Baines: Transfer window was difficult for Stones

We don't historically do much buying or selling in the January window, so it will be interesting to see how the board handles it, if it does happen.

If we are just treading water, the players will want to leave for better opportunities and to ensure that they are picked for the Euros.

That's hard to argue with.

The sad thing is, that John Stones did put in a transfer request. Whatever spin our club (and good servants like Baines) put on it, he made up his mind to go, so presumably he will leave before too long, as long as we have defensive cover lined-up, or if Jose has a meltdown and Chelsea no longer look so attractive.

What we are now seeing is an attempt to get the fans onside. Give us a break, please. He wanted to jump into that snake pit and we refused to let him. I don't want to hear how terrible it was for poor lickle Stonesy. Get on with the season. I will forgive John when I see him clatter Costa and plant a header past Courtois.

So my view is that Stones must live with the consequences of his actions. I feel no sympathy for him whatsoever. Indeed, I would be surprised if he expected any from Everton supporters. This article is merely an attempt by the club and it's PR advisors to send a message of togetherness and unity. Fair enough.

The pinch point of Saturday's confrontation with Chelsea aside, it is reasonable for us to expect the dust to settle, until perhaps the pre-Christmas run-in at least, when the frantic lobbying will start again no doubt. Stones could curtail it all of course, by withdrawing the transfer request, but I won't hold my breath.

The big clubs have the most fans and media outlets know that they will get the clicks they want by peddling stories about these clubs buying up X and Y. Man U were supposedly buying about 50 different players this Summer!

The gossip about our best players being bought will never stop and it's up to them to rise above it and play or if they are incapable or unwilling to do that then for us to get the best result out if we can.

I've said before that I think it's highly unlikely that more than two of Stones, Barkley, McCarthy, Lukaku, Deulofeu and Coleman will still be here in 3 years time and we will have some big transfer revenue coming in that the club will have to work out how best to use....

Let's cheer John and the lads to the rafters and get a win against Chelski that will get that whining prick Mourinho closer to the exit door.

COYB

I felt for him for a millisecond and then thought that he earns more in a week that I do in a year and as stated above, no matter how bad the media flurry got, Baines did not submit a transfer request.

(Possibly because he wouldn't buy into the board's plan of making every player leaving the bad guy... taps nose conspiratorially.)

I think the pressure built so much that he felt he had to make a decision and hand in a request. The club quite rightly turned it down and he accepted their decision. No sulking, no drop in form, he just got on with things. I have a lot of respect for him because of that. Anyone holding a grudge because of the request (not demand) is extremely immature, in my opinion.

He's just played for England again and has a very good chance of being in the starting lineup for the Euros. I don't think we will sell in January, but next summer will depend very much on how we do on the field this season.

I have always sort of wondered how these things work in real terms – it would be fascinating to be a fly on the wall in the office of a Premier League manager around transfer deadline day, especially when a saga like this happens!

It's now up to the board to do their bit and release funds and prove they mean business by building a team around the likes of Stones, Barkley, Lukaku etc and get us back to whence we were, one of the best teams in the league. COYB.

Bainsey is older and an Evertonian and probably more capable of "handling" his agent.

Stonesy would have been under intense pressure from his money-grabbing agent telling him his international career would be enhanced. He will never get another chance like this, you don't turn a club like Chelsea down, etc etc.

IMO, the law should be changed that agents cannot take a cut of any transfer fee and that they submit an invoice for services to the player on an ongoing basis for representation and advice.

Why should the clubs pay a huge fee for these parasites to hawk their players off to other clubs?

So that's how it is with me right now. Never mind January, next year or whenever. I want him out of his daze and back to his best. The Chelsea game will be a big test but we know he has the ability to cope. All eyes will be on him. Fingers crossed he does well.

Transfer hype appears to have become an industry of its own. As soon as one window shuts, the media speculation starts about the next one. The nearer we get to January, the more the rumours regarding Stones and who knows who else will get more hyped up. Every red top and internet rumour site will feed off each other claiming "exclusives" that are just made up and transfers that are never going to happen.

There should only be one window in the summer. No January window at all. Give everyone a chance to calm down. Let's see them keep up the transfer prattle if they had to wait the best part of a year between each window.

But then. as we all well know at Goodison from past events, this is now par for the course. Shrek, Lescott, Gosling are just a few examples who have flown the coop, but never for the money to hear them talk, just medals and trophies.

I firmly believe that it was only pressure and protest from our long suffering fans that decided the board and BK from making a deal with the most detestable piece of garbage in the Premier League. Unfortunately this is not the end of the matter unless EFC can turn us into real contenders for European 'honours' and to do this we must keep our best an brightest.

If John does leave us then I pray to the gods it is not to Chelski; preferably to the other money team that will piss of Chelsea and Man Utd, who it's been said he was a supporter of, but we want £40M+.

We should call him " sideways " for that is all he seems to be able to see !
John Stones will of course leave,it is only a matter of when.

I fail to see any logic.

You want the product, but you don't want the protagonists to reap the rewards? Would you prefer them to be old cloth capped pros riding to the stadium on their bikes, or maybe driving an old Ford Mondeo like yours?

Reality check required. Money doesn't have anything to do with whether John Stones was tapped up, unsettled, had his head turned or whatever other bullshit term you want to put to the situation - the kid was clearly given bad advice, and genuinely upset by the whole affair yet you think he should just get over it because he earns more money than you ever will?

He has talent, and he's worked hard since he was a child to get to where he is today - what did you do from childhood until now to make that happen for you? Nothing. Like the rest of us you probably dicked about at school, or went to University and smoked dope & drank beer, discovered girls, then discovered pubs and larked about while John Stones was doing none of that and working his arse off to become a highly paid professional footballer at the club you love - yet you turn on him when he's had his head messed with. I feel nothing but sympathy for the kid to be honest.

I suddenly find myself feeling quite angry on this thread, which is weird because I'd started to fee much better about the Stones thing lately.

He has my full support anyway, for what it's worth.

Sorry, I'll shut up now.

Net result - he wasn't sold = bad advice.

Do you think John Stones made the decision all on his own? Do you think he has an agent? Maybe some other advisors who saw pound signs?

Do you think he was well advised to make a transfer request, given that Everton had stated on a number of occasions prior to that, that he would not be sold?

How on any level was it good advice, given the club's public standpoint at the time, and subsequently keeping the player?

I haven't heard, seen, read anywhere that anyone thinks he was well advised to hand in a transfer request - aside from Paul Merson who one would imagine still has trouble tying his own shoelaces.

But I'm with the majority here in supporting the lad, and I'm convinced he'll do just fine this season now that the transfer insanity has ebbed for the moment. One thing Stones has never lacked is confidence. And when he has a bad game from time to time, I'll chalk it up to his being 21 and in his first full season as a starter. Not the Chelski crap.

That said, I really hope he nets one against Chelsea & spits on Mourinho as part of the celebration!

Stones has been with us for just over two years and played less than 50 games- BUT he owes the club and the fans everything?? Big leap in your thought process mate.

We BOUGHT HIM with the hope he would turn into a player just like lots of other players, don't know how the fans help in his development. Unless you count the people calling the team 'fucking useless' every time they misplace a pass as encouragement. That lad and the rest of them are honing their skills just to shut up the muppet in Row G who abuses them all game long.

Now I am in full on defence mode, the lad is just 21 and having too much pressure put on him.

Yes, he now plays regularly for the mighty Blues and is playing for England,

Yes, he seems to be getting better each game.

Yes, he is hot property

No, as a group of supporters, fans, in my case obsessive idiot, should we give them grief if they want to leave. With the exception of Nick Barmby, as we definitely put him back on the radar and then announces he was always a RS, He still deserves MAJOR GRIEF

You redeem yourself by saying we shouldn't deal with the west London club and they deserve a warm welcome on Saturday.

"Transfer hype appears to have become an industry of its own. As soon as one window shuts, the media speculation starts about the next one. The nearer we get to January, the more the rumours regarding Stones and who knows who else will get more hyped up. Every red top and internet rumour site will feed off each other claiming "exclusives" that are just made up and transfers that are never going to happen."

Wouldn't it be nice ("to get on wiv me neighbours...") come Jan, to start rumors about journo hacks being head hunted by rival newspapers.

Can you imagine it? Not only that radio and tv twats could have the same scenario.

Machiavellian? You bet your arse!!

ps: Couldn't resist a tribute to a great band. One of Englands finest.

Maureen will soak it up though, he is so coooool... at least in his own head and it's gonna be interesting but he went to a do last night about music or something with his daughter's tits hanging out and never looked too happy then either so let's make it a shite week for the one who truly believes he is special... special needs maybe.

In the late '60s we played in a nice shade of yellow shirts, blue shorts and Donovan had a song 'Mellow Yellow' we used to belt out....

[Memories from an oldie.]

Totally agreed with comment 21.

Thought you "amplified" it very succinctly my friend.

Talking of Donovan we had a toe curlingly awful song to the tune of Jennifer Juniper... Everton, Everton, Everton FC. Thankfully most people have forgotten this one.

But, back to reality,

I'm going the game on Saturday and I'm gonna give the pile of shite shit live from the Gwladys St.

Mourinihore ain't gettin' away with this one.

I don't want Stonsey to play. What a smack in the mouth for Chelscum if we beat them without Stones.

ps: Forget the Beatles... the track by the Small Faces called "What you gonna do about it" would be more appropriate.

James, very well written. I agree totally.

I have no doubt from the comments made that he was advised to put a written request in but what if it was one of our own (eg, Elstone) who told him the only way he would be allowed to go would be if he put a written request in and he stupidly read that as EFC wanting him to do it?

January will reveal a lot.

My opinion is it is never a good idea to hand in a transfer request when you know you are going to move anyway if not this window, then the next or the next.

I do believe that Stones does owe Martinez a debt of gratitude for having the likes of Chelsea offering mega money for him.

How many games did he play for Moyes? Moyes needed some serious convincing to sign him, just like Coleman. So yes, Stones going to Everton other than Wigan was our gain and Wigan's loss and we have to take it on the chin what goes around comes around when Chelsea or whoever come calling again, and they will.

If Martinez had not become Everton manager then Stone's development would have been slower.

And you watch Mourinho on Saturday with his mind games with John Stones by the way. It's guaranteed that he will go out of his way to piss us all off.

"It's guaranteed that he will go out of his way to piss us all off."

And you don't think the Gwladys Street won't find out anything to do with his family? Just like Everton is our family,

Don't forget, he started it... the little TWAT!

No seriously, I can see Mourinho standing on the pitch waiting for Stones or doing something like that no matter what the result.

He's still got loads to learn, but now this saga is over, hopefully he can get back to doing what he does best; playing football.

If certain sections of the crowd get on his back because of it, he only has himself to blame, but he's pulling on the Royal Blue of Everton and while he does he'll get my support... until that first misplaced pass, then he gets dog's abuse. ;)

Interesting to see the tussle between Kane and Stones. Two young men who for very different reasons, were put under unfair and unnecessary pressure from an increasingly intrusive "sports reporting" industry. As Tony Williams points out, these kids will earn more in a week than most of us do in a year... but for two young men with the world supposedly at their feet, they didn't half look miserable from where I was sat.

Let's get behind the kid... he plays for us and I want him to stay, so we have to convince him he is still loved.

I'm convinced there's a lot of journos out there who genuinely don't understand buy-out clauses.

In this scenario Everton pay Stones MORE money each week and can demand no more than £38M in transfer fees, be that this summer or whenever. Considering we were reportedly unwilling to do business at £40M, how exactly does any of this benefit Everton?!

If any deal is on the table for Stones, which there really shouldn't be at this stage, then it would be absolutely insane to put in a clause of any less than £50-£60M.

By all means, give him improved terms (he's on £30k a week, poor lamb) but no player should be setting the price for a buyout. Fuck him, fuck his 'advisors' and most of all, fuck the journos who want to set the agenda in this matter!! He's our player and we set the terms.

I am convinced we have the worst sports journalists in the world. The game now is poorly represented as a sport now or in any descriptive way so people who don't go to the match can get a feel for how the game went. Journalists are to engaged in sensational inexactitudes in the hope they get to be the first to predict a transfer or indeed to influence one.

I love to read about the game and how it is described similar to Ken Buckley, entertaining and factual. I don't know why they don't get back to that.

For the life of me I cannot see Stones demanding any sort of condition which would be working against him. As he gets better and I think he will, then it won't only be Chelsea coming in for him, United and City for starters.

So, unless I read that John Stones " is quoted" as demanding such a clause, then I'll not believe it and we don't need to get fans jumping on a bandwagon about him unless it's proven.

Reporters...pundits, horrible, and mainly unintelligent ex players, or wannabee pundits for the telly. Gobshites most of them and love causing bother if it gives them a "story" Bastards!

Pots and kettles?

Let them get one of the 33 players they've loaned out back or, better still, bring a young lad through the ranks, something they haven't done since Terry emerged, apparently.

On top of that why would we ever allow a clause to be entered which meant he would be off in January/Next August.

So let's get this straight! We will pay you more a week from now on so we can allow you to leave in the next transfer window for an amount we rejected last time?
Common sense anyone... I fucking hate journos.

Also James, I mentioned the wages because I said I felt sorry for him...until I realised etc

I will support him and I am glad he stayed.

Yes, I am pleased we have shown a statement of intent but tell me how many times do players actually say to suitors "Clear off; I am happy where I am"? More likely to hear the word "flattered " being used.

Unless we really win something or show European qualification, Stones will be off, I have no doubt (sadly).

The scum who write for those rags can just say anything they like, and the others will follow. They can cite 'sources' because nothing they're writing is going to be disproved or proven at this point by anyone.

Who cares? I've just started ignoring it all, if only for my delicate heart to keep ticking along for the next 40 years (if I'm really really lucky).

All this stress is enough to turn a man to drink.

Chatted to him quite a bit about Stones etc; however, he did mention a rather amusing rumor going around the Chelsea fans that the very beautiful ex medic / physio was shagging one of the players and yes you can guess who's name is top of the list ........?? Good old JT!

It should come out in the court case, she is taking advice about sueing Chelsea, will make interesting reading if she goes ahead.

Sorry for the off topic.

Do not interpret this as wanting JS to be sold.

What a band eh?

According to that report we would double his wages and he would demand a release clause. Makes no sense at all. We would have to pay him more and earn less if we would sell.

If that's what he would want (which I do not believe as this was just another piece of lazy journalism) then we're better off keeping him on his current deal for at least another two years. His value will not go down and by that time he will still have another two years left on his contract.

Any time Phil.

I'm racking my brains to try remember what exactly we were arguing regarding Fellaini's release clause.

All I can remember is that you thought Moyes was deliberately waiting for the release clause to expire before bidding for him.

It's so nonsensical I can't even come up with any possible explanation you could have had.

And yes, you're right, I stated Moyes, or anyone else for that matter, would wait until Fellaini's release clause expired before bidding for him. And that is exactly what happened!!

I think that's normal transfer activity and I don't think it would be unreasonable to guess that Stonesy might be the subject of enquiries from wealthy clubs in the future. I don't see anything wrong with a club making an enquiry for a player, as long as it is abiding by the rules. And if the lad turns out to be the Captain of England I think he will become, then it is highly likely he will go to a rich and successful club.

The difference and it's a major one, is the public courting of a player. Now I'm not sure if that is within the rules, or not. What I would say though, is that it is a deliberate unsettling tactic, and uses the Press to kick up a feeding frenzy.

Mourinho knew exactly what he was doing and will fully deserve the welcome he gets tomorrow.

If a contract is changed it has to be signed by both parties. Semantics, but most would call that a 'new contract'.

Haha... the release clause argument still makes me laugh. You think Moyes deliberately waited til after the release clause expired... despite him being able to get him cheaper while it was in place.

Anyone can see that Moyes was after other targets and went back to Fellaini in desperation.

And yet you feel vindicated....

Moyes said that's exactly what he did do, and yes as I was perfectly correct, I do feel vindicated.

You can also have an extension to a contract which is not a new contract, it basically says the existing contract is extended for a period of x years and is only a few paragraphs long.

A contract has to expire before a new one can be signed?!?!

So if John Stones signs a contract til 2020 tomorrow, do you think he stays on £30k til his current 4 year contract expires?

----------

Why did Moyes wait til a buy out clause expired to bid for Fellaini, if not out of desperation?

Please don't let the results of that fiasco support your argument. The whole situation was only 'farcical' because Moyes could have bought the player cheaper if he'd have just bid before the release clause expired!

Moyes tried to get Felli for under £20M and it failed. Last minute, all other targets gone, he paid up....more than he would have had to just a few days before.

Supporting evidence:

If you remember, Everton insisted that the release clause expired a good 10 days before the transfer window closed. If someone met Fellaini's price, it gave them a chance to at least replace him.

Eric, how do you explain that???

A contract has to expire before a new one can be signed?!?!
Yes, otherwise it's an amendment or an extension.

So if John Stones signs a contract til 2020 tomorrow, do you think he stays on £30k til his current 4 year contract expires?
It would depend on what the wages are stipulated in the terms of the amendment to the contract, if he agrees to £30k until 2020 then yes, you would be correct.

Why did Moyes wait til a buy-out clause expired to bid for Fellaini, if not out of desperation? Because he could offer less than the buy-out clause figure.

Moyes could have bought the player cheaper if he'd have just bid before the release clause expired! He couldn't as we could have justifiably turned it down as not meeting the valuation.

Moyes tried to get Felli for under £20M and it failed. See, you answered your own question there, he bid £16M after the clause had expired.

Supporting evidence:
If you remember, Everton insisted that the release clause expired a good 10 days before the transfer window closed. If someone met Fellaini's price, it gave them a chance to at least replace him.
So why did we sell him on the 11th hour of the transfer window with no chance of replacing him?

Phil, how do you explain that?

If anyone has access to a desktop and a brain in the meantime then please feel free to fill Eric in.

http://footballmanager.wikia.com/wiki/Minimum_fee_release_clause

I can't find any posts online that agree with you.

And I can't be arsed discussing it anymore.

And there are lots of reports online that agree with my point of view, but feel free to remain uninformed.

You said Moyes was waiting for the minimum fee to expire so he could bid less. That is untrue. He could bid less at any point. Everton could, of course, reject it at any point too.

Don't you understand that Moyes was a laughing stock because he paid MORE than the release fee?

I can assure you I'm not uninformed. If you remember, everyone disagreed with you when you last put your argument forward.

A release fee is added to a contract by the player, so that he has an exit route. It doesn't benefit the club at all. The only thing they can do is try get the fee set as high as possible so at least if they lose the player it is for an inflated price.

When that fee expired, the ball was firmly in Everton's court. We could have demanded £40M if we wanted. Obviously BK got the fee he was happy with and the player wanted to go.

'Players with a minimum fee release clause can still be sold for less than the set fee, at the club's discretion.'

That is something have you argued against many times. You said that Moyes waited for the fee to expire before offering a lower fee.

"Minimum fee release clause
A minimum fee release clause is a clause in a player's contract which sets a minimum fee that a club must bid in order to be able to buy that player. If a club bid's the minimum fee set in a player's contract in an initial payment, the player's club cannot block the bid and must allow the bidder to talk to the player. Players with a minimum fee release clause can still be sold for less that the set fee, at the club's discretion."

In the original discussion I posted
"Eric Myles
469 Posted 03/08/2013 at 08:05:48
I think the correct way to look at Fellaini's clause is that if someone offers more than the set fee within the time period then the Club has to advise him of the interest and cannot stop him from leaving if he agrees terms.
."

and

"Eric Myles
518 Posted 03/08/2013 at 11:47:04
Of course we could sell him for less than the release clause any time we want but it means that if a lower offer is made we don't have to inform the player."

So you have posted a link in an attempt to prove what I said is wrong, but it only supports exactly what I said. Thank you for proving yourself wrong.

"You said that Moyes waited for the fee to expire before offering a lower fee." And that is EXACTLY what he did, he bid £16M for Fellaini AFTER THE CLAUSE EXPIRED.

No, Football Manager is not my source of knowledge. It just happened to describe it well.

Eric Myles (#806)
Phil, they can't unless the Club agrees to accept less, if another club offers the clause value the player MUST be informed and it MUST be accepted, if less is offered then it can just be binned if the Club aren't interested.

And what part of

"Eric Myles (#518)
Of course we could sell him for less than the release clause any time we want

Eric Myles (#161)
But you are right that we could sell him for less than the value in the clause at any tme (sic) but that would be up to the Club to decide, not the player.

Eric Myles (#369)
Mike #332, of course the Club can sell him for less now if they want to, count the number of times I've said that previously.

Eric Myles (#644)
Wayne #589 "but most release clauses contain a figure which the club must accept. The club is still able to accept a lower fee if they wish at any time" and that's exactly my understanding so what do you disagree with?

Suggests to you that I don't get that a lower fee could have been offered before the clause expiry????

"A minimum fee release clause is a clause in a player's contract which sets a minimum fee that a club must bid in order to be able to buy that player. If a club bid's the minimum fee set in a player's contract in an initial payment, the player's club cannot block the bid and must allow the bidder to talk to the player. Players with a minimum fee release clause can still be sold for less that the set fee, at the club's discretion."

When that is EXACTLY what I said in the original thread as proven by the above extracts.