a player can force his way out of his contract by blabbing to the press and collect his settlement anyway simplly because he didn't sign on the dotted line?

Exactly!

Yeah, exactly. That's why, legally, a newspaper article can constitute a transfer request.

I think we can consider O'Neill's letter to be more of a ransom note than a starting point for negotiation.

OK, so you're not willing to discuss this seriously I take it? First the problems were with MON refusing to negotiate, now they're with MON not negotiating in exactly the way you'd like him to.

I really can't see what else you are proposing here apart from: 'We are Liverpool, so you must sell us this player at less than the value you have placed on him.'

I am willing to discuss it seriously.

I haven't seen the contents of O'Neill's letter but I'm fairly sure it offers Liverpool no encouragement whatsoever and was not designed to spark a round of negotiations.

I fail to see why Villa need to offer any encouragement to Liverpool - the only thing that needs to be offered is cash. If Liverpool don't have the cash, then why should Villa care?

That's the whole point - some are claiming that O'Neill's letter was designed to open negotations. To do that, it would have to offer encouragement.

And you should really try to be more respectful.

I'm not the only one.

But you're the one stirring things up, what's wrong with you?

And a tabloid newpaper article does not quantify as a 'transfer request' as far as Aston Villa Football Club is concerned. Ask the 'general' and I'm sure he would laugh at such an irrelevant question!

No mate - I'm not the only one stirring things up either.

I'd like to know what the General has to say too but I expect he knows Villa would have a strong case if they chose not to settle Barry's contract based on the NOWT interview.

Redman LLB (HONS) wrote

You should really starting thinking before posting.

In legal terms, a transfer request can be official, unofficial, verbal or written. The whole country has seen a document containing direct quotes from Barry expressing his desire to leave Aston Villa. That is a transfer request. If, for whatever reason, Barry contested that in court, he would lose.

So please explain, have you seen the contents of Barrys current contract t osee exactly what is defined as 'a transfer request'. It has been held for many years that the only form of request that effects payments is in WRITING. Otherwise this wouldn't be an issue in many transfers.

Has Bentley put his request in writing? No. He has left the tour, alledgedly feigned injury but no WRITTEN request.

An offical, written transfer request constitutes an agreement to waive any settlement due.

Direct quotes in a Sunday newspaper demanding to leave don't constitute an agreement but provide the selling club with more than enough evidence to use in court should the player contest their decision to withhold the settlement on the basis that he did not hand in an official transfer request.

The transfer request is designed to protect a club from having to lose a player against it's wishes and also settle his contract. What is the point of having an official transfer request if a player can force his way out of his contract by blabbing to the press and collect his settlement anyway simplly because he didn't sign on the dotted line?

And you should really try to be more respectful.

I'm not the only one.

Redman, you keep going on about a refusal to negotiate, but I fail to see any evidence that this is actually the case. I've no doubt that MON has been difficult to deal with throughout all of this (I wonder why?) but to suggest he's sticking his fingers in his ears and going 'la la la la la' is frankly ludicrous.

The latest reports point to MON putting a proposal to Liverpool last week some time. As far as I know, nothing has been heard back from Liverpool since. So who is it here who isn't negotiating?

I think we can consider O'Neill's letter to be more of a ransom note than a starting point for negotiation.

On what basis can we consider that? Do you know what's in that letter?

Of course not but after the way this has gone so far, do you really think it offers Liverpool any encouragement?

I think we can consider O'Neill's letter to be more of a ransom note than a starting point for negotiation.

OK, so you're not willing to discuss this seriously I take it? First the problems were with MON refusing to negotiate, now they're with MON not negotiating in exactly the way you'd like him to.

I really can't see what else you are proposing here apart from: 'We are Liverpool, so you must sell us this player at less than the value you have placed on him.'

I am willing to discuss it seriously.

I haven't seen the contents of O'Neill's letter but I'm fairly sure it offers Liverpool no encouragement whatsoever and was not designed to spark a round of negotiations.

That's hilarious! I think you'll find this has to be in writing to the club itself.

Oh dear. Another one.

Very constructive, you are a 'wind-up' merchant!

So, when do football clubs listen to players via the press? When did Barry actually hand in a written transfer request then?

As far as I'm aware Barry hasn't done that yet for fear of losing a share of the transfer fee.

You should really starting thinking before posting.

In legal terms, a transfer request can be official, unofficial, verbal or written. The whole country has seen a document containing direct quotes from Barry expressing his desire to leave Aston Villa. That is a transfer request. If, for whatever reason, Barry contested that in court, he would lose.

because Redman he and his agent are greddy bastards, it is that simple

They may be greedy bastards but I'm not sure it is necessarily that simple.

Redman, you keep going on about a refusal to negotiate, but I fail to see any evidence that this is actually the case. I've no doubt that MON has been difficult to deal with throughout all of this (I wonder why?) but to suggest he's sticking his fingers in his ears and going 'la la la la la' is frankly ludicrous.

The latest reports point to MON putting a proposal to Liverpool last week some time. As far as I know, nothing has been heard back from Liverpool since. So who is it here who isn't negotiating?

I think we can consider O'Neill's letter to be more of a ransom note than a starting point for negotiation.

That's hilarious! I think you'll find this has to be in writing to the club itself.

Oh dear. Another one.

You'd struggle to convince me O'Neill's unwllingness to negotiate at all is anything other than a matter of pride and principle after the way the whole episode has played out.

I believe there is a stong element of truth in this statement. The words stubborn and obdurate spring to mind. There appears to be no flexibility at all from MOn over this whole thing - hence why it may collapse.

And you can consider the NOWT interview to be his transfer request.

of course you can. So why not make it official, if he wants to leave that much. Make it official, waive your fee/bonus to get your move.

this bit confuses me.

It confuses me too. What is clear is that Villa would have a strong case against Barry should they wish to withhold his contract settlement.

What is less clear is, as you say, is why he hasn't made it official.

"Suffering" was probably a poor choice of word.

But there is no doubt Barry's ambition is being hampered at this moment by his club's unwllingness to negotiate. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm just saying that's how it is. Of course, you could argue his ambition is being hampered by Liverpool's failure to meet the valuation but we aren't a million miles apart, are we? You'd struggle to convince me O'Neill's unwllingness to negotiate at all is anything other than a matter of pride and principle after the way the whole episode has played out.

So you're saying we should drop the price. Why should Barry cost less than Mascherano, Hargreaves or Carrick? It is the going rate for a player of that calibre in that position. Do you not understand this?

Sorry - who's putting words in who's mouth? Nobody said anybody should drop the price.

And you can consider the NOWT interview to be his transfer request.

You and I both know that is bollocks. Please try harder, your clearly appraent lack of applied knowledge is bringing down the level of intellect on the board.

You can think it's bollocks if you want but then you obviously know **** all about law and just made yourself look a bit silly.

Then why are you so convinced that you know what he is thinking?

It isn't rocket science, is it? Jesus wept. I'm hardly predicting what he wants for his dinner.

I'm just saying the player is suffering unfairly.

i don't think the player is either suffering (at this moment) or suffering unfairly.

Unless of course you are of the school of thinking that believes Ronaldo to be some sort of Slave at man united.

barry either leaves Villa for Liverpool or someone else, or he stays at VP and gets his head down.

why would he be suffering? Are we abusing him? Did he willingly enter a 4 year contract with us, for which he gets handsomely paid?

Has he even put in a written transfer request?

suffering my arse.

"Suffering" was probably a poor choice of word.

But there is no doubt Barry's ambition is being hampered at this moment by his club's unwllingness to negotiate. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm just saying that's how it is. Of course, you could argue his ambition is being hampered by Liverpool's failure to meet the valuation but we aren't a million miles apart, are we? You'd struggle to convince me O'Neill's unwllingness to negotiate at all is anything other than a matter of pride and principle after the way the whole episode has played out.

And you can consider the NOWT interview to be his transfer request.

You seem to want to paint O'Neill and Villa as the only bad guys in this whole deal.

Absolutely not true. All I do is offer an alternative to the general consensus around here that the sun shines out of O'Neill's arse.

What I would say is that O'Neill is walking a bit of a tightrope. Although he has every right to demand the full asking price, if his unwillingness to negotiate is purely a matter of pride and principle, it'll be the player who suffers and unfairly so, in my opinion.

I wonder if your sympathy for Gareth would be the same if lets say Man Utd came in for your captain, hes head was turned but then Man Utd wouldn't pay the asking price. Would you then be saying oh lets just lower our asking price our poor captain is now suffering its not fair on him boo whoo.

I didnt say anybody should lower the asking price, I'm just saying the player is suffering unfairly. Not that I expect you to be sympathetic because you are quite right - I wouldn't be either.

Hold your horses guys.

If you were to ask Gareth Barry who is damaging his career the most, I think his answer would be Martin O'Neill, don't you?

I'm talking from Gareth Barry's point-of-view, not Villa's or Liverpool's.

What the ****? He is contracted to the Villa.

If he don't like that, he can stick a transfer request in. He hasn't.

Okay, I'll type it in bold then.

I'm talking from Gareth Barry's point-of-view, in response to a poster who was also talking from Gareth Barry's point-of-view.

Clear?

I imagine that Gareth Barry is kicking himself for signing a four year contract that he can't get out of easily. If he had not tried to get himself a transfer to Liverpool, his career would be doing fine - with a team on the up, and breaking into the England side again. Who is doing most damage to Gareth Barry's career? Gareth Barry.

He could be doing a hell of a lot worse than playing for Villa, that's for sure.

But it's difficult to argue that he doesn't know himself what's best for his career.

I suppose that also depends on the future as well I mean if he gets very little playing time at Liverpool or Liverpool go on a slump and end up fifth (say for arguments sake Everton get fourth) then Rafa maybe sacked, Torres might leave....and the new manager doest like Barry.....then Gareth Barry has gone from a club that he is a hero at, the manager loves and he's the captain of, also he is playing for England......so he has ruined his career.....

I mean look at the players it's happened to.......where it hasnt improved their careers

Bosnich from Villa to Man U

Sidwell

Kewell

Shevchenko

Darren Bent

Jeffers

and these are just a few, and I agree there are successes as well.....but who knows until you have hindsight whose ruining whose career....MON is just stalling Barry's

History shows us that the grass isn't always greener.

Whether or not Barry makes the best decisions for his career, it's still his career and those decisions should be his to make. But of course, there is more to consider than just what Gareth Barry wants.

What I would say is that O'Neill is walking a bit of a tightrope. Although he has every right to demand the full asking price, if his unwillingness to negotiate is purely a matter of pride and principle, it'll be the player who suffers and unfairly so, in my opinion.

Hold your horses guys.

If you were to ask Gareth Barry who is damaging his career the most, I think his answer would be Martin O'Neill, don't you?

I'm talking from Gareth Barry's point-of-view, not Villa's or Liverpool's.

What the ****? He is contracted to the Villa.

If he don't like that, he can stick a transfer request in. He hasn't.

Okay, I'll type it in bold then.

I'm talking from Gareth Barry's point-of-view, in response to a poster who was also talking from Gareth Barry's point-of-view.

Clear?

I imagine that Gareth Barry is kicking himself for signing a four year contract that he can't get out of easily. If he had not tried to get himself a transfer to Liverpool, his career would be doing fine - with a team on the up, and breaking into the England side again. Who is doing most damage to Gareth Barry's career? Gareth Barry.

He could be doing a hell of a lot worse than playing for Villa, that's for sure.

But it's difficult to argue that he doesn't know himself what's best for his career.

Hold your horses guys.

If you were to ask Gareth Barry who is damaging his career the most, I think his answer would be Martin O'Neill, don't you?

I'm talking from Gareth Barry's point-of-view, not Villa's or Liverpool's.

What the ****? He is contracted to the Villa.

If he don't like that, he can stick a transfer request in. He hasn't.

Okay, I'll type it in bold then.

I'm talking from Gareth Barry's point-of-view, in response to a poster who was also talking from Gareth Barry's point-of-view.

Clear?

Hold your horses guys.

If you were to ask Gareth Barry who is damaging his career the most, I think his answer would be Martin O'Neill, don't you?

I'm talking from Gareth Barry's point-of-view, not Villa's or Liverpool's.

i think the fans got their feelings off their chest - expect humble pie from mr Barry - Rafa, Gerrard and Alex Black have lost him his captaincy and potentially his participation in the world cup - well done you rocket polishers -

It depends on your point-of-view, doesn't it?

If you are talking in terms of Barry's career, you could say O'Neill is denying him the right to play at the highest level of club football and enhance his chances of playing at the world cup.

Jas 100% agree mate, it makes no sense does it ...

why risk an injury ?

as it to make a point ot Barry and the wider world that we mean buisness ...

It's either:

brinksmanship - not playing Barry would only encourage Liverpool.

Or

O'Neill is assuming no acceptable bid is forthcoming and is exercising his right to use a contracted player as he wishes.

or maybe you's are just not in the running anymore

I think I already covered that point here:

O'Neill is assuming no acceptable bid is forthcoming and is exercising his right to use a contracted player as he wishes.

except I managed to stay on topic. :winkold: