Jani Sturm's move falls through

[Anish]

Blimey Anish, always look on the bright side of life eh.

106230[/snapback]

It pissed me off completely when the club announce something like this (such and such a player is about to sign for us) and then it doesn't happen. Building up the hopes of fans only to disappoint.

It's not like this is a one-off either, as McAteer's example also proves.

If you can't fulfill your promises, don't make them in the first place. Surely not too much to ask for?

106235[/snapback]

Signing Mcateer hardly filled us with excitement....

106262[/snapback]

Not the point was it? <_< <_<

[Steven]

But Sturm this week failed a medical check on a long-term groin injury and Leicester manager Craig Levein has now pulled out of the deal.

So it looks as though the deal was always conditional on Sturm passing the medical.

[Leicesterboi]

Shows Levein has got his whitts about him then! he wanst the mug it was looking like :P

[Anish]

But Sturm this week failed a medical check on a long-term groin injury and Leicester manager Craig Levein has now pulled out of the deal.

So it looks as though the deal was always conditional on Sturm passing the medical.

106283[/snapback]

That just further strengthens my case. City knew about the long term injury and (fair play to them) made the medical examination thorough and his joining us was conditional upon passing the test. But that said surely they should have kept a bit more of a lid on this story instead of announcing it to the world that he'd signed for us - when his medical was to play such a vital role.

[Steven]

But Sturm this week failed a medical check on a long-term groin injury and Leicester manager Craig Levein has now pulled out of the deal.

So it looks as though the deal was always conditional on Sturm passing the medical.

106283[/snapback]

That just further strengthens my case. City knew about the long term injury and (fair play to them) made the medical examination thorough and his joining us was conditional upon passing the test. But that said surely they should have kept a bit more of a lid on this story instead of announcing it to the world that he'd signed for us - when his medical was to play such a vital role.

106309[/snapback]

But wasn't Sturm's signing announced on the OS as a smokescreen to something else (can't remember what) going on at the same time.

[Mark]

http://www.lcfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/News/...~644576,00.html

Just say's we were negotiating a deal with the player, no certainty about it...

[step]

Anish, you are dead right, prior to signing any pre-contract agreement CL should have subjected sturn to a pre-contract agreement medical.

To ensure that CL was not waisting the clubs money on a pointless pre-contract agreement medical. CL should have first got sturn to sign an agreement of intent, to sign a pre-contract agreement, prior to a pre-contract agreement medical, for the pre-contract agreement.

But sturns himself may need to sure he is fit enough to sign the agreement of intent, to sign a pre-contract agreement, and he may wish to subject himself to pre 'agreement of intent' medical, prior signing the agreement of intent to be subjected to a pre-contract agreement medical prior to the pre-contract agreement signing.

If only CL would have thought of this it would have saved loads of money and time.

What shall we moan about now?

[Steven]

Anish, you are dead right, prior to signing any pre-contract agreement CL should have subjected sturn to a pre-contract agreement medical.

To ensure that CL was not waisting the clubs money on a pointless pre-contract agreement medical.  CL should have first got sturn to sign an agreement of intent, to sign a pre-contract agreement, prior to a pre-contract agreement medical, for the pre-contract agreement.

But sturns himself may need to sure he is fit enough to sign the agreement of intent, to sign a pre-contract agreement, and he may wish to subject himself to pre 'agreement of intent' medical, prior signing the agreement of intent to be subjected to a pre-contract agreement medical prior to the pre-contract agreement signing.

If only CL would have thought of this it would have saved loads of money and time. 

What shall we moan about now?

106379[/snapback]

Sturm signed/intended to sign a pre-Contract agreement knowing he had a long term problem as did City. I am sure that Sturm and his team as well as City have been monitoring the situation and recently it has come to a head. I ask two things, was a contract actually signed and when were City made aware of this problem?

[Ric Flair]

Am I the only person who thinks Levein has made himself look like a right prat with this affair?

Surely they would have done medical checks before him signing the pre-contract? If that failed to pick up the problem then what injury has he sustained recently which has resulted in this medical failure?

Levein and the OS revealed his signing much too soon, and now the deal has collapsed. What a shambles by all concerned. Giving the fans a false sense of hope only to pull the plug at the last minute. This reminds me of the Jason McAteer debacle. The club never learns.

I'm not too bothered that he's not coming - Levein said he wouldn't be a starter and would be one for the future, so it's not a great loss. But I am disappointed in the club and in Levein for announcing this 'signing' when it wasn't even a done-deal.  <_< 

106211[/snapback]

I disagree. I think it shows that Levein is very shrewd in everything he does and it would be impossible to keep a pre-contract signing out of the media. So I don't think it was Levein's fault for publishing we'd signed him, it's inevitable that stories are published whether Levein wanted them to or not.

By the way, Sturm has been injured on and off since christmas. So I imagine when we struck a deal with Gorida, it was always stated that if he didn't recover from his injury by the end of the season we'd pull the plug. This perhaps wasn't published, again why would you publish that. Also perhaps the medical team gave Sturm the all clear a few months ago and because he's still injured, we did another check and it's still playing up. What is stupid about that? Do you find it acceptable to have another Lee Morris, Matt Jones, Darren Eadier on our hands?

There have been plenty of players who have been 'officially signed' by clubs only to fail the medicals, Ruud Van Nistelrooy, John Hartson with Spurs, etc. Why does that make the club look silly? Surely it would be more stupid to risk the player and sign him anyway ala Ricardo Fuller who's hardly played since signing for Portsmouth even though he failed a medical.

I find your comments odd in the context of the situation, remember we probably don't know the full story and i'm sure Levein knew what he was doing at all times.

[Ric Flair]

Blimey Anish, always look on the bright side of life eh.

106230[/snapback]

It pissed me off completely when the club announce something like this (such and such a player is about to sign for us) and then it doesn't happen. Building up the hopes of fans only to disappoint.

It's not like this is a one-off either, as McAteer's example also proves.

If you can't fulfill your promises, don't make them in the first place. Surely not too much to ask for?

106235[/snapback]

Are you really that naive? The media get hold of any old story especially a story that has some truth in it. If Levein had kept the Sturm signing under wraps until he took his recent medical then he's defied science. It doesn't happen in this day and age and why wouldn't you want to tell your fans that you've agreed to sign a player in principle. He's an honest man, something you've praised in the past but now criticising??

Have you thought that perhaps the early checks on Sturm indicated that his groin problem would clear up in no time, so we signed him. He's since been injured 3 or 4 times apparently and obviously we've pulled out as the recent checks prove it's worse than it was. Hindsight has come in handy, luckily we've managed to pull out without losing any money. What's silly and stupid about that?