Premier League - Transfer Window Vote

ClaretTony · Post by **ClaretTony** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:22 pm

Voted to close the window early from next year. It required 14 in favour. I believe we voted in favour.

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:27 pm

Watch the prices for players in Europe drop when our window shuts and theirs keeps open for another 20 odd days

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:29 pm

Our window will now close before the start of the season, which is a vote for common sense.

Dyched · Post by **Dyched** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:33 pm

This could backfire next summer. Players won't want to be signing especially for clubs like ours if they get called up for their country. 2/3 good games and they can attract far bigger clubs. It's going to be a scramble to get players in after the WC is finished.

Guitargeorge · Post by **Guitargeorge** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:34 pm

Good decision. All done so that Panini can get their albums out sooner!

Quickenthetempo · Post by **Quickenthetempo** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:56 pm

I was hoping we wouldn't be able to sell after the window but that will come sooner rather than later.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:00 pm

ClaretTony wrote:Voted to close the window early from next year. It required 14 in favour. I believe we voted in favour.

Can we assume Leicester voted for the window to be open for 14 seconds longer?

"Fifa has rejected Leicester City's application to register midfielder Adrien Silva after the club missed the deadline by 14 seconds."

BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41118927" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:03 pm

The common sense approach wouldve been to have it run until easter like it used to.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:08 pm

Dyched wrote:This could backfire next summer. Players won't want to be signing especially for clubs like ours if they get called up for their country. 2/3 good games and they can attract far bigger clubs. It's going to be a scramble to get players in after the WC is finished.

That's the point - the scramble will be before the season starts, which is less disruptive. Players will want to sign for English clubs before the window closes, because English clubs are the ones that pay the highest wages. As England pays the highest wages, England is in the best position to make this stick; who knows, other countries may follow suit next year.

jojomk1 · Post by **jojomk1** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:09 pm

Could backfire on Prem League sides

We close our window but then teams from Europe come in for our players before their window shuts, leaving us no way to replace our losses

We do not rule the world of football and other countries will not fall in line when their season starts later than ours

A free market means there should be no window at all

JohnDearyMe · Post by **JohnDearyMe** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:01 pm

The Guardian reported that Burnley's chairman abstained from the vote

simonclaret · Post by **simonclaret** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:05 pm

JohnDearyMe wrote:The Guardian reported that Burnley's chairman abstained from the vote

Be interested to know his reasons.

Vegas Claret · Post by **Vegas Claret** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:12 pm

Would be a sensible decision if it was a UEFA/FIFA directive to all leagues, as it is it will be a complete cluster and will just drive the prices up even more.

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:41 pm

Leicester have voted for the window to close 14 seconds later -

ClaretTony · Post by **ClaretTony** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:41 pm

JohnDearyMe wrote:The Guardian reported that Burnley's chairman abstained from the vote

Very surprising given that senior people at the club, in the manager, were very much in favour.

Bin Ont Turf · Post by **Bin Ont Turf** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:43 pm

Reecey1987 will be upset.

Grumps · Post by **Grumps** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:52 pm

Would only work if all other leagues did the same, otherwise it will be an utter shambles, which is why I guess our sensible chairman didn't vote for it.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:53 pm

I'm not sure why it would be an issue for PL clubs in regards to clubs abroad wanting to buy their players...

No one forces a club to sell a player and several clubs have refused to sell this summer.

firstclaret · Post by **firstclaret** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:55 pm

BleedingClaret wrote:Leicester have voted for the window to close 14 seconds later -

Maybe they should have gone for Arshavin, window didn't seem to apply for him.

quoonbeatz · Post by **quoonbeatz** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:55 pm

about time. finally a bit of sense from the premier league.

DCWat · Post by **DCWat** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:09 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:Would be a sensible decision if it was a UEFA/FIFA directive to all leagues, as it is it will be a complete cluster and will just drive the prices up even more.

Not sure how that could work in reality, Vegas. Plenty leagues start at very different times.

diamondpocket · Post by **diamondpocket** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:14 pm

Good job it didnt close early this year as we wouldnt have had the time to find another striker with Gray leaving so soon to the season starting, or we wouldnt have sold him as we hadnt a replacement signed up therefore losing a good deal. Hopefully, it forces teams and clubs to do much more work over the Summer but as we've seen with a longer period clubs & agents just wait till the last minute to cause unsettlement; for the bigger clubs it aint so much a problem but for us it could well be.

Vegas Claret · Post by **Vegas Claret** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:16 pm

DCWat wrote:Not sure how that could work in reality, Vegas. Plenty leagues start at very different times.

Isn't there only a week difference between the PL and the rest ? (going for memory so I could be wrong).
If they would have made the rule that the PL transfer window closes not allowing players to be sold then it would work. As it is someone in Spain could buy Defour 20 days after our window closes. It's ok if you are a mega club that can turn down bids but we aren't nor are we a big club in PL terms - it's a dumb move imho but it's done now.

Wokingclaret · Post by **Wokingclaret** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:21 pm

JohnDearyMe wrote:The Guardian reported that Burnley's chairman abstained from the vote

May be thinking we might not be in next season

DCWat · Post by **DCWat** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:32 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:Isn't there only a week difference between the PL and the rest ? (going for memory so I could be wrong).
If they would have made the rule that the PL transfer window closes not allowing players to be sold then it would work. As it is someone in Spain could buy Defour 20 days after our window closes. It's ok if you are a mega club that can turn down bids but we aren't nor are we a big club in PL terms - it's a dumb move imho but it's done now.

It probably is much of a muchness for the big leagues under UEFA - Iceland, Russia, Ireland, Norway - amongst others are different though and plenty more outside of UEFA.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesti ... all_season" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Vegas Claret · Post by **Vegas Claret** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:48 pm

DCWat wrote:It probably is much of a muchness for the big leagues under UEFA - Iceland, Russia, Ireland, Norway - amongst others are different though and plenty more outside of UEFA.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesti ... all_season" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yeah but none of those are what I would class as major leagues, I'd be very surprised if anyone from them could attract PL players. We'll find out next summer, hopefully we'll still be in the PL for it to matter !!

jojomk1 · Post by **jojomk1** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:11 pm

JohnDearyMe wrote:The Guardian reported that Burnley's chairman abstained from the vote

If true, anyone got a suitable instrument to get the splinters out of his bum

joey13 · Post by **joey13** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:17 pm

JohnDearyMe wrote:The Guardian reported that Burnley's chairman abstained from the vote

Abstained from bringing in a centre back and contradicted himself on how much we would invest in the team .

Reecey1987 · Post by **Reecey1987** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:42 pm

Bin Ont Turf wrote:Reecey1987 will be upset.

Why's that ?

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:54 pm

joey13 wrote:Abstained from bringing in a centre back and contradicted himself on how much we would invest in the team .

Do you know how many deals we tried to get across the line and failed - if so do you know why they failed - very few know how many we tried and failed for and how much has gone on in the background - if you are one of the privileged few and can, please divulge - if not, please move on the squad has

joey13 · Post by **joey13** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 7:04 pm

Chester Perry wrote:Do you know how many deals we tried to get across the line and failed - if so do you know why they failed - very few know how many we tried and failed for and how much has gone on in the background - if you are one of the privileged few and can, please divulge - if not, please move on the squad has

Only had 18 months to get a deal across the line for a centre back and failed now hasn't got the balls to make a decision on something as important as the transfer window .You keep sucking up if it makes you feel better.

Walton · Post by **Walton** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 7:38 pm

If Burnley had voted in favour instead of abstaining, the transfer window would have closed before the season start.

We've just messed it up for the 13 clubs who wanted change.

South West Claret. · Post by **South West Claret.** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 7:41 pm

simonclaret wrote:Be interested to know his reasons.

Yes me to.

Jimscho · Post by **Jimscho** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 7:45 pm

Walton wrote:If Burnley had voted in favour instead of abstaining, the transfer window would have closed before the season start.

We've just messed it up for the 13 clubs who wanted change.

We haven't messed it up for anyone.14 clubs voted for it to close early and so it is going to close early.

MACCA · Post by **MACCA** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 7:47 pm

simonclaret wrote:Be interested to know his reasons.

Have you seen the price of Deisel?

And don't get me started on the parking fees!

We won't be held to ransom, and possibly the times didn't align for us to get the vote over the line, but I'm sure they had plenty of other irons in the fire.

Bin Ont Turf · Post by **Bin Ont Turf** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:08 pm

Reecey1987 wrote:Why's that ?

It was noticeable how much you were into this summers transfer window (not a bad thing), that's all.

Just a bit of fun.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:17 pm

Quote from the BBC.

" Fourteen Premier League clubs voted in favour of the amendment, which was the minimum total needed for the plans to be approved. Manchester United, Manchester City, Watford, Swansea and Crystal Palace voted against the proposal while Burnley abstained. "

What a strange mix of clubs. Frankly its embarrasing that we could not decide one way or the other. Why? Board/manager difference of views or split Board?

I think Club's should be able to sign who they want when they want, provided that they can't play more than 25 over 21's in any one season.

Reecey1987 · Post by **Reecey1987** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:18 pm

Bin Ont Turf wrote:It was noticeable how much you were into this summers transfer window (not a bad thing), that's all.

Just a bit of fun.

I dont mind transfer window i just think it stays open far to long . That last 6 weeks that kept getting repeated time and time again seemed a lot longer

Royboyclaret · Post by **Royboyclaret** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:14 pm

Burnley abstain???

What's that all about?.......Surely as a club we can't be so indecisive.

Can only conclude the manager wanted one thing and the Board the other.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:16 pm

summitclaret wrote:Quote from the BBC.

" Fourteen Premier League clubs voted in favour of the amendment, which was the minimum total needed for the plans to be approved. Manchester United, Manchester City, Watford, Swansea and Crystal Palace voted against the proposal while Burnley abstained. "

What a strange mix of clubs. Frankly its embarrasing that we could not decide one way or the other. Why? Board/manager difference of views or split Board?

I think Club's should be able to sign who they want when they want, provided that they can't play more than 25 over 21's in any one season.

Hi summit, I read a couple of days back that the refusal of one of the big clubs to sell a player to Spain (RM/Barca, I guess) helped swing the vote in favour. It demonstrated that (some big) clubs could hold on to their players, even if the player wanted a move - and, so they will be able to do the same when the EPL window is closed and the big European clubs get their cheque books out.

How many of the smaller EPL clubs will be able to say "no sale" when a large amount is offered for their "star player?"

So, three choices: vote "yes," vote "no" or abstain. I don't know, maybe make the argument that the EPL shouldn't change until the big clubs in Europe and aligned with the same deadline date. It would be interesting to know why Watford, Swansea and Crystal Palace voted the way they did, and interesting to know why Brighton, Huddersfield and Newcastle voted for the change. It's possible that 3 of these 6 clubs will not be in the EPL at the start of the 2018/19 season.

EDIT: And, as above, why were Leicester supporting the change? They got a 2 hour extension in the last window and still couldn't get their paperwork sorted in time.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:16 pm

Royboyclaret wrote:Burnley abstain???

What's that all about?.......Surely as a club we can't be so indecisive.

Can only conclude the manager wanted one thing and the Board the other.

The board probably wanted an end to the transfer window altogether!

South West Claret. · Post by **South West Claret.** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:23 pm

Royboyclaret wrote:Burnley abstain???

What's that all about?.......Surely as a club we can't be so indecisive.

Can only conclude the manager wanted one thing and the Board the other.

Hopefully we will get to hear why we didn't vote.

Oshkoshclaret · Post by **Oshkoshclaret** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:29 pm

Maybe we didn't have an informed opinion on the subject.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:55 pm

Royboyclaret wrote:Burnley abstain???

What's that all about?.......Surely as a club we can't be so indecisive.

Well, we can and we can't.

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:57 pm

jojomk1 wrote:Could backfire on Prem League sides

We close our window but then teams from Europe come in for our players before their window shuts, leaving us no way to replace our losses

We do not rule the world of football and other countries will not fall in line when their season starts later than ours

A free market means there should be no window at all

Like Fenerbahce have done today with Costa coffee

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41195421

South West Claret. · Post by **South West Claret.** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:04 pm

dsr wrote:Well, we can and we can't.

Yes of course but that's not my reason for wanting to know why Burnley did not use their vote.

Voting was a hard fought right in this country so I'm always interested as to know why people don't use their vote.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:20 pm

South West Claret. wrote:Yes of course but that's not my reason for wanting to know why Burnley did not use their vote.

Voting was a hard fought right in this country so I'm always interested as to know why people don't use their vote.

They did use the vote, as an abstention. Presumably they weren't convinced of the arguments for or against, so rather than toss a coin and introduce a random element into a serious vote, they stood back and allowed teams that were convinced of the arguments to make the decision. It's probably better to let decisions be made by people who with a solid point of view, rather than by people who don't know and/or don't care.

Does anyone know what the rule is re. the two-thirds majority? If it's two-thirds of the electorate, then it needs 14 votes in favour and an abstention counts the same as a no vote. But if it's two-thirds of the voters, then with only 19 voting, 13 votes in favour would have been enough.

South West Claret. · Post by **South West Claret.** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:38 pm

People can play with words as much as they like but the fact remains that if you don't cast your vote then you have not voted...it's as simple as that. As I say I shall be interested as to why Burnley did not vote.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:53 pm

An abstention is different from not voting. I have at least twice gone to polling stations to vote for nobody because there was nobody worth electing - I registered my right to vote and was part of the turnout, and that's different from not turning out at all.

But I agree, it will be interesting to know exactly why they abstained.

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri Sep 08, 2017 12:17 am

joey13 wrote:Only had 18 months to get a deal across the line for a centre back and failed now hasn't got the balls to make a decision on something as important as the transfer window .You keep sucking up if it makes you feel better.

Where was I sucking up

Where is your ability to answer my question

Abusing someone (Garlick in this case) and drawing conclusions when you don't know the facts makes no sense (even though it is a popular past time on here).

fyi I share the frustration re a central defender and having pace/creativity up front I choose not to call out the club and it's management who have moved things forward so massively in the last 5 years, because I believe they are constantly trying to improve the lot of the club. Sometimes things don't fall into place the way you want them too - that is the nature of the beast. If you don't like it there are plenty of options other than abusing someone who has a consistent record of trying to do right by the club