Harvey Elliott

[Jims Dentist]

Apologies if this has been posted but:
Has the tribunal actually got round to ruling on a transfer fee for Elliott?

[Jeroen]

A few more Appearances now Liverpool has won the league and it will push up the final amount
$€$€$

Happy days

[grandad]

It is not as if the Tribunal has had much to do recently. Beyond a joke now.

[Finnans Right Peg]

With the lack of information we get from the club I wouldn't be surprised if we already agreed a deal hence why we signed knockheart🤔

[ChesterTheTabby]

With the lack of information we get from the club I wouldn't be surprised if we already agreed a deal hence why we signed knockheart🤔

Did we actually sign Knockaert? Or was that all a windup?

[The Rational Fan]

With the lack of information we get from the club I wouldn't be surprised if we already agreed a deal hence why we signed knockheart🤔

Did we actually sign Knockaert? Or was that all a windup?

In fairness, we were supposed to buy Knockaert by the 1st of July or send him back to Brighton. Brighton were probably in a good negotiating position to ask for a high-price and Knockaert probably wanted a long contract too in return for playing the rest of the season.

Hopefully, the tribunal realizes that we deserve more than Knocakert's fee for a young right-winger like Harvey Elliott. If the tribunal doesn't reward Fulham for developing young talent (like Harvey Elliott and Ryan Sessegnon), then many clubs will start following the Brentford model of only developing players (like Saïd Benrahma and Ollie Watkins) after they are 17 years old.

I think the EFL would be making a huge mistake to make a decision that would reduce the number of clubs willing to develop young players.

[N_O_W_S]

It's impossible finding any actual tribunal fees for Ings or Solanke to have a bit of a baseline.

I know that there was a recent article suggesting that we are hoping for £10m.

I have also seen a report saying what Elliot has done since moving wont have any effect upon the fee as those appearances were at Liverpool and not Fulham.

[St Eve]

He just signed a 3 year contract with Liverpool. That should help us with the valuation

[The Cravenette]

He just signed a 3 year contract with Liverpool. That should help us with the valuation

Exactly. Surely now he has signed professional papers the compensation has to have been agreed.

[Jurassic Parker]

personal opinion but he was never premiership level. I watched him several times for Spurs and his inability to beat a man is his downfall. Jose said he's not physical enough and that's his issue and I'm inclined to agree, he can't get past a man, he just gets stuck deep in the left wing needing someone to come short and pass it to

[res]

personal opinion but he was never premiership level. I watched him several times for Spurs and his inability to beat a man is his downfall. Jose said he's not physical enough and that's his issue and I'm inclined to agree, he can't get past a man, he just gets stuck deep in the left wing needing someone to come short and pass it to

I think you're confusing Harvey Elliott with Ryan Sessegnon

[The Rational Fan]

It's impossible finding any actual tribunal fees for Ings or Solanke to have a bit of a baseline.

I know that there was a recent article suggesting that we are hoping for £10m. I have also seen a report saying what Elliot has done since moving wont have any effect upon the fee as those appearances were at Liverpool and not Fulham.

In the end, the Tribunal doesn't care about Fulham and are probably loyal to the Big Six clubs. But, they do care about English Football and don't want medium size clubs following the Brentford model of only developing over 17-year-old players.

Fulham spends more money on development and develops younger players than Brentford, so Fulham should be rewarded when we produce a player like Harvey Elliott. Reward Brentford and Liverpool, then every club will focus on older developing teenages.

Some clubs are spending £5m per year on youth development, and many clubs would cut spending if Fulham only get £4m for Harvey Elliott (i.e. less than one years spending for some clubs on youth). I think English Football youth development will be reduced, if the Tribunal doesn't demand Liverpool to pay £10m+.

[Bill2]

It's impossible finding any actual tribunal fees for Ings or Solanke to have a bit of a baseline.

I know that there was a recent article suggesting that we are hoping for £10m. I have also seen a report saying what Elliot has done since moving wont have any effect upon the fee as those appearances were at Liverpool and not Fulham.

In the end, the Tribunal doesn't care about Fulham and are probably loyal to the Big Six clubs. But, they do care about English Football and don't want medium size clubs following the Brentford model of only developing over 17-year-old players.

Fulham spends more money on development and develops younger players than Brentford, so Fulham should be rewarded when we produce a player like Harvey Elliott. Reward Brentford and Liverpool, then every club will focus on older developing teenages.

Some clubs are spending £5m per year on youth development, and many clubs would cut spending if Fulham only get £4m for Harvey Elliott (i.e. less than one years spending for some clubs on youth). I think English Football youth development will be reduced, if the Tribunal doesn't demand Liverpool to pay £10m+.

Agree, we operate an academy equal to any Prem clubbut if we are constantly being robbed of the brightest talent. If we don't get a good fee what is the point of having an academy. Let all the big clubs develop the youngsters and we will just take the ones released.