You do realise football clubs would not be in business if they had to honour every single contract, whilst also offering new ones to players in order to build dont you?
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Then they should start running themselves effectively and they might not be right in the **** then like most of them are.

If a contract is signed it should be honoured by both parties or dont sign the damn thing

grand,

So you would rather Spurs honoured their contract with Bassong, rather than buy Vertonghen?

And who's fault is it, Spurs' for buying, or Bassong for not being good enough, for example?

So you would rather Spurs honoured their contract with Bassong, rather than buy Vertonghen?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

ALL contracts should be honoured unless both parties agree that a change is ok and I dont care if its Modric, Bassong or the damned tea lady.

Its called honour and principles let me know when you begin to understand it without a multitude of questiosn about it

grandspurs

ALL contracts should be honoured unless both parties agree that a change is ok and I dont care if its Modric, Bassong or the damned tea lady.

=================

I understand alright . It sounds to me like you want one rule to suit Modric's scenario and another to suit any other eventuality, that coincides with your opinion of that particular player.

If players honoured contracts, we wouldn't have any assets in about 4-5 years time.

Maybe that would be good for the sport, buy it hasn't happened since i can remember & it wont for some time.

Maybe that would be good for the sport, buy it hasn't happened since i can remember & it wont for some time.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

That does not make it right does it ?

The Sun has been the best selling paper for as long as I can remember does that mean its not crap ?

Because bad business practise has gone on within football that does not make it acceptable and because the game has no soul anymore and every single person on the planet involved in football (barring the fans) are simply money mad with no principles, no loyalty and no honour that makes it ok then does it ?

grand,

I didnt say it was right, but its how football has worked, and does work.

You cant single out one player as being immoral when it suits. If one player gets your goat when they fail to honour a contract, then you should aim your anger at all players, past & present, who have ever worn the Spurs shirt, along with almost every player in the Premiership right now.

For the record, Sol Campbell honoured his contract with us, and he's widely known as the biggest judas in football (as far as we're concerned), so i'm not sure all this adds up.

For the record, Sol Campbell honoured his contract with us, and he's widely known as the biggest judas in football (as far as we're concerned), so i'm not sure all this adds up.

-----

David Bentley is well on his way to honouring his contract too

Grandspurs, i'm afraid your logic isn't applicable to modern football in this day and age

You cant single out one player as being immoral when it suits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I dont apply it to one player who said that I did.

The same applies to Berbatov thats why I would not have wanted him back.

The same applied to Robbie Keane thats why I went totally ballistic and refused to go to WHL for 6 months when we bought him back.

I dont pick and choose my principles reply no matter who the players is concerned if they do THFC a big disservice as Modric did then I never want them near a Spurs shirt again regardless of who they are.

Grandspurs, i'm afraid your logic isn't applicable to modern football in this day and age
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Probably not because we live in a society where honour, principles, loyalty and integrity do not exist thats hardly anything to accept happily tho is it ?

"For the record, Sol Campbell honoured his contract with us, and he's widely known as the biggest judas in football (as far as we're concerned), so i'm not sure all this adds up."

WTF !!??

The guy RAN DOWN his contract so Spurs COULD NOT GET a TRANSFER FEE, while negotiating BETTER PERSONAL TERMS with the G00ns that he wouldn't have got if they had to pay. And didn't have the grace to tell his CURRENT employer he would not be resigning.

^resigning ^re-signing

"Probably not because we live in a society where honour, principles, loyalty and integrity do not exist thats hardly anything to accept happily tho is it ?"

There still is, but I won't go into more details as I need that barrier of mild hostility to remain between us.

RDBD (

The guy RAN DOWN his contract so Spurs COULD NOT GET a TRANSFER FEE, while negotiating BETTER PERSONAL TERMS with the G00ns that he wouldn't have got if they had to pay. And didn't have the grace to tell his CURRENT employer he would not be resigning.

=================

Otherwise known as honouring a contract & moving on.

To me he's a Judas (& always will be) but you cant deny that Sol's scenario fits into the way Grand would prefer all footballers to act.

"Otherwise known as honouring a contract & moving on."

No.

That is like me being offered a contract extension by my client way in advance of the current one expiring, insinuating I will sign it.
And then in the week before expiry, telling the client I am not actually signing.

And that is without even considering Campbells' personal greed and the cost to his then employer.

RDBD,

I really dont want to get into this debate, because it may come across like i'm defending the Judas, but no-one can deny that he honoured his contract (as per the scenario Grand was referring to).

If he hadnt honoured his contract, he wouldnt have been allowed to walk away & join another club for nothing - which we all know he did.

In fairness to Chicken, Campbell honoured his contract with us - he played right until the end of it and never refused to play. The problem we all have with it is emotive, not legal.

He led us down the garden path about signing a new one, but ultimately he fulfilled any contractural obligations and he wasn't obliged to sign a new one. Morally not right, but legally by the book.

As it is we'd rather he didn't, and we'd sold him to United for £20m the season before.



The way I see it, a contract is just some financial security for both parties - guaranteed income for the player in case of injury and a guaranteed fee for the club if he goes.

If either party wants to end it early the other party is compensated fully.....and that means paying someone off like Ade if a club like City want rid, or us getting top dollar for someone like Modric

What he did was out of pure greed.

He didn't say of his plans, cos Spurs would have then put him on the open market for starters. And then if a big club such as Man Utd had came in (which they may have) , his s-c-u-m-m-y cowardice would have been exposed for what it was.

There is "honouring" your contract, and honouring your contract + courtesy/respect to your client/employer.

Chicken :

Out of interest, how old are you (I am 45 ) ??

i am putting chicken at 35

RDBD,

But i doubt Judas' contract said anything about telling us of his intentions after his contract run out, so he did not dishonour it in any way.

Loyalty wise he committed the worst sin of any footballer i know, but loyalty is not contractual - not in this sense of it anyway.

Dear god, but I agree with Chicken!

If a player wants to leave your team, either for greater wages, better chance of of trophies or both there is two ways it can happen. A player agitates for a move (Modric) so effectively breaks the terms and conditions of his contract or he waits out his contract leaving on a free (Sol).

Yes both are morally dubious, but at least in the later case the contract itself has been honoured.

The hate level and "Judas" name calling has nothing to do with which method is used to leave, it's all about where a player leaves for. Sol to Arsenal or Ince to Man U, both utter s who will never be forgiven by fans or their original clubs, despite the two different ways in which they left.

I don't fault players for wanting to move to a bigger/currently more likely to win trophies club. Ronaldo did it to Manu. We lost Masherano and Alonso.

But running down your contract to screw over your club is the worst though.

Dramatic,

I think the Ince & Sol sceanrios are totally different, though.

Sol sold us a dummy, pretending that he was going to sign up after the summer, when he "probably" already held talks with our bitter enemy's, and then subsequently joined them on a free, even though we could have sold him 6 months earlier for a hefty sum.

Ince, on the other hand, was pictured holding up the Man Utd shirt before his transfer had even gone through. However, you did still recieve his market value in money terms, so it wasnt so much a double whammy. On top of this, he signed for Man Utd - not your biggest enemy (whether that be Spurs or Millwall, you can decide).

That aside, Sol did honour his contract.

Yeah the moves were different but that's kind of my point, they are still both roundly hated. If fans would like you to stay then however you move there will be a sense of betrayal.

Let's be honest despite what we as fans might say on forums like this the reason we boo some old players is because we know our teams would be stronger if they were still around.

When Bentley finally goes I'm sure he will get a warm welcome on any return, same as say Sears will at the Boleyn.

Simply put good ex players are far more likely to good booed on their return than mediocre ones.

"But running down your contract to screw over your club is the worst though."

He could have said he was going only to consider the G00ns, even if he had been put on the market (which AFAIK was his right at the time) .

The fact that he didn't allow Spurs the chance to put him on the market regardless, is the reason he should be held in utter contempt.

100