Berbatov to whoever thread

Mitch Connor

pickarooney wrote: »

I don't agree at all. At Man City, Robinho will get playing time each week, which he probably wouldn't at Chelsea or Real and will be the big man on campus (compared to SWP at least!). Realistically the only way to become a great player is to be playing all the time.

So, who's taking bets on which of Berbatov and Robinho scores the most goals this season? His new club being Man City, I hope the wee Brazilian escapes a season-long injury.

I'd say Berbatov - Robinho is not a clinical striker.

Chong

Robinho is no striker only scored 11 goals last season and played most of the season for madrid.

He is not the player that scores goals.

iregk

To be honest I'm disappointed that Dimi moved to united. Not because it gives united another good player far from it. I was really hoping that this time we would see a club stand up against a big name and allow him to rot and teach him a lesson.

This is another example of a player bullying his way out of a club. Its another nail in the coffin of player contracts as they clearly mean nothing these days and the be honest the big clubs are to blame. Shame spurs couldn't stand strong and teach him a lesson.

grames_bond

i have a new found respect for berba tbh, i know peole are talking about money taking over but he would have made more at citeh if the papers are to be believed (reading everything with a pinch of salt still indicates that citeh would offer him more) but he was telling the truth about wanting CL football and the opportunity to win trophies, i genuinely believed he would go to citehg yesterday because....lets be honest money talks but i am happy that i have been proven wrong! (to an extent)

Boggles

grames_bond wrote: »

i have a new found respect for berba tbh, i know peole are talking about money taking over but he would have made more at citeh if the papers are to be believed (reading everything with a pinch of salt still indicates that citeh would offer him more) but he was telling the truth about wanting CL football and the opportunity to win trophies, i genuinely believed he would go to citehg yesterday because....lets be honest money talks but i am happy that i have been proven wrong! (to an extent)

Money indeed does have a strong voice, but lets be honest it's not like he will be on the bread line at United, he will be made a millionaire dozens of times over.

He wanted to play for the best club in the world, Citeh were never in with any sort of realistic chance.

Spud83

nipplenuts wrote: »

If they had done nothing wrong, why then ask for the complaint to be dropped?

The complaints were made weeks ago in effort to put off the interest from Manchester United and Liverpool.

Why would Spurs drop the complaint if Utd had done something wrong?

Why would Spurs get Liverpool to admit wrong doing and pay into their charity yet not get Utd to do the same. Answer because there was evidence against Liverpool, but Spurs had nothing on Utd. The premier league even asked Spurs for more information/evidence and they couldn't provide it.

Spurs got the money they wanted, Utd got the player they wanted, Spurs say we cant let a striker go without a replacement in our squad, Utd go here have cambell for a year, deal done.

Spurs dropping the complaint is more likely both clubs going look the deal is done everybody got what they wanted, there is no evidence for this complaint, lets just drop it and avoid the legal hassle and bad PR it will cause and all just walk away.

PHB

nipplenuts wrote: »

If they had done nothing wrong, why then ask for the complaint to be dropped?

Who said that United wanted the complaint dropped? A lot indicates that Spurs ****ed it up, Levy did make his comments just after Fergies fake interview remember.

This way saves face for Spurs.

I'm not saying one way or another, I'm just saying its not really clear what happened here, and I'm of the opinion that if he did get tapped up by Fergie, Spurs would not let it go.

Jigsaw

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

Lol..

LOL to you too sir.

allybhoy

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

The complaints were made weeks ago in effort to put off the interest from Manchester United and Liverpool.

Why would Spurs drop the complaint if Utd had done something wrong?

Why would Spurs get Liverpool to admit wrong doing and pay into their charity yet not get Utd to do the same. Answer because there was evidence against Liverpool, but Spurs had nothing on Utd. The premier league even asked Spurs for more information/evidence and they couldn't provide it.

Is the fact that he was met in Manchester airport by Ferguson without permission from spurs when he was supposed to go to City for a medical not evidence enough?

Spurs were bullied into this transfer, Berbatov refused to sign for City, so spurs had no option but to accept Utd's bid otherwise they would have had to have let him go in 10months on a free anyway.

The reason they dropped the complaints was because utd gave them Campbell as sweetner in order to drop the charges.

linky1
linky2

super_furry

Come off it, it's being made clear in every news outlet that the move was agreed on the condition that Spurs drop their complaint. It's the hypocrasy that United show that galls most people - being outraged when Madrid try to sign Ronaldo, but employing similar tactics to get what they want. It's just a shame that Spurs don't have the bottle to seek justice or that the Premier League won't act on their own initiative and punish United for their underhand tactics.

Draupnir

allybhoy wrote: »

Is the fact that he was met in Manchester airport by Ferguson without permission from spurs when he was supposed to go to City for a medical not evidence enough?

Spurs were bullied into this transfer, Berbatov refused to sign for City, so spurs had no option but to accept Utd's bid otherwise they would have had to have let him go in 10months on a free anyway.

The reason they dropped the complaints was because utd gave them Campbell as sweetner in order to drop the charges.

linky1
linky2

Nothing in your post is factual, it is all based on speculation and conjecture. The fact is that while Spurs never said United had permission, they never said they had not either. I can't find any reputable source that says that. There was an announcement at around 2:30 yesterday that they had only accepted Citys bid, is that were all this rubbish coming from? United obviously had a bid accepted after that.

If United had no permission to do the deal, how did Spurs get Frazier Campbell organised, loaned and registered? Did United force them into taking him too?

Jigsaw

Dave! wrote: »

Bleh bleh bleh, move on with your life and stop pestering others. Somehow I'm guessing that if the shoe was on the other foot that you wouldn't be posting this drama queen stuff...

But therein lies the problem you see, the shoe will NEVER be on the other foot unless something happens to your club like Abramovich or these Abu Dhabi chaps. I want the likes of Pavlyuchenko to be a real success for Spurs this season but I am also in no doubt that if he ends up knocking in 20+ goals this season, big clubs will be sniffing round him offering him staggering wages to leave Spurs and then we at Spurs are back to square one again.

And there's no real need for the patronising tone to your post. I am making a perfectly valid point, which of course you are entitled to agree or disagree with.

m@cc@

m@cc@ wrote: »

Still burns does it?

He's a Barca fan....self owned!

Aquos76

allybhoy wrote: »

Is the fact that he was met in Manchester airport by Ferguson without permission from spurs when he was supposed to go to City for a medical not evidence enough?

And where do we have exact proof that this happened without premission

allybhoy wrote: »

Spurs were bullied into this transfer, Berbatov refused to sign for City, so spurs had no option but to accept Utd's bid otherwise they would have had to have let him go in 10months on a free anyway.

Or more to the point, they would have been stuck with a player who did not want to be there. Spure should be thankful to City, it meant they were able to get more money out of United for their man.

allybhoy wrote: »

The reason they dropped the complaints was because utd gave them Campbell as sweetner in order to drop the charges.

Again there is no proof to this. In one of the links you posted this it states

However, Levy seems to have had a change of mind, with many people believing it had something to do with Fraizer Campbell joining Spurs on a season long loan from the English champions as part of the deal, as well as United meeting the Lillywhites original valuation of the player.

Many people, that that is reall proof I guess:rolleyes:

Spud83

allybhoy wrote: »

Is the fact that he was met in Manchester airport by Ferguson without permission from spurs when he was supposed to go to City for a medical not evidence enough?

Spurs were bullied into this transfer, Berbatov refused to sign for City, so spurs had no option but to accept Utd's bid otherwise they would have had to have let him go in 10months on a free anyway.

The reason they dropped the complaints was because utd gave them Campbell as sweetner in order to drop the charges.

linky1
linky2

The two articles are relating to the claims that were made weeks ago. These claims were proved false as it was based on an interview with Ferguson where he said "We have made a bid for a player and we are hopeful", the website reported this as "Ferguson confirms bid for Berbatov". The web site came out a day later with the full transcript and said Ferguson never mentioned Berbatov we just assumed and we apologise for any trouble caused.

This is what Spurs complaint was based on. When this was proved false the premier league went back to Spurs and said you need more evidence then this. Spurs have since failed to provide this evidence and this was weeks ago.

super_furry wrote: »

Come off it, it's being made clear in every news outlet that the move was agreed on the condition that Spurs drop their complaint. It's the hypocrasy that United show that galls most people - being outraged when Madrid try to sign Ronaldo, but employing similar tactics to get what they want. It's just a shame that Spurs don't have the bottle to seek justice or that the Premier League won't act on their own initiative and punish United for their underhand tactics.

What similar tactics. Ferguson/Gill/Utd have never mention Berbatovs name once this summer. Unless you can show me where they have because I have never seen it. Everything is we are trying to get a striker, we are trying to get a player. Never has his name or even club been mentioned.

Spurs made the Berbatov bid public, not United.

Spurs have had weeks to provide evidence Utd tapped him up and came up with nothing. As for yesterday I would doubt Utd would risk escalating the complaint by picking up Berbatov and doing the medical without the consent of Spurs.

Spurs and Levy have by all accounts been a nightmare to deal with and I doubt Fergie and Gill would risk him giving them more evidence to fuel his complaint.

pickarooney

Jigsaw wrote: »

I want the likes of Pavlyuchenko to be a real success for Spurs this season but I am also in no doubt that if he ends up knocking in 20+ goals this season, big clubs will be sniffing round him offering him staggering wages to leave Spurs and then we at Spurs are back to square one again.

Square one being where your club strips a poorer club of its top assets and lets them rot on the bench? It's not as though Spurs are nurturing young talent and seeing them run off to bigger clubs for tuppence ha'penny, they're doing the exact same thing, albeit one level down.

allybhoy

Draupnir wrote: »

Nothing in your post is factual, it is all based on speculation and conjecture. The fact is that while Spurs never said United had permission, they never said they had not either. I can't find any reputable source that says that. There was an announcement at around 2:30 yesterday that they had only accepted Citys bid, is that were all this rubbish coming from? United obviously had a bid accepted after that.

If United had no permission to do the deal, how did Spurs get Frazier Campbell organised, loaned and registered? Did United force them into taking him too?

So Berbatov was not met by Ferguson in the airport and not driven to Carrington when he actually flew into Manchester under instructions to go to City?

City put in a higher bid than Man U, Spurs accepted, sent Berbatov to Manchester, he was intercepted in the airport by Ferguson who continued to carry out the transfer without the permission of Spurs. Spurs were then left with the scenario that Berbatov wouldnt sign for City, so it was either keep the sulking kid on the bench for 10months then let him go for free or else be bullied into a transfer that they didnt want by man u.

No matter how you try and dress this up, Berbatov was "tapped up" by utd as they did have permission to meet with him nor bring him to Carrington. But Utd knew that if they left it till the last minute Berbatov would not be able to sign for City and spurs would have no choice but to accept their bid.

Look everyone knew he was going to go to Utd, but the manner that they went about their business was absolutely deplorable IMO. Especially after the Real madrid\Ronaldo escapade in the summer.

Linky

PHB

Which is why this way is the best way for all parties. Anyone who wants to believe United tapped him up can believe it. Anyone who doesn't want to can think the other way and Spurs don't get shown up for a stupid complaint.

Boggles

pickarooney wrote: »

Square one being where your club strips a poorer club of its top assets and lets them rot on the bench? It's not as though Spurs are nurturing young talent and seeing them run off to bigger clubs for tuppence ha'penny, they're doing the exact same thing, albeit one level down.

That's exactly it, Spurs play there part just like every other team in the food chain.

Spurs are very very very well compensated for selling there big names. I know a couple fans who actually giggled when they heard how much they were getting for Carrick.

The London club are actually a very well run business, buying cheap and selling big is more policy than percieved bullied pilferage.

quad_red

allybhoy wrote: »

So Berbatov was not met by Ferguson in the airport and not driven to Carrington when he actually flew into Manchester under instructions to go to City?

You can't *instruct* a player to talk to anymore. You can give a player *permission* to.

And nothing you've said is backed up by anything other than screaming press reports. Fergie's got gall but it's simply not credible that they would go and pick up Berbatov and put him through a medical without agreement from the club.

allybhoy

Aquos76 wrote: »

And where do we have exact proof that this happened without premission



Or more to the point, they would have been stuck with a player who did not want to be there. Spure should be thankful to City, it meant they were able to get more money out of United for their man.



Again there is no proof to this. In one of the links you posted this it states


Many people, that that is reall proof I guess:rolleyes:

Well the fact that Spurs accepted the bid from City would be evidence one would assume that they didnt grant permission for him to speak to Utd, especially seeing as though they sent him to Manchester to go to City and not Utd.

Different Linky again

Mitch Connor

allybhoy wrote: »

Well the fact that Spurs accepted the bid from City would be evidence one would assume that they didnt grant permission for him to speak to Utd.

So a club can only grant permission for a player to speak to one rival club at a time? can you show me the rule for that, or even effectively explain the logic on it?

Even if he was 'sent' to manchester to speak to City, who is to say that Unioted did not get the permission they saught while berbatov was on his way to the airport, or in the air?

Mr Alan

Good work from City getting Utd to cough up a few million more than they could have gotten him for all summer long

Spud83

allybhoy wrote: »

So Berbatov was not met by Ferguson in the airport and not driven to Carrington when he actually flew into Manchester under instructions to go to City?

Who said he was instructed to go to City. City had a bid accepted, we do not know wether Utd did or didn't have permission to speak to him. Why would Ferguson make it so public that he is meeting him? Obviously a club like Utd could have made it a bit more secretive than picking him up, bringing him to the training ground and stadium.

allybhoy wrote: »

City put in a higher bid than Man U, Spurs accepted, sent Berbatov to Manchester, he was intercepted in the airport by Ferguson who continued to carry out the transfer without the permission of Spurs. Spurs were then left with the scenario that Berbatov wouldnt sign for City, so it was either keep the sulking kid on the bench for 10months then let him go for free or else be bullied into a transfer that they didnt want by man u.

Intercepted you make it sound like a kidnapping. Hughes was off playing golf he wasn't due to meet Berb until later in the day. Utd got in there before them.

allybhoy wrote: »

No matter how you try and dress this up, Berbatov was "tapped up" by utd as they did have permission to meet with him nor bring him to Carrington. But Utd knew that if they left it till the last minute Berbatov would not be able to sign for City and spurs would have no choice but to accept their bid.

You keep saying these things with no proof. No article or report has any direct quotes from any spurs official from yesterday.

allybhoy wrote: »

Look everyone knew he was going to go to Utd, but the manner that they went about their business was absolutely deplorable IMO. Especially after the Real madrid\Ronaldo escapade in the summer.

Linky

Again another useless article being posted.

"seemingly against the wishes of the London club" - with absolutely no back up to the statement. No comments from Spurs, and no comments from Gill.

"Tottenham have made no formal statement on their discussions with United" - that is the only fact.

Clutching at straws lads. He signed for us meaning Spurs signed off on the deal. Stop making idiots of yourselves, you only look bitter.

joe316

allybhoy wrote: »

Well the fact that Spurs accepted the bid from City would be evidence one would assume that they didnt grant permission for him to speak to Utd, especially seeing as though they sent him to Manchester to go to City and not Utd.

Different Linky again

take off those ABU blinkers and just think about it for a second, do you really think that United c*ck blocked the city driver at the airport and stole Berbatov? Can you imagine Fergie with a sign at the airport for "Berba". Considering how vocal Spurs were over the past few weeks with regards to United "tapping up" the player, they went awful quiet yesterday when supposedly they went without their permission and spoke to him. Dont you think that considering their previous actions that they would have went straight to the premier league, fa, fifa, press etc... to complain?

Didnt summit very similar happen with a certain Robbie Keane recently?

Mr Alan

Mr Alan wrote: »

Good work from City getting Utd to cough up a few million more than they could have gotten him for all summer long

Whatever u can find to make u happy! i dont care if we pay 50 million for John O Shea if it wins us things.

Spud83

allybhoy wrote: »

Well the fact that Spurs accepted the bid from City would be evidence one would assume that they didnt grant permission for him to speak to Utd, especially seeing as though they sent him to Manchester to go to City and not Utd.

Different Linky again

Another link that has no quotes from any spurs official from yesterday.

They accepted a bid from City, yes. Does not mean that Utd didn't come along after hearing of that bid and said look we will match it and sort out something regarding a loan deal for Campbell, but you have to let us talk to the player.

Spurs couldn't risk Berbatov turning down city, and not giving Utd enough time to complete the deal. Meaning they would be stuck with a player who would walk in 10 months.

MIN2511

United have their man... thats all that matters to me

ROCKMAN

allybhoy wrote: »

So Berbatov was not met by Ferguson in the airport and not driven to Carrington when he actually flew into Manchester under instructions to go to City?

City put in a higher bid than Man U, Spurs accepted, sent Berbatov to Manchester, he was intercepted in the airport by Ferguson who continued to carry out the transfer without the permission of Spurs. Spurs were then left with the scenario that Berbatov wouldnt sign for City, so it was either keep the sulking kid on the bench for 10months then let him go for free or else be bullied into a transfer that they didnt want by man u.

No matter how you try and dress this up, Berbatov was "tapped up" by utd as they did have permission to meet with him nor bring him to Carrington. But Utd knew that if they left it till the last minute Berbatov would not be able to sign for City and spurs would have no choice but to accept their bid.



Linky

If you believe Berbatov was sent by Spurs to City as you stated
Can you answer one QUESTION ?

WHY WAS BERBATOV FLYING TO MANCHESTER AN HOUR BEFORE CITY EVEN MADE A BID

Berbs was reported to be traveling to Manchester a good hour(around 12.30-12.45 SSN) before any City interested /bid(BID was at 1.22pm)was report .
So unless Spurs have sign Mystic Meg Now could he be flying in to meet city ,

He was always flying in for a meeting with Fergie and UTD.

Dave!

Mr Alan wrote: »

Good work from City getting Utd to cough up a few million more than they could have gotten him for all summer long

The small victories, eh Alan?

Kold

Levy should not have dropped the charges. I can't understand that. Every man and his dog know that United have been guilty for about 6 months now.

MIN2511

Kold wrote: »

Levy should not have dropped the charges. I can't understand that. Every man and his dog know that United have been guilty for about 6 months now.

Ah... don't you know?

United is the greatest! SAF is the best! We got him in the end....

Overpriced though, he better be over played too....


But at the end of the day the soccer world still respects SAF... And thats what matters for now

ROCKMAN

Mr Alan wrote: »

Good work from City getting Utd to cough up a few million more than they could have gotten him for all summer long

When the dust settles and you realize that for City to achieve their plan of a TOP 4 finish this season, That Liverpool must be their first Target

Will you be all and congratulation's to City then . hmmm

Kold

MIN2511 wrote: »

Ah... don't you know?

United is the greatest! SAF is the best! We got him in the end....

Overpriced though, he better be over played too....


But at the end of the day the soccer world still respects SAF... And thats what matters for now

I have no respect for the way these dealings went down. From my view ye were still 1.25m below our asking price, maybe if you'd just given us that donkey I'd be a little less peeved.

Overpriced my bollocks. He was 'Not for sale' in the end we had our backs against the wall because the grade-a w*nker was causing trouble for our club. I have no respect for Berbatov, he will be booed off the pitch whenever he comes to the Lane and I for one hope he breaks his f*cking legs.

This is of course bitterness, but it's the only resort at this stage with Levy dropping the charges. SAF is a pr*ck for the way in which he conducted himself these last few months and I really hope the next club they try to shaft shoves it down their throats. Next time you take a shining to a player, conduct yourselves better than the way this disgrace happened.

therecklessone

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

Spurs couldn't risk Berbatov turning down city, and not giving Utd enough time to complete the deal. Meaning they would be stuck with a player who would walk in 10 months.

He couldn't have left for nothing in 10 months, he had two years remaining on his contract plus Spurs had the option of another two years if we wished which he would be bound to fulfil.

He agreed to that clause when he signed his much improved contract about 6 months into his stint at Spurs.

astrofool

I'd say it's to do with the buyout clause for a player over 28 with 2 years remaining.

Anyway, hilarious thread all around, from Jigsaw bursting a blood vessel as Spurs get humped by the big fish again, to the pool supporters going giddy with glee as Man City looked to have stolen him.

Fergie is a master in the art of transfer dealings, and got his target, the only better team news yesterday was that Liverpool managed to get themselves shot of Voronin (pity they didn't manage to get rid of Pennant as well).

therecklessone

astrofool wrote: »

I'd say it's to do with the buyout clause for a player over 28 with 2 years remaining.

Webster not an issue I believe, if we had activated the two year option it would have been considered another contract extension therefore he would have had to serve another two years before he could walk away.

allybhoy

This link is from Spurs official page. Link

"As part of the settlement the Club has agreed not to pursue its official complaint to the Premier League."

Surely if Utd did nothing wrong then there would be no need to mention something like this. Do you think that it is a response to the media stating the transfer was not in good faith?

At the end of the day lads, it doesnt matter a ****e, Berbatov is at Utd. He's happy, Utd are happy, and Spurs are probably happy at the price they recieved. Everybody knew Berbatov was going to go Utd, but its the manner in which it was conducted that upsets football fans outside of Utd. As Mick Dennis from the Guardian said, utd acted like the mafia.

Mitch Connor

allybhoy wrote: »

This link is from Spurs official page. Link

"As part of the settlement the Club has agreed not to pursue its official complaint to the Premier League."

Surely if Utd did nothing wrong then there would be no need to mention something like this. Do you think that it is a response to the media stating the transfer was not in good faith?

At the end of the day lads, it doesnt matter a ****e, Berbatov is at Utd. He's happy, Utd are happy, and Spurs are probably happy at the price they recieved. Everybody knew Berbatov was going to go Utd, but its the manner in which it was conducted that upsets football fans outside of Utd. As Mick Dennis from the Guardian said, utd acted like the mafia.

Or could be a way to save face for Spurs - if they had anything to begin with the premier league might have done more than tell them to come back when they had something to actually complain about.

Dave!

allybhoy wrote: »

This link is from Spurs official page. Link

"As part of the settlement the Club has agreed not to pursue its official complaint to the Premier League."

Surely if Utd did nothing wrong then there would be no need to mention something like this. Do you think that it is a response to the media stating the transfer was not in good faith?

United didn't mention that on their website, it was a Spurs thing

Seems to me like it's Spurs going into the negotiations and saying "alright alright, you give us £30m and Frasier Campbell and you can have Berbatov, and we won't pursue the complaint the PL as well", to which Ferguson replied "ehh.... okay.....?"

Anybody aware of a situation where a complaint was made, then a negotiation and transfer was done, and the complaint was subsequently pursued?

These complaints are usually political or strategic in nature. United reported Madrid to get them to back off from Ronaldo, not because they're morally opposed to tapping up a player (cue Pool fans posting "qft")

Mitch Connor

Zeige from Boro to Liverpool, complaint was persued and upheld, though Boro had no choice but to sell due to the minimum fee release clause in Zeige's contract.

allybhoy

Dave! wrote: »

United didn't mention that on their website, it was a Spurs thing

Seems to me like it's Spurs going into the negotiations and saying "alright alright, you give us £30m and Frasier Campbell and you can have Berbatov, and we won't pursue the complaint the PL as well", to which Ferguson replied "ehh.... okay.....?"

Would you not think that it would be more feasible that Utd could have just as easily said, we'll give you Fraser Campbell and and an extra few quid if you withdraw your complaint? Why would Spurs ask utd for a few extra quid to keep quiet when they already had a similar bid from City?

Mitch Connor

allybhoy wrote: »

Would you not think that it would be more feasible that Utd could have just as easily said, we'll give you Fraser Campbell and and an extra few quid if you withdraw your complaint? Why would Spurs ask utd for a few extra quid to keep quiet when they already had a similar bid from City?

Because Berbatov had no intention of going to City?

astrofool

allybhoy wrote: »

Would you not think that it would be more feasible that Utd could have just as easily said, we'll give you Fraser Campbell and and an extra few quid if you withdraw your complaint? Why would Spurs ask utd for a few extra quid to keep quiet when they already had a similar bid from City?

Probably because Berbatov had no intention of going to City, he was on his way to Manchester before City even bid.

If Tottenham did have a valid complaint, why would they drop it, and let their best player go to Man United? Why didn't they push the complaint with all their evidence weeks ago when they first made it?

allybhoy

Tauren wrote: »

Because Berbatov had no intention of going to City?

Well thats fairly obvious, seeing as though he wouldnt even meet with them, but just because a player doesnt want to go somewhere doesnt mean he cant be sold to them. Like I highly doubt Campbell wanted to leave OT for WHL but he still did.

therecklessone

allybhoy wrote: »

but just because a player doesnt want to go somewhere doesnt mean he cant be sold to them.

Yes it does.

Mitch Connor

allybhoy wrote: »

Well thats fairly obvious, seeing as though he wouldnt even meet with them, but just because a player doesnt want to go somewhere doesnt mean he cant be sold to them. Like I highly doubt Campbell wanted to leave OT for WHL but he still did.

Yeah, it actually does. If a player doesn't want to sign for someone, he can not be forced to. As for Campbel - he is probably loving it - virtually no chance of game time at United and has a decent chance of it at Spurs - why wouldn't he have wanted to go on loan to them? He was at Hull last year and loved it...

Dave!

allybhoy wrote: »

Would you not think that it would be more feasible that Utd could have just as easily said, we'll give you Fraser Campbell and and an extra few quid if you withdraw your complaint?

It's certainly a possibility, not a more feasible one though as Spurs' complaint apparantly rested on a quote misattributed to Ferguson

allybhoy

Tauren wrote: »

Yeah, it actually does. If a player doesn't want to sign for someone, he can not be forced to. As for Campbel - he is probably loving it - virtually no chance of game time at United and has a decent chance of it at Spurs - why wouldn't he have wanted to go on loan to them? He was at Hull last year and loved it...

So your telling me never in the history of football has any player been sold to a club against his will?

Because he had every chance of staying at utd and getting some starts at OT, he started the Newcastle game and looked lively and was the 3rd choice striker behind Rooney and Tevez until yesterday.