2025 Summer Transfer Thread. 😂

[Penwortham Blue]

1 hour ago, davulsukur said:

How?

We'll have paid Liverpool compensation when he signed his first pro deal here and any deal up to 23 years old. 

He's 27 now, they'll get nothing more, surely? 

Can't be anything in any contract as they released him.

Agree, think it is absolute bollocks re: compensation but will bow to Kent Exile’s knowledge with regard to solidarity payments.

Edited 6 hours ago by Penwortham Blue
In line of a later post

[KentExile]

28 minutes ago, Penwortham Blue said:

Agree, think it is absolute bollocks.

Exactly the same law will ensure that Rovers get a cut of Rory Finneran & Camden Schapers eventual transfer fees when Newcastle & Chelsea cash in on them, even if this is not done until after they turn 27 (as is the case with Travis).

This fee is on top of any fees/compensation that will have already been paid by this point and will apply to all future transfers involving them

Its actually one of the few areas that are not completely in favour of the big clubs (generally speaking), as 9 times out of 10, the beneficiary is a smaller club who had their talent poached at a young age. 

The same law means we are due an extra slice of any and all future transfers for Adam Wharton, Ashley Phillips, David Raya etc beyond any other future sell on fees etc which were actually negotiated in their sales, so if we didn't have Venkys being recipients of the money it would benefit Rovers if they had a nomadic career but with large transfer fees, like Anelka's career maybe?

Edited 6 hours ago by KentExile

[yeti-dog]

1.5 million seems a bit tight to me.. 

One thing are charlatan owners do reasonably well is stick to their guns on values. For that reason and the fact we won't replace like with like anyway I'd be saying I want £2 - 2.5 mil and if Derby won't pay they can do one. We tell Travis he's staying for the year and can then walk on a free, we kick the can down the road and look to replace him next summer with a half decent free transfer ourselves.

[wilsdenrover]

1 hour ago, KentExile said:

True (ish)

Travis was with Liverpool until 2014 (which I think would have been the season he turned 16, so it looks like  Liverpool would be due 1.5% of the full transfer value rather than the 2.5% that the twitter account states)

Disclaimer - Sunday morning maths is not my strong point, so below is the working 😉  Though if anyone is lazy, WilsdenRover with likely be along to check my work sooner rather than later 😉  Thanks in advance Wilsden 🙂 

 

The distribution of solidarity payments is as follows:

• 5% of the transfer fee is set aside for solidarity payments.

• This 5% is then distributed among the clubs based on the period the player was registered with them, calculated from the season of the player’s 12th birthday until the season of their 23rd birthday as follows:

– Season of 12th birthday: 5% (i.e. 0.25% of total compensation);

– Season of 13th birthday: 5% (i.e. 0.25% of total compensation);

– Season of 14th birthday: 5% (i.e. 0.25% of total compensation);

– Season of 15th birthday: 5% (i.e. 0.25% of total compensation);

– Season of 16th birthday: 10% (i.e. 0.5% of total compensation);

– Season of 17th birthday: 10% (i.e. 0.5% of total compensation);

– Season of 18th birthday: 10% (i.e. 0.5% of total compensation);

– Season of 19th birthday: 10% (i.e. 0.5% of total compensation);

– Season of 20th birthday: 10% (i.e. 0.5% of total compensation);

– Season of 21st birthday: 10% (i.e. 0.5% of total compensation);

– Season of 22nd birthday: 10% (i.e. 0.5% of total compensation);

– Season of 23rd birthday: 10% (i.e. 0.5% of total compensation)

The distribution is proportional, ensuring that clubs that contributed more to the player’s development receive a larger share.

A quick google suggests Travis left Liverpool at 17.

If so they’d be due 2% of the fee. 
 

Edited to add @KentExile:

On reflection I think this is a FIFA regulation so only applies to international transfers (and only if those take place before the end of the year the player turns 23).

I’m off out now but I’ll double check later on…

second edit (wife now impatiently standing by the door 😁😁):

The EFL solidarity rule is a 5% levy on all transfers - this isn’t distributed to former clubs it goes into a pension pot for players (with any excess going into a youth fund).

 

Edited 6 hours ago by wilsdenrover

[JHRover]

We're getting to the point where you have to balance potential outgoings/incomings and the costs/benefits of those with the value of retaining Championship status.

Even the most deluded and optimistic of supporters can surely see now that this isn't a good Championship squad and that it is going to be one almighty struggle this season. 

It always makes me wonder the thought process going on in some people's heads when they clamour for a player to be sold (or in this case be forced out) on the basis it 'makes financial sense' to sell now, get a million or two in (that won't be used to improve the squad, because even if they allowed a chunk of it to be spent on fees our wage 'model' prevents us from getting proven quality) and then a direct result of these sort of sales is potential relegation to League One and probably £10 million+ in revenue lost. 

There's still a lot of delusion around that we can just offload all these players, cut costs, sign equivalent or better quality and stay in the Championship (if you consider that to be some sort of achievement, I don't but the people running the club do). 

The penny will drop in the coming weeks only it will be too late when it does.

[KentExile]

28 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

A quick google suggests Travis left Liverpool at 17.

If so they’d be due 2% of the fee. 
 

Edited to add @KentExile:

On reflection I think this is a FIFA regulation so only applies to international transfers (and only if those take place before the end of the year the player turns 23).

I’m off out now but I’ll double check later on…

second edit (wife now impatiently standing by the door 😁😁😞

The EFL solidarity rule is a 5% levy on all transfers - this isn’t distributed to former clubs it goes into a pension pot for players (with any excess going into a youth fund).

 

Its definitely a FIFA regulation/law/rule.  Although it is not restricted to international transfers only, or to players under a certain age (which applies to "training compensation".  Also does not apply if no fee is paid (which is self explanatory as the rule itself  relates to a a % of any fee paid)

 

https://www.lawinsport.com/topics/item/a-guide-to-training-compensation-and-solidarity-payments-in-football#:~:text=Article 21 RSTP is entitled,former club (solidarity contribution).

Article 20 RSTP is entitled “Training compensation” and provides as follows:

“Training compensation shall be paid to a player’s training club(s): (1) when a player signs his first contract as a professional, and (2) each time a professional is transferred until the end of the season of his 23rd birthday. The obligation to pay training compensation arises whether the transfer takes place during or at the end of the player’s contract. The provisions concerning training compensation are set out in Annexe 4 of these regulations.”

Article 21 RSTP is entitled “Solidarity mechanism” and provides as follows:

“If a professional is transferred before the expiry of his contract, any club that has contributed to his education and training shall receive a proportion of the compensation paid to his former club (solidarity contribution). The provisions concerning solidarity contributions are set out in Annexe 5 of these regulations.”

 

PS - Sometimes I wonder if we should have a separate forum corner for discussing laws around transfers in autistic detail... so that we don't bore the rest of the forum 😉 

Edited 6 hours ago by KentExile

[bluebruce]

2 hours ago, Tim Southampton Rover said:

Alan Nixon reporting that Liverpool will receive a percentage of any Travis deal. No idea if that’s accurate, but if he left on a free to another English club, while being under a certain age, then it sounds similar to the scenario we hoped for with Dolan. Unfortunately, we missed out - Liverpool won't be.

Anyone else want to put a boot in on us while we're already down? 🤣

UPDATE:

 

2 hours ago, davulsukur said:

How?

We'll have paid Liverpool compensation when he signed his first pro deal here and any deal up to 23 years old. 

He's 27 now, they'll get nothing more, surely? 

Can't be anything in any contract as they released him.

Solidarity payments always happen, it's not the same as compensation. We will see a similar benefit from moves Adam Wharton makes. And it's separate to sell on clauses, so we will get the bulk of the 5% if he moves fairly soon. It's also not down to moving within the same country like compensation is, so any future moves Dolan makes for money, ourselves and Preston will see a small slice. I'm not sure how long these rules have been in place but it's at least a few years.

[bluebruce]

40 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

The EFL solidarity rule is a 5% levy on all transfers - this isn’t distributed to former clubs it goes into a pension pot for players (with any excess going into a youth fund).

 

First I've heard of it not going to former clubs. Certainly in FM20 it was hardwired into the game as a payment to former clubs. They're not generally wrong with that sort of thing, so unless the rules changed since the 19/20 season... (and if they did that's a hunk of crap IMO, players get enough compo as it is, clubs are the ones bleeding money, partly because of shit regulations that let big clubs poach their youngsters).

[alcd]

Nixon just enjoys winding up Rovers fans. A 2% levy is just a drop in the ocean. 

[KentExile]

10 minutes ago, alcd said:

Nixon just enjoys winding up Rovers fans. A 2% levy is just a drop in the ocean. 

Yep, and standard across all transfers.  It genuinely does seem to be an attempt to wind people up

[bluebruce]

9 minutes ago, KentExile said:

Yep, and standard across all transfers.  It genuinely does seem to be an attempt to wind people up

Yeh it's relevant for small clubs whose products go on to sell for multimillions after moving to a higher league. But 75k or whatever, even to us, is barely worth mentioning, and even less so to Liverpool.

[unleaded]

21 hours ago, FE123 said:

RE the BrfcPrivy account on Twitter.

Its extraordinary that a senior member of a multi-million pound business sees it necessary to leak propaganda from an anonymous twitter account in a desperate attempt to generate positive PR.

Its a clear reflection on the fact we are run by amateurs.

The info he gets and leaks, has to either be a member of VI’s staff or someone on the board.

Shambolic, heads should roll.

You can’t have it both ways .. say theirs no club communication then have a rant when they do it ….. 

If it’s good enough for Posh and their chairman am glad we have one too … Heads should take a bow …..

[Emerald Isle Rover]

1 minute ago, unleaded said:

You can’t have it both ways .. say theirs no club communication then have a rant when they do it ….. 

If it’s good enough for Posh and their chairman am glad we have one too … Heads should take a bow …..

The problem with that is it’s selective 

[roversfan99]

6 minutes ago, unleaded said:

You can’t have it both ways .. say theirs no club communication then have a rant when they do it ….. 

If it’s good enough for Posh and their chairman am glad we have one too … Heads should take a bow …..

Peterborough's chairman is a knobhead but this is totally different anyway. Journalists being actively blocked from asking certain difficult questions but someone on the inside speaking behind an anonymous twitter handle spitting out pro club messages.

I asked but didnt get an answer. You have been very pro Gestede and the current regime and having previously praised him, very noticeably keen to stick the boot into Eustace. Do you have no concerns as to the direction that the club is heading in, do you still have faith in the recruitment, no concerns about our total inability to keep our best players or sort new contracts and do you have any appreciation as to why Eustace couldnt stay, beside just being a "snake?"

[Mattyblue]

How anybody can be ‘’ITK’ but with a straight face come on here and say that it’s anything but a total mess down there.

My own brother in law couldn’t get out quick enough (and he’s a life long fan, but he couldn’t risk his career any longer).

[Torgeir]

3 hours ago, SpaceBarSlam said:

Derby have offered 1.5 million for Travis. How exactly has letting this spill out into a what has clearly become quite a bitter stand off benefited the club at all? 

We clearly want to move him on, he wants out and clubs will have been following the fallout and know that it's hardly going to be a case of apologies on both sides and Trav reintegrated as captain if his valuation isn't met.

Astonishing mishandling. 

Would never have happened under this guy:

[MarkBRFC]

28 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

 

I asked but didnt get an answer. You have been very pro Gestede and the current regime and having previously praised him, very noticeably keen to stick the boot into Eustace. Do you have no concerns as to the direction that the club is heading in, do you still have faith in the recruitment, no concerns about our total inability to keep our best players or sort new contracts and do you have any appreciation as to why Eustace couldnt stay, beside just being a "snake?"

You won't get an answer on this.

Just look at his twitter feed, all players who leave are snakes and rats and everything Gestede does is wonderful.

Been a solid source for news at times over the years but it all does make me wonder who he really is 🤔

[bluebruce]

48 minutes ago, unleaded said:

You can’t have it both ways .. say theirs no club communication then have a rant when they do it ….. 

If it’s good enough for Posh and their chairman am glad we have one too … Heads should take a bow …..

There's a big big difference between official communication from the club chairman (we don't even have one of those btw) and unofficial communication from an anonymous employee of dubious intent. I would have thought that obvious tbh.

[bluebruce]

11 minutes ago, MarkBRFC said:

You won't get an answer on this.

Just look at his twitter feed, all players who leave are snakes and rats and everything Gestede does is wonderful.

Been a solid source for news at times over the years but it all does make me wonder who he really is 🤔

I've always understood it that he works for an agency. In what capacity and what agency, I've never been clear.

[BRFC.]

On 16/08/2025 at 12:09, Mercer said:

Indeed - would also love to see who else is on the payroll!!!

Some fans on twitter 👀👀👀

[simongarnerisgod]

we could be left with a micro squad by the tranfer window closure,god alone knows whats going to happen,one things is certain it won`t be any happy news😰.be no surprise to me if mahktar,hyam,travis and anyone else worth a club of quid are offloaded

[wilsdenrover]

3 hours ago, KentExile said:

Its definitely a FIFA regulation/law/rule.  Although it is not restricted to international transfers only, or to players under a certain age (which applies to "training compensation".  Also does not apply if no fee is paid (which is self explanatory as the rule itself  relates to a a % of any fee paid)

 

https://www.lawinsport.com/topics/item/a-guide-to-training-compensation-and-solidarity-payments-in-football#:~:text=Article 21 RSTP is entitled,former club (solidarity contribution).

Article 20 RSTP is entitled “Training compensation” and provides as follows:

“Training compensation shall be paid to a player’s training club(s): (1) when a player signs his first contract as a professional, and (2) each time a professional is transferred until the end of the season of his 23rd birthday. The obligation to pay training compensation arises whether the transfer takes place during or at the end of the player’s contract. The provisions concerning training compensation are set out in Annexe 4 of these regulations.”

Article 21 RSTP is entitled “Solidarity mechanism” and provides as follows:

“If a professional is transferred before the expiry of his contract, any club that has contributed to his education and training shall receive a proportion of the compensation paid to his former club (solidarity contribution). The provisions concerning solidarity contributions are set out in Annexe 5 of these regulations.”

 

PS - Sometimes I wonder if we should have a separate forum corner for discussing laws around transfers in autistic detail... so that we don't bore the rest of the forum 😉 

You’re right regarding the lack of an age restriction so my apologies in this regard.

It still won’t apply with Travis and Liverpool as annexe 5 includes the following neither of which are met in this case:

 

If people ever get bored of our musings I’m more than happy to take it to DMs 😁

[wilsdenrover]

2 hours ago, bluebruce said:

First I've heard of it not going to former clubs. Certainly in FM20 it was hardwired into the game as a payment to former clubs. They're not generally wrong with that sort of thing, so unless the rules changed since the 19/20 season... (and if they did that's a hunk of crap IMO, players get enough compo as it is, clubs are the ones bleeding money, partly because of shit regulations that let big clubs poach their youngsters).

[Tomphil2]

1 hour ago, unleaded said:

You can’t have it both ways .. say theirs no club communication then have a rant when they do it ….. 

If it’s good enough for Posh and their chairman am glad we have one too … Heads should take a bow …..

There's a difference between dripping genuine info out and club propaganda to protect certain people.

We've no idea which it is but it's likely one of the two and the constant 'refused to play' seems to be the standard line chucked out. I can't see anyone in their right mind actually expecting Travis to play yesterday.

How long before he's tweeting 'Sonny refused to play' or 'Dom refused' ?

[B16Rover]

Can anyone explain to me the whole snake thing? How many players have to leave before we reassess which party are the snakes