comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by JimmyGreaves (U21183)
posted 2 minutes ago
Is it a case of Forrest will string this "victim strategy" for as long as they can just to pee us off.

Should we call their bluff and just say fek off to them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No because the deal on the table from Spurs is the very least he can get from any team, unless MGW were to decide to sign a new watertight deal on better terms. If Spurs were to threaten to drop out, another club will take him for 60m easily.

Like I say, I think the difficulty will be the payment structure. He could just be a major cvnt about it and keep MGW shackled to the club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What is the payment structure in the release clause?

comment by Luka "The List" Brasi (U22178)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by JimmyGreaves (U21183)
posted 2 minutes ago
Is it a case of Forrest will string this "victim strategy" for as long as they can just to pee us off.

Should we call their bluff and just say fek off to them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No because the deal on the table from Spurs is the very least he can get from any team, unless MGW were to decide to sign a new watertight deal on better terms. If Spurs were to threaten to drop out, another club will take him for 60m easily.

Like I say, I think the difficulty will be the payment structure. He could just be a major cvnt about it and keep MGW shackled to the club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What is the payment structure in the release clause?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that's it. We don't know. There might not be one. It could be like Eze's which leaves it open. It basically means that the selling club maintain leverage by saying "you're not getting him unless you pay in full", knowing full well no club can really afford to do that. It's kinda sneaky.

My gut is telling me that we will get this done but we'll end up paying about 65m, a sweetener extra to avoid having to pay in one go, maybe over 3 years or so.

I don't think we need to pay anything extra to speed things up.

At some point, the MGW camp can argue Spurs have paid the release clause as stipulated, and Forest are in breach of the contract by not releasing the player's registration.

If we don’t speed this up, another club will steal a match on us

comment by There is only one real Igor and he is the boy ... (U20074)
posted 1 day, 8 hours ago
It's fairly clear what's happened

When the news broken we told Spurs are paying a £60m release clause and MGW is having a medical on the Friday.

Now if Forest genuinely didn't know or agree and there is a confidential agreement in place then either Spurs or MGW camp has breached agreements or the governing body rules around approaching players.

I totally get that Spurs fans want the best for Spurs, and I don't expect a great deal of sympathy from other fans particularly as we feature in other news at the moment! But legal agreements and laws set out by the governing body should be stuck to by everyone right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It's clear what happened

If Spurs bid 60m and then the the confidentially agreement doesn't matter, if we bid at a level high enough to trigger it.

The moment 60m is bid, it's triggered.

Imagine a release clause so confidential that even when it is met you are not allowed to disclose it .

As long as we officially bid then it doesn't matter if it is subsequently disclosed by the club or the agent or the players cleaner, it's been triggered.

I don't think Man City ever officially bid when they were interested so it remains confidential until they do triggered it with a 6om+ bid

Plus Spurs never announced anything.

If we have approached him subsequently without consent, the argument becomes, is triggering the release clause (whether knowingly or not) de facto giving agreement that you can talk to the player. If Spurs triggered it and the agent responded confirming this then surely NF have effectively granted consent to approach, given there is a release clause which atvleast implicitly implies the right to talk to the player.

comment by Luka "The List" Brasi (U22178)
posted 3 hours ago
I don't think we need to pay anything extra to speed things up.

At some point, the MGW camp can argue Spurs have paid the release clause as stipulated, and Forest are in breach of the contract by not releasing the player's registration.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I mean paying a bit more to avoid any need to pay in one go, a bit like the reduced fee we paid for Bale to get Southampton out of an immediate financial hole they'd dug for themselves. We agree to pay maybe 3-5m more in order to allow the fee to be amortised in the more traditional sense. Paying 60m in one payment is virtually impossible because it then means you're hamstrung when looking at other targets in the window.

No chance. We don't need to enter a negotiation with Forest. We have paid the clause. We must be able to afford it.

Maybe the rumours are true and there is more investment than we think?

comment by Don’s Dinner (U11802)
posted 14 hours, 41 minutes ago
If we don’t speed this up, another club will steal a match on us
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair point, I mean if you were Forest, would you not be actively contacting other clubs to see if a better deal can be arranged, maybe cash + player deal for one of your own targets

This deal is dying judging by the latest reports. We're gonna need MGW to help us on this to stand a chance. He needs to force a move.

comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 15 minutes ago
This deal is dying judging by the latest reports. We're gonna need MGW to help us on this to stand a chance. He needs to force a move.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


It’s my fault. I praised the board for speedy transfer business and professionalism.

I get we don't know the details of the contract but surely we've paid the release clause. I can't believe our lawyers wouldn't have gone through it with fine tooth comb before bidding. How on earth can they insist on keeping him? They must have a case somewhere.

Forest have broken ffp rules to stay in the league, accused a ref of being a Luton fan when they got a bad decision, banned a commentator from their ground for criticising them and went to the UEFA trying to ban palace from the EL

i'm in no doubt they'll win this one too but really dodgy behaviour again

Forest haven't actually done any legal action that I can tell. The only thing we've been told is they complained to the PL.

comment by Bãleș left boot - Europa Champions 2025 (U22081)
posted 1 hour, 12 minutes ago
Forest haven't actually done any legal action that I can tell. The only thing we've been told is they complained to the PL.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sky are reporting that PL have not been contacted

Forest have written to Spurs and MGW warning on behavior and setting expectations on conduct to move this forward!

Once you get past all the media hype and get to the facts it's really not all that bad is it?

comment by Phenom (U20037)
posted 3 hours, 47 minutes ago
Forest have broken ffp rules to stay in the league, accused a ref of being a Luton fan when they got a bad decision, banned a commentator from their ground for criticising them and went to the UEFA trying to ban palace from the EL

i'm in no doubt they'll win this one too but really dodgy behaviour again
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Legendary behavior 🤣

So are you Levey in or out? Still planing on protesting?