The Kraken

I think your mate has mugged you off for his bird. Bros over hos.

That rings a bell. Interesting; I'll DEFINITELY feel more comfortable about this in 10 days time then. EDIT: Not the most reliable surce, but an Arsenal blog: http://goonerboy.blogspot.co.uk/2006/05/theos-performance-few-transfer-rumours.html

Theo was under a pre-contract agreement for us when he left for Arsenal. There was a great deal of worry at the time that he could potentially leave on the cheap if it went to tribunal, Lowe did very well to extract such a significant fee. It seems to be quite a grey area to me.

Where did I say it wasn't binding? I just imagine a pre-contract agreement is easier to break than a formal contract.

Once again confirmation that he hasn't yet signed a pro contract, just a pre-contract agreement. I'll feel more confident of the situation in 10 days time.

There we go. Top stuff.

What have you provided to this thread other than moaning about others ruining it? There's some reasonable discussion going on if you choose to notice it and partake in it. What irony.

Well I'm expecting it to be a very swift and very firm rebuttal from SFC.

They're worth that money only if they go on and fulfill the potential. There's absolutely no guarantee of that; particularly for Luke Shaw who hasn't yet played a league game and still has a lot of growing and development to go through. Look at the two lads who were poached from Leeds by Chelsea, Tom Taiwo and Michael Woods. Chelsea paid £5M for them back in 2006. Both have played for their England age groups. Yet they were last seen playing football for Carlisle and Yeovil. The expensive risk didn't pay off; they didn't develop further as it was hoped they might.

Absolutely right. This thread was plodding along just fine until a couple of people got too angry about the genuine opinions of fellow posters. While that's true to some extent, if Shaw were to decide to go it would be a significant kick in the teeth for our oft-stated ambition of producing and keeping young talent. Of course it doesn't prove anything either way, it would be wrong to suggest that our academy is in meltdown if he leaves, and equally wrong to say that we'll never have players poached again if he decides to stay. It would just set something of a precedent and send out a sign that, even though we're back in the Premier League and have decent financing behind us, our ability to keep hold of young talent when the big clubs come calling is seemingly no better (or worse) than it ever was.

Precisely. In my eyes both cases show how absolutely mental the transfer market has gone in this country, particularly for younger English players.

He has. It's a shame when people have to revert to aggression and personal attacks etc etc

Wow. That's a flip out, and then some.

I think that would likely crash the forum.

Pedantry aside again, £11.2M is 14M Euros.

With Stuart Pearce at the helm I don't have as much faith as you do. This is the manager who on more than one occasion has chosen to throw on a goalkeeper to play up front whilst leaving an actual striker on the bench.

Oi vey

If you're saying it wouldn't set any precedent, at all, then fair enough, we'll have to agree to disagree. I believe it would.

You're over-reacting. No-one has said that it blows the argument apart. Simply that it sets a precedent.

Check the link provided above (post #70); he can't sign a pro contract until 17 years old, what he has signed is a pre-contract agreement. So his pro contract will (as it stands) kick in on 12th July.

Well it would, actually. The point has been made before, by a number of posters, that as we're back in the PL and with wealth behind us we are in a much better position with our academy as our young players are now much LESS likely to leave early than Walcott, Bale and AOC were. Of course Chelsea are a big club, so were Arsenal & Spurs when they came in before, so its a very valid comparison to make if Shaw does decide to leave (I have a hunch its unlikely he'll go).

Well if that's correct he's on a pre-contract agreement, as Theo was when he left at 16 years old. The tribunal system these days is much better (fairer to the selling club) than it used to be, but is still a bit of a risk. Still with only 9 days to go until his 17th birthday I'm sure we could just neglect to pick up the phone for a few days.... EDIT: Here's the link on the OS, he HASN'T yet signed a professional contract. http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10280~2776895,00.html "Luke will begin a professional contract when he turns 17 in July, having joined five other Academy players in agreeing to do so 18 months ago".

Cracking over-simplification there. Its not a case of being confused by which team is which, is it? Its whether there is any risk, at all, of any of the players in the heat of the game not being able to distinguish instantly between a team mate and an opposition player. If the PL and referee decide they're happy there's no conflict then we're fine. If they decide there is then we'll need a third kit.

With our financial state right now its a hell of a lot easier to turn down bids of £4M that it would have been before. Even £5M or £6M, while being a great financial return, would send out a terrible message were we to sell Luke Shaw for that. The real test IMO comes if/when he establishes himself in the side and the likes of Chelsea etc come calling with bids around the level we sold AOC for, and the player has the potential to go straight into their first team/squad. Shaw wouldn't have that right now or for potentially quite some time.