.com reporting Dyer has submitted a transfer request that has been rejected by the Toon

Any truth.

Headlines in the morning no doubt

Off to leeds no doubt

Illegal approach which the young lad has swallowed hook line and sinker

Tossers all of them

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

Answers

22 million

Take it or have a young dissatified player on our hands?

Hard on Freddie

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

Well we can't spend £22 Million pounds, because no bugger will come.

Therefore,

Having the young disatisfied player on our hands is the option to go for.

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

If it is true that we can't attract he sort of player we are looking for, despite the cash being bandied about, then a part-ex might be the option. If O'Dreary is so keen on LKD, then who is he prepared to give up in part-ex? Harte and Bridges have been mentioned on here. Just suppose they were thrown into the melting pot, what balance might we expect and would their addition and the loss of LKD strengthen or weaken the overall squad?

IMHO, it would weaken the team. I believe that midfield is still an area we are lacking in. Take LKD out and we lack creativity and movement. As was said on the Bellyman thread (I think), CB adds a bit more movement up front (or just behind). And maybe Bassedas can deliver this term. Does that copensate enough for the loss of LKD?

And finally (for now) if we lose LKD, will that make attracting top players even more difficult? I believe so for 2 reasons - the fact that a future England star wants away and the subsequent lessening of the number of "stars" we have.

That said - I now think it is likely he will go. But on our terms.

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

I gettin' pig sick of this poaching stuff, when are we gonna start and poach players, unsettle them. Make outrageous demands in the papers. When Dyer leaves we will come out smelling like roses and this ungrateful, selfish self absorbed brat will be made to look like a right chump. What price loyalty? Shearer showed it and he was englands best. Seething at this though.

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

it has to be on the cards now. Various newspapers haven't let this alone since last season, no doubt fuelled by contacts at either leeds or Man U (depends where he goes). I have some sympathy with NUFC, if a player hands in a TF request, they might as well sell.

He's an ungrateful little s*d, I would have thought another season at least, especially as BR pointed out, we've been paying his wages throughout his injury.

I wonder though, would a club buy a player who is still recuperating from major surgery?

And I agree with other posters, we want to sell him abroad OR if it is to that knob O Leary, we want at least Bridges in part ex.

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

I've just thought, if poaching players is deemed so acceptable now, why the hell won't NUFC set about Carrick. His family are all big Toon fans, surely they are best placed to tap him?

just a thought.

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

If it is true that he has asked for a transfer, deny it, play him in the reserves for the duration of his contract (or until he changes his attitude). See the opponents at Kingston Park treat him with the utmost respect.

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

Trouble with that Pete is that, unlike Farcelino, the 1st team would be a lot worse off without him than with him (probably). But as has been stated elsewhere, a stand like this is perhaps the only thing to stop these mercenary bar stewards from not breaking their contracts.

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

Once again I concur with pete!! Can't we fire him from his contract, and still hold his registration so he can't play. Then we can sell his registration when we deem fit. That'll teach the bastard. Of course if he stays then all this stuff is void innit? How about send Bobby round to his parents hoose in ipswich (sure they are both big ipswich fans) have him sit down with them and tell them how disappointed he is with young keirons attitude. That'll have his fatha calling him up.

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

Perhaps a clause in some of these high end long term contracts stating that upon a transfer request being submitted, salary is immediately cut by 50 per cent, decreasing monthly by say 5 percent until the transfer is withdrawn or the player is sold. That might deter some of these brats. I always believed a contract to be binding on both parties. We signed him to play football for us in return for lots of money. We never guaranteed him first team football, nor did we guarantee the worlds best for him to pal around with. If he doesn't like it, he can rot in the reserves a while.

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

He still has 2 year's left on his contract - we should let him stew for at least 6 months. Failing that, ask for Kewell and 6 Mill.

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

All nice words fellas, but imo none of it will work.

These prima donnas have established a routine now wherein they either threaten to work (ie. train & play) 'without enthusiasm' or simply bugger off and say "I'm not playing for you any more, so perhaps you would kindly transfer me to the club of my choice please!" I'm afraid they simply will not agree to serving a period of penance at KP.
This situation immediately weakens the negotiating position of their Club and tends to reduce the players market value (viz the Ziege situation when he exited Boro).

So, what is the suffering Club to do? They could sue the player for breach of contract, but what remedy could the Court impose? They cannot instruct the player to start playing again, "and oh by the way - with maximum enthusiasm if you don't mind".
Financial penalties can be imposed, but I suspect Club's may already have the right to automatically stop paying their wages anyway if they are in breach of their Contracts. However, these guys are already rich and are quite prepared to take a substantial financial penalty that they know they can make up by moving on anyway.

I suspect the Club could effectively refuse to sell the player while under Contract, and effectively put him out of the game for the duration of his Contract, but few Clubs could afford to take the risk that they may never then capitalise on the players transfer.
I would actually like to see a major Club take this on, but have a feeling it simply wouldn't work, and that at some point they might find themselves be in Court fighting a 'restraint of trade' claim.

This is a very difficult situation, and I just can't see how the Clubs can win. Exercising some form of retribution on the player, however deserving, seems to me unlikely to achieve the desired aims, and the best course still appears to be to sell the player, recoup as much value as possible from the situation, and move on. However, a positive move would be for the PL and FA to seriously investigate the role of certain Clubs in unsettling players with other Clubs - first in the dock should be Liverpool and Leeds Utd. Tossers!

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

Kewell and six mill? bollox! kewell, harte and woodgate + 6 mill nowt less. If they want him that bad, make the feckers pay through the yang for it

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

Whatever, he'll never become the player he could be if he goes to Leeds - the culture there will pander to his (alleged) tendency towards spunk-sodden excess. In the long run, he will regret moving more than we'll regret his going.

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

Alright then clarky, so what can a club do?? If the contracts that players sign are so lopsided in favour of players then they should restructure them accordingly. Didn't this big transfer thing just rule that there can't be a transfer fee for someone over 23?? if so then sell him now? and leeds won't be able to shift him in two years time.

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

I did say syme - I don't really know what the Club's can do. The proverbial "geni is out of the bottle", the players have the power, and putting geni back into the bottle is never easy - especially when there is no concensus to arrest the situation among the major Club's. Indeed, some of these club's are actively undermining whatever degree of control the club's still have by underhanded, selfish practices of the kind that have caused, or at least contributed to, the transfer of Rio Ferdinand, Nick Barmby, Christian Zeige, and probably numerous others.

As long as the major club's are carving each other up, the players will continue to take advantage of the situation. Until the Club's get their act together the players will retain the power.

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

I know you said clarky, it was more of a statement than a question of "what do the clubs do" I think it is going to take a unilateral act by all the clubs to stop or some intervention by the FA. I propose that all the chairmen should meet and decide on what is and is not acceptable behaviour to intice players out of their current contracts. Perhaps more of an american type of system might work ie instead of huge transfer fees, players are exchanged for options on other players, basically the player has a small say in who they go to.

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

what? has everyone gone to bed? get up man it's awnly 1030pm

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

Dyer's case poses a specific and a wider problem. From what I have read, I am coming to the reluctant conclusion that he is becoming so dissatisfied that the club would be better off letting him go to the highest bidder. I would prefer a situation whereby his disillusionment is being exaggerated by the press and that a fatherly talk can bring him around. The wider issue is the transfer system which I believe is outmoded. The US system of bartering players is I think much better. Thus, if Leeds wanted him, Newcastle could negotiate specific players in compensation.

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

Bag, worms, genie, bottle, spanner, works. Pick your metaphor. It all adds up to a bliddy mess. I have to say, I'm at a loss. However, I do believe that the proposed transfer window could have a beneficial affect. Lets suppose we only had a transfer window open during the "off season".

At some stage, when beginning the season (needs to be determined to include IMHO a period of planning before the real stuff starts) each team would know that barring injury or suspension, which players would be available to them for that season. Like the current xfer deadline, there could be exceptions for specific cases such as losing 3 keepers or whatever. But once a player starts playing for the season, he's there until it's over. For this "stability", I suggest the clubs would have to select a player for a certain number of appearances - at least on the bench and not simply send them to the likes of KP every week. Injuries and suspensions would reduce this "quota".

The other side of the coin would be for the clubs to be able to rid themselves of wasters like Farcelino and Maric during the off season without incurring huge wage bills for someone who clearly doesn't want to play and is happy to just sit back and rake in the dosh.

I guess I'm almost suggesting a 1-yr contract. Hmm - maybe that's a bit short for continuity as we could almost get to the ludicrous situation they have in the US with franchised teams moving from club to club.

Of course, the whole piggin' problem with any change remotely like this is that it is totally against European employment laws. Unless exceptions to that can be made, then more Bosmanesque court cases would ensue.

As I said - I haven't a clue. Sadly, I'm not sure anybody does :-(

WRT to taking a stand against LKD, it would be great if it could make a difference. However, I couldn't see it working out for us. Suppose we did find a way of restricting him. What message would that send to other potential players? We already have enough problems trying to recruit right now. Imagine the attitude if they saw the club taking a hard line with players. To be honest, on our past performance, I'm surprised they're not queuing up to join Farcelino and his predecessors on the bench and in the treatment room ;-)

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

Hmm - seems we might not be alone in seeing our top stars being poached. According to my Auntie .

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

Not for the first time I find myself at odds with the rest of you. I cannot bring myself to criticise a player for demanding more ambition from his club. Dyer is told he is one of the best players of his generation and he should be playing at the top, in exciting teams and at the most exhilarating finals of European and World competitions. And here he is with us, in a club whose management say they are happy with mid table mediocrity - a position which they have now struggled to achieve for the last four seasons.

Top players have, say, 10 years at the top. By the time his contract comes to an end he will have wasted over half of those with us. If I were him, I would be desperate to get the very best out of my God-given talents, by demanding the very best from my club side. Even so, it would be foolish to deny that he has a greater obligation of loyalty to his own talent, than he does to us. In twenty years time when he looks back over his career, mourning the lack of achievement, few of us will be sharing his disappointment. By then we will have new heroes and he will be but a distant memory.

And, frankly, the way the club has been run the last four years, we haven't earned his loyalty. While I deeply regret the need for it, I welcome his call for more ambition. Somebody's got to exert an influence over a moribund leadership that is more than happy to see us finish in the bottom half of the table, and is then surprised and disappointed that we can't attract talent to the club. What planet are these people on? There is not one supporter on this BBS who couldn't have predicted that we were going to have problems in the transfer market, when the chairman decided that we didn't need to strengthen the side and get into Europe.

To make matters worse, we have developed a laager culture at the club: it's us versus the world - we're right and they must be wrong. It's defensive: it attacks the messenger, rather than listen to the message. When players, like Goma and Domi, leave and criticise our training facilities, our Chairman bites back saying that if they don't want to play for us, we don't want them. We all know the logic of this policy: he'll still be saying this when we're facing relegation from the first division. Even when players, like Matt Jansen, who supported us as a youngster, refuse to come to us, criticising us as unambitious, the message still fails to get home.

The sad fact is that we have a board and a chairman who are chasing the game. While other teams strengthened their sides and are now in Europe attracting quality players, our chairman refused to, and now he wonders why we can't attract even mediocre players. Of course we can attract those who are desperate to get out of the Nationwide, but we can no longer pull the best in Europe. When Man Utd announced the deal with the New York Yankies he limply responded by claiming that he and Bobby had had a friendly conversation with Lamar Hunt, as some show of evidence that we are still in the same game as Man Utd.

The sad fact is we're not, though Freddy Shepherd doesn't realise it. They're among the best in Europe: we're among the worst in the Premier League. And he also doesn't realise that it's as difficult to get out of the bottom of the Premier League, where he's brought us, as it is to get out of the Nationwide League. We should stop shooting the messenger and attend to the message. If you want to attract and keep the best you must a) be in Europe, b) have the best training and medical facilities (not one where most players can expect to be out for long periods each season and have their careers threatened by being forced to train on rock-hard pitches), and c) display unlimited ambition (not just the crude boast that we've got 100m to spend, as if that's all that needs to be done).

-- Anonymous, July 17, 2001

So no new Dyer stuff this morning

IF .com are to be believd the next step will be for his agent to issue a statement telling the world and his dog that poor Kieron is being forced to honour a contract he signed only two years ago, how he is desperate to fulfil his ambitions, the fans are great but he needs trophies bla bla bla......

-- Anonymous, July 18, 2001

sell him. (metaphor) we don't need more bad apples.

-- Anonymous, July 18, 2001

I shall console myself with the attitude that Dyer is now a non- person as far as NUFC is concerned, until he convinces me otherwise.

I mean, we've had eff all from him for ages, so starting the season without him won't make things any harder than they were, so the sooner we get used to the idea the better, it seems to me.

If he is on his way, the sooner the better, and effin good riddance. Not to Leeds but, if that can be arranged. Somewhere abroad would be preferable. We need to have at least as much say in where he goes as he does, and I'd make the little effer sweat at least until the season is a few weeks old.

On the other hand, it still doesn't make much sense to me that whoever wants him will go for it before he's proved his fitness. Common sense would say let him stay where he is until we can see that he's over the injury, and is match fit. I can't believe our lot would allow them to use a 'He's not fully fit' argument to try to get the price down. On second thoughts, though, it wouldn't surprise me if they did fall for that.

-- Anonymous, July 18, 2001

Sell him to Man U (he won't get a game) for 10 million plus Butt and either Johnsen or Fortune or both. We get players that we need and money that we can't spend (yet)

-- Anonymous, July 18, 2001

Bobby said before that he contacted a team about some player and they wanted a deal involving Dyer. It will be interesting to see if he goes back after that player now.

-- Anonymous, July 18, 2001

If he really wants to go, then we can't stop him and the last thing we need is a bad atmosphere in the dressing room. Having said that, as has been said he'll presumably have to prove his fitness and renewed form first, so we still may have a short term 'use' of him and won't be in danger of him sulking around kicking his heels. When is he due back from injury?

-- Anonymous, July 18, 2001

First point - Dyer's Agent, Jonathan Whitmore, has indicated that Kieron has not requested a transfer, and that he will be playing for Newcastle this season.
I suspect they have struck a deal with Shepherd - along the lines I've outlined on the "Sell the little sh*t" thread.

Bryan,
As ever, a terrific post, and one that strikes to the heart of Newcastle's problems - management. This does not come as a surprise, and as most on here know, I violently agree with you.
However, I've realised by now that this is not going to change - although with the share price dropping again to only 31p last night, they do become more yet vulnerable to a takeover. The problem is that with the present profitability and debt levels, they are a very poor investment, and it would require a very rich philanthropist, or perhaps a media company with wider ambitions, to seriously consider acquiring NUFC plc.

Despite all of this, I don't believe the Board and major shareholders lack ambition - it's more they lack the vision and ability to realise their ambitions.

One manifestation of management deficiencies in recent months has been the many and varied conflicting signals that have come from different Managers and Directors.
The 'mid-table mediocrity' jibe resulted I believe from some comments made by David Stonehouse - recently resigned, which may be significant - and I suspect were taken entirely out of context. As a professional accountant, Stonehouse couldn't help but be concerned about the weak financial position the Club finds itself in - not to mention the massive spending 'boasts' of one Director - and the real dangers posed by a poor performances on the playing field. I feel certain his comments regarding the need to establish a mid-table position related principally to the immediate financial imperitives associated with avoiding relegation than to any inherent lack of long- term ambition.
I did actually meet David once, and he struck me as very keen Toon fan, with no lack of ambition for the Club.

With regard to your comments on Kieron Dyer, you are quite correct to laud his ambition to maximise his achievements in what is a short career. However, you are ignoring the practicalities of the same young man - fully supported by highly-paid professional advisers - signing a 5 year Contract, and then deciding it is perfectly OK to say "I want out" after 2 years. This attitude is insidious, and at the core of a problem that is materially damaging the game.

Players certainly understand their "rights" under their Contracts, but repeatedly baulk at the "obligations" - and this is not right.
If they feel the need to micro-manage their careers then imo they should not be willingly entering into such long-term Contracts. Having entered into long-term Contracts they must be held to the obligations - or negotiate their way out professionally.
Right now player's Contracts are entirely one-sided, and essentially worthless pieces of paper.

-- Anonymous, July 18, 2001

Your views are known and respected Clarky as you put the arguments well. Whether you are right or wrong will probably always remain debatable.

In contrast Bryan's effort is way off beam. As you (Clarky) say yourself the club does not lack ambition and it is farcical to argue otherwise when you look at the spend on ground and players over 10 years including a World record Fee. No ambition? - Nonsense.

a club whose management say they are happy with mid table mediocrity

A quote from a departed chairman and taken out of context - Clarky has testified to the man's ambition at first hand.

leadership that is more than happy to see us finish in the bottom half of the table

silly remark with no evidence for it whatever

disappointed that we can't attract talent to the club.

Well which is it then? "More than happy" to be bottom half or "disappointed" we can't attract talent? If they were happy to be bottom half where is the need for talent?

Clarky argues that managerial inability not lack of ambition holds us back. I tend to disagree and take the view that bad luck in the selection of the football manager has been our main problem. It is quite likely that neither of us will ever be proved right or wrong on the issue. However we are both in agreement that the board has ambition and that is a point which has been proved many times over the past 10 years.

-- Anonymous, July 18, 2001

Jonno,
As I believe you know, I would be delighted to be proven entirely wrong in my assessment of Toon management. However, I base my judgement on various observations and signals, and certainly not just the problems created by successive appointments as Team Manager.

Regarding the latter, I have some sympathy with your view that there has been an element of bad luck involved. However, I've also noticed that good management usually appears to go hand in hand with good fortune!

;-{)

-- Anonymous, July 18, 2001

Maybe KD wants to go to Leeds because he feels unsupported at Newcastle. When he goes out on the town and is caught by the press or is caught speeding the club and management haul him in and drag him over the coals. At Leeds, when their young bucks go out on the piss and kick the daylights out of anybody who gets in the way, the club and management rally round the players and create false alibis for them. That's true support! Perhaps FS should suggest to KD that any future transgressions will be treated in the same way and then he'll agree to s

-- Anonymous, July 18, 2001

OK so everybody has ambition. What if just what if all these ambitions are different? Dyer wants to win trophys, Bobby wants a quiet retirement and the board what to knob every woman in the land?

If I had a job to do, (qualify for Europe) I went to my boss and said I need this to do it, not that but THIS, I would get it. Never mind the price this is what I want.

OK so I am not talking being silly here. Robert wants 30,000 we have offered 20,000 negotiating comes to 26,000 he says no Make an offer no questions take it or leave it for 27,000. The figures are notional as 30,000 is not a lot in the big league.

Get the players do the job then start attracting players because you are in Europe and then get rid of the tossers. Use them as they hope to use you.

This we have got this much to spend is BOLLOX we want to do well but nobody wants to come is BOLLOX.

Yes everyone has ambitions, just that they are not the same

-- Anonymous, July 18, 2001