Transfer Rumours & Discussion

Guest wrote:I don't follow the Belles, did they have an over-inflated squad because they were all part-timers or are the Belles going to have to replace all these players that were released?

They had a fair few defenders and midfielders. Those releases will be a case of making room for what they have signed and just general trimming of the no longer needed.

Guest wrote:Harding's agent has said her new club is being announced after the international break. Which was pretty obviously going to be the case but whatever. Their guess is Wednesday.

Wednesday is a long way off. There's no need to wait until then if she is already there and getting it over and done with lessens the chances of it leaking. Though it seems like people are starting to figure out what is being suspected anyway. Wednesday is also fixture list release day.

City have loaned Brooks to Everton.

http://everton.fawsl.com/news/blues_bag_brooks.html#mFBGYGT4RvGv2LYz.97

City have loaned Brooks to Everton

Not surprising, I wondered were she would pop up on loan. I found this part of the press release the most amusing. "Having played the role of understudy to England keeper Karen Bardsley, Brooks will now spend the 2016 campaign with the Blues, and will compete with Kirstie Levell for the number one jersey."

Everton are damn lucky to have such a talented goalie on loan, there is no competition. Brooks is by far the better of the two. I cringe every time Spence talks: "Alex has already shown in our conversations that she understands what we want from our players at the Club" I already feel sorry for her, it will be good for her to get games though. She has the making of an excellent goalie for England.

Is Baggaley taking over from Spencer? I was expecting City to loan Brooks to Birmingham as an apology for being the reason why Spencer left them for Chelsea.

Baggaley is indeed taking over from Spencer as per this statement:
http://www.birminghamcityladiesfc.co.uk/news/statement_player_movements_in_transfer_window.html#U9zeGlrWx8wg6TBi.97

was expecting City to loan Brooks to Birmingham as an apology for being the reason why Spencer left them for Chelsea.

I'd expect that City thought it would be more useful to send Brooks down to a fairly decent WSL 2 side where she won't be bombarded with shots constantly. I expect that Baggaley will see the most action on the field this season.

.@LFCladies have today reluctantly accepted a bid from @ArsenalLadies for @AsisatOshoala - http://goo.gl/g7CFG4 .

I'm done

I thought it was Lundh and Harding in for Dowie and Smorsgard. But the Harding and Oshoala moves are so close together it suggests Harding might be Oshoala's replacement? Oshoala leaving changes so much. I don't think anybody saw that one coming.

Guest wrote:I thought it was Lundh and Harding in for Dowie and Smorsgard. But the Harding and Oshoala moves are so close together it suggests Harding might be Oshoala's replacement? Oshoala leaving changes so much. I don't think anybody saw that one coming.

I would think that myself if it wasn't for Liverpool's statement using 'today' the offer was accepted. If it really has happened only today then this Oshoala thing has had no bearing on any other business of the winter. But it's so hard to gauge time frames in this league.

^ It depends how you read the statement. 'Liverpool Ladies Football Club can today confirm that the Club has reluctantly accepted a bid from Arsenal Ladies for Asisat Oshoala.' Is the use of today in regards to today being the day they are just confirming it or is today the day it all happened. I can read it both ways.

How do other clubs find out about buy out clauses? It is something that Arsenal can ask and Liverpool have to tell them? If that is so Liverpool would have known of Arsenal's interest before today and Arsenal came back today with the high bid that triggered that clause. I don't understand why Arsenal would want her they have a lot of young forwards one would think that they would have gone for a more experienced forward.

Looks like Arsenal is stock-piling forwards as well as midfielders. I hope Oshoala turns Arsenal done, she'll see more playing time at Liverpool and she needs consistent minutes to progress. She's pretty friendly with Fara so she probably will go. Wonder if Fara told Arsenal of the buy out clause?

A legit buy out clause in English football would be extremely rare. Any kind of release clause for that matter is rare. And that extends to the men's game as well. So I'm amazed one existed and has been activated in the WSL given the usual nonchalant attitude towards contracts and such like. Knowledge of them is supposed to stay between the player and the current club. 

Arsenal could have got the info via Fara. They could have got it via Oshoala/her agent, who will have been the one to insist such a clause existed in the first place. And if it was either of those avenues we're in some murky water. But without knowing what the actual terms of the clause are it's very difficult to try and piece it all together.

This whole Oshoala announcement is so odd.  I wonder if Liverpool are being proactive with information because the Fara trade took so long (even with her out of contract) that they are going public to stop rumours and forcing Arsenal to make the next move of personal terms with Oshoala more public.  I think that this will be the first transfer fee that will be released/leaked to the public.

They could have got it via Oshoala/her agent, who will have been the one to insist such a clause existed in the first place. And if it was either of those avenues we're in some murky water.

Arsenal can't contact Oshoala or her agent without Liverpool's consent. Very murky water indeed.

This whole Oshoala announcement is so odd.  I wonder if Liverpool are being proactive with information because the Fara trade took so long (even with her out of contract) that they are going public to stop rumours and forcing Arsenal to make the next move of personal terms with Oshoala more public.  I think that this will be the first transfer fee that will be released/leaked to the public.

It isn't in Liverpool's best interests for her release clause to become public knowledge unless they actually want to move her on. She hasn't gone anywhere yet; she still needs to want to move and then agree personal terms with Arsenal. She can turn them down at either hurdles. But by publically announcing this process is happening Liverpool are basically inviting everybody else to come in for her as well. If her clause is not club specific then multiple clubs can trigger it at the same time.

So if they don't want her to leave, don't say anything and hope she tells Arsenal no.

How long before a player is out of contract can another club come courting that player without the home clubs approval? Arsenal were giving "gifts" to Fara as early as the Liverpool v Arsenal game just after Canada and then wined and dined her for the Arsenal v Liverpool men's game when she was down in London as a BT Sport guest reporter. Were they free to do this at that time or was Liverpool allowing Arsenal to woo her?

Guest wrote:It isn't in Liverpool's best interests for her release clause to become public knowledge unless they actually want to move her on. She hasn't gone anywhere yet; she still needs to want to move and then agree personal terms with Arsenal. She can turn them down at either hurdles. But by publically announcing this process is happening Liverpool are basically inviting everybody else to come in for her as well. If her clause is not club specific then multiple clubs can trigger it at the same time.

So if they don't want her to leave, don't say anything and hope she tells Arsenal no.

We're talking about the WSL here, where getting information is like getting blood from a stone. I find it hard to believe Liverpool would have made us privy to this without first finding out that Oshoala intends to use this as an opportunity to leave. They must know that this clause being activated is going to lead to a transfer out. Because if not and she stays then it's like the whole thing never happened, and why make us wise to something which never happened when so much that does happen is left unsaid.

So if it's not Arsenal it's somebody. Which is where your point about inviting other interest comes in. If her response to being told that her clause had been activated was anything less than a flat out 'I don't wish to leave' then tell the world her clause exists and cash in. Because she will only leave for nothing in 12 months otherwise.

Guest wrote:How long before a player is out of contract can another club come courting that player without the home clubs approval? Arsenal were giving "gifts" to Fara as early as the Liverpool v Arsenal game just after Canada and then wined and dined her for the Arsenal v Liverpool men's game when she was down in London as a BT Sport guest reporter. Were they free to do this at that time or was Liverpool allowing Arsenal to woo her?

In the men's game, clubs are allowed to approach imminently free agent players six months before their contract expires. I don't know if the same applies to WSL contracts given the WSL season is shorter. You would hope not since the average season only stretches to eight months if we're lucky.

Why would Arsenal leave it until the end of January to go in for a player they knew they wouldn't have to bother haggling over because a clause gives them automatic bid acceptance. She could have been secured months ago if they were that keen, and if they would have done it months ago too to make sure nobody beat them to her because if they knew of her clause others could easily have found out as well.

So either this has indeed been in place for months and we are only just being told now as the final pieces fall into place, or Arsenal have been shopping around and settled for her when their higher listed preferences never came off.

What happened to that English forward that they were supposed to be getting? Did we ever figure out who it was?

just being told now as the final pieces fall into place

What final pieces, Arsenal's loan from the bank finally going through to afford the buy out clause? I agree if Oshoala was a main target they would have secured her in December, why wait. Smacks of an expensive panic buy from Arsenal, most likely since they were unable to secure their main target. They now have three forwards under 21 (with only one of them being English), 2 forwards over 35 and 2 forwards in their prime. How in the hell are they going to accommodate all of those players. Some of their purchases having been baffling this off season and the amount of money they have spent on fees and wages is staggering.

Liverpool are basically inviting everybody else to come in for her as well. If her clause is not club specific then multiple clubs can trigger it at the same time

Do you think that they are trying to sell her overseas? Chelsea definitely don't need her and I don't think City would waste that kind of money on her, I can't believe that Arsenal are to be honest. I know that PSG was interested in her before she went to Liverpool maybe a German or Swedish club would be as well. Better for Liverpool to sell her to a different league than to a direct rival if she doesn't want to see out her contract.

Guest wrote:Do you think that they are trying to sell her overseas? Chelsea definitely don't need her and I don't think City would waste that kind of money on her, I can't believe that Arsenal are to be honest. I know that PSG was interested in her before she went to Liverpool maybe a German or Swedish club would be as well. Better for Liverpool to sell her to a different league than to a direct rival if she doesn't want to see out her contract.

I'm sure they would rather sell her overseas than to a direct rival. Normally when clubs invite a round of interest they are trying to start a bidding war, but if Oshoala's clause is a sale value then her clause effectively functions like a buy it now price meaning a bidding war isn't going to happen. Therefore, the only reason for announcing her clause when intending to sell would be to allow them to put a selection of clubs to Oshoala for her to choose from. If Arsenal are not a done deal they could be hoping somebody foreign comes in late prompted by this news. Buy it now prices stop you from being able to swinging a deal in your favour through paying over the odds on the transfer fee, so you swing it in your favour by paying over the odds on the personal terms offered direct to the player. They could be hoping somebody in a different league comes in and blows Arsenal out of the water.

Guest wrote:What happened to that English forward that they were supposed to be getting? Did we ever figure out who it was?

I know Sampson has a million forwards but even so, when you list them and look at what is in front of you you can eliminate a fair few based on their current club not wanting to part with them and Arsenal not being able to afford the astronomical fee it would require to change that. It more or less leaves you with just Taylor. Who I do think would come back to England for the right circumstances. But is now apparently not going to do that with Arsenal.