Everton reject Small compensation offer from Southampton

Consider what Rangers were asking for their inexperienced but big potential fullback – £10M? The tribunal should take into account what it would cost us to replace a similar such player in Small. I know that, in this case, Small is not under a professional contract but nevertheless £1.5M is derogatory.

It could be argued that there should be a hefty sell-on percentage that goes to us too.

Don't do anything. Forget it and let it grow then review it at each transfer window. Cash in when it reaches peak amount.

How about a compromise of £2.5M and a 30% sell-on fee? How they picked Brands over me is anyone's guess.

I'm surprised at Southampton making an offer that's 2 Small, don't they know he's a left back, not a right back!

Something of an anomaly that youngsters (legal juniors?) out of contract/agreement are worth compensation to their previous club but senior players out of contract are due nothing. I suppose it is dependent on who makes the rules until one named Bosman is found.

Alan 5 - it's compensation for their development at a club, it applies until around 23 I think. It is there to stop the top clubs hoovering all the best 17 year olds up for nothing, knowing that they will all be available.

Kevin (#5);

I understand what it is for, assuming a club has played a part in their development, but I'd have thought that, legally, 'out of contract' was just that, regardless of age or agreements made by Football Associations.

Is it a Uefa decision or does it apply only to English clubs? And is it applicable to Markelo given that Everton seem to have released him?

Sorry, dogs walked so catching up on the threads.

Contract run down, so we're not going to command anything near what Rangers allegedly asked for.

Classic negotiation. If it is true we are asking £5M, then why wouldn't Southampton come in low?

And we know we won't get £5M. My guess is it will end up in the middle. £2 or £2.5M is my guess.

Alan,

Your focus on 'out of contract' and/or young players being released may be muddying the waters somewhat.

I know that Everton release many young players each year and get no compensation, even if that player is then picked up by another club. The most recent example of this is Jack McIntyre, 18, released in June, who has now joined Sunderland.

The difference with Thierry Small is he was not out of contract; this was not a player Everton wanted to release. However, since he was under 17, there was strictly no legally binding 'contract' in place but he (or his keepers) had signed a Scholarship Agreement with Everton that ran through June 2022.

I'm not sure of the legal status of such agreements, or what they commit each party to exactly, but this at least meant that the player was Everton's and not a completely free agent. Yes, they are at liberty to tear up the Scholarship Agreement if they so wish, but their club is then due compensation if they join another club. Whereas if their 'contract' (or Scholarship Agreement) expires and is not renewed, and they are released, then there is no basis for compensation.

Regarding Nathangelo Markelo, he was 22, still under professional contract with Everton through June 2022, and transferred to PSV Eindhoven for an undisclosed fee, agreed between the clubs obviously, so not a question of compensation in his case.

That's my understanding but I'd be very grateful to be corrected on anything I've mistated.

Deary me, storm in a tea cup. Nail them for the lot.

I've gone off Saints since Klopp's mate took over and shouted his mouth off about Pickford last season. Relegation hopefully.

Thanks for the clarity, Michael, and you're right, it's not a contract, it's a scholarship agreement. Fundamental difference.

It will be a negotiation. A bit like Brexit. Both parties start on one end of the spectrum. Both know what is realistic and they will eventually meet somewhere in the middle with both claiming victory.

I actually think the 1.5M is acceptable. Players are usually vastly underrated at tribunals.

I've no idea what basis is used but I presume it may be based on the values and length of contracts both parties offered the player.

I'm glad we rejected it and should try and squeeze the Saints for every penny. It will hurt them move than it will hurt us, financially speaking.

I also hope we have not released his registration and Small is unable to train with his new team mates or be involved with Southampton in any capacity until this is finalised in about 6 months.

I rate the lad, which is way I'm being harsh. I can't wish him luck, but it will be interesting to see how he develops over the next few seasons.

It seems that there are discrepancies over the Thierry Small situation!

Marcel Brands is being lined up by the hierarchy as the reason for Small not signing a professional contract! More lies, in line with the Rooney transfer?

Ancelotti gave Small his debut. Why? Because he rated him, as did Unsworth.

IMO Brands has allowed himself to be manipulated, in respect of his role. How on earth did he allow Ancelotti to bring James in on the wages we are paying him? It's reported that he is on anything between £200k-£250k a week!!!

Whatever figure it is, who at boardroom level allowed this to happen?

Now Brands is being hung out to dry by his fellow board members. Sound familiar? Perhaps Brands should consider resigning, walk away whilst his so-called reputation is intact.

Ray,

Why would you believe these stories? What sources are quoted? How reliable are they?

Big pinch of salt required I think.

Chris 62

Football Insider is the source.

I take your point, however I'm not that naive to believe everything I read.

Just highlighting the coincidence.

Cheers Ray,

Football Insider is probably one of the worst purveyors of rubbish, although there's plenty to choose from, to be fair.

I suppose now we can expect it to be repeated ad nauseam until it becomes ‘fact'.

Unworth finally "opens up" to the Red Echo about losing Small:

'He's got his way' - Thierry Small exit explained after 'unbelievable' Everton offer rejected

And tells us nothing we didn't already know... surely blatantly lying when he says "We never envisaged it coming." — It was widely rumoured back in March, after the lad was given a paltry sniff of the big time, that this was on the cards, probably when it became obvious to him and his people that he wasn't going to get any follow-up playing time with the big boys.

Firstly Michael, thank you for enticing me to go onto the dreadful Echo website. Not just because of it's content, but the pop ups and adds that create annoying delays.

I still can't criticise a 17 year old. I just hope that he, and his advisors, are making a decision based on his future and his welfare. If Everton wasn't for him, I can take that. I just hope he's made his decision (or others have for him), for the right reasons at this point in time.

Acknowledging that at his stage of life, whoever knows?

You do wonder how much Everton will have spent on Small and his family over the years, (illegally) because I'm sure there is something written in the rules, that states a club have to pay so much compensation for every year of development, and it does look like Southampton, are offering to pay more than the current going rate?

Michael 17

You say in your post that Small " was given a paltry sniff of the big time" how much game time do you think this young 16 year old should have had then. Surely the fact that he was given any time at all as a 16 year old spoke volumes of how highly they rated him. Lets also not forget that a certain young French full back was ahead of him in the pecking order as he had done well when included in the first team.

Danny, I'll second that, an awful website, not iPad friendly at all, pop ups and crashes every time. There's articles I want to read but most of the time avoid.

Tony, I makes me think of Raheem Stirling's move when Liverpool poached him from QPRs academy 11 years ago. The reported fee they had to pay was 600k, then they had add one linked to first team appearances. There was also a 20% sell on fee. All in all they got around £8m or more according to the Guardian.

We should have similar clauses inserted if it was fine for QPR to do so.

Sorry about that, Danny. I'm gonna guess you're using Google Chrome as your browser?

I found that switching to Microsoft Edge * drastically improved the stability of the Echo page, especially as it is loading, and that pop-ups and auto-play videos (the worst!) don't seem to bug me as much.

* Other browsers are available. This should not be construed as an endorsement by ToffeeWeb of a particular browser... although some seem to be better than others. Your results may vary. No guarantee or warranty, expressed or implied, should be inferred from these comments.

I think that the only way to stop this kind of thing happening more often Tony, is for clubs to receive a bigger percentage of future sales, which is what I think you're alluding to anyway.

Brian @20,

He came on with 5 minutes left... maybe 8 minutes total with added time. In January. I don't know that he even got a touch of the ball.

He then got to see – what exactly – by way of playing opportunity? Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

In the subsequent 26 league games and 2 more cup games, he was not even named on the bench. So much for 8 minutes of glory as Everton's youngest ever!

And recall, in at least 5 of those remaining games, Il Trattorio didn't even name a full bench!!! And I won't even waste the effort counting the number of times he named 2 fucking goalkeepers on the subs bench!

Would it have been that hard to involve him a few more times? And at least give him hope???

On second thoughts... the above diatribe only suggests he probably wasn't very good and we are being led by the nose again by our wonderful club officials. They were quite happy to let him go and save on paying him a significantly increased wedge.

Or is that too cynical?

Michael (24), I think a lot of fans thought Small's few minutes of fame was just a sweetener to help him sign the contract that was on offer, I know I did, looks like Southampton offered him or his agent a better deal.

Time will tell if Southampton have signed a good player for a relatively small fee,not sure myself but good luck to the lad, doubt if he will play for Southampton's first team any time soon, same as he wouldn't have played for us in the same period.

Fair enough, Dave, I would agree with most of that.

At the same time, I'm recalling many discussions we've had about the abject failure of the Academy system to provide players for the first team. If the solution is to kick out all the older players who aren't gonna make it, and to accelerate the young bucks who show promise, then surely it follows that you give them a realistic pathway to the first team?

I'm just saying, in Small's case, that pathway should have seen at least another 4 or 5 run-outs from the bench over the remaining games. He wasn't even named again on the bench! I just find that unconscionable given the hype.

Is it really too much to expect if you want the player to believe he is on the fringe of the first team? Or do you send him the opposite message – that he didn't cut it in his 8 minutes of fame and it's Hasta Leugo, Thierry?

Michael,

From memory, when the story of him leaving first surfaced, he was supposed to be going to his home town team, wasn't he? Many people felt fair enough.

He ended up elsewhere, and maybe, just maybe, his representatives have just got a much better deal. Southampton is a long way from Birmingham the last time I looked. Ironically had he stayed he probably had a better chance of first team football here, with only one left back on the books.

Maybe the club have just told them to fuck off! Why are we so ready to assume the worst of them?