Cardiff City decide not to offer Tom Heaton a new deal

CARDIFF have started a scramble for Tom Heaton's signature — by opting not to offer him a new deal.

The hero keeper from City's Carling Cup semi-final shootout win over Crystal Palace is out of contract in the summer.

Heaton, 25, also pulled off a remarkable save to deny Steven Gerrard in the Wembley final shootout but ended up losing.

Cardiff manager Malky Mackay has preferred Scot keeper David Marshall in Championship games to former Manchester United trainee Heaton.

Now he will be able to leave on a free and the star's representatives have been sounding out potential suitors since January.

The former England Under-21 stopper was loaned out to six clubs by United before signing a two-year contract with Cardiff in 2010.


http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sp ... -move.html

Hopefully this is not true. If it is, I can't believe we haven't offered him a new deal with him being out of contract at the end of the season! Every championship club will look to get him next season on a free transfer as he is a very good keeper at this level.

I definitely would've offered Heaton a new contract. Hopefully this article is rubbish!

It's The Sun

It's The Sun

The Sun is the only website reporting it but I thought I may as well post it

I'm praying this isn't true though. Heaton is just as good as Marshall!

He's better than him! I've said it from day one.

If there is interest from other clubs cant we just give him a new contract and sell him soon after..? At least it will pocket some money for the club rather than seeing another player leaving on a free..?

Worth a minimal amount angry man, the signing on fee he will receive means he wouldn't be silly to sign on unless he plans on staying.

Worth a minimal amount angry man, the signing on fee he will receive means he wouldn't be silly to sign on unless he plans on staying.

A minimal amount is better than nothing at all and people wonder why the debts are raising..?

Worth a minimal amount angry man, the signing on fee he will receive means he wouldn't be silly to sign on unless he plans on staying.

A minimal amount is better than nothing at all and people wonder why the debts are raising..?

Minimal fee to us, we would have to offer him a rejoining fee.

A free agent gets a larger signing on fee as a free agent.

To sign him back up and sell him for a minimal fee would cost us I would guess.... That's assuming he will not take a signing on fee which he wouldn't.

Worth a minimal amount angry man, the signing on fee he will receive means he wouldn't be silly to sign on unless he plans on staying.

A minimal amount is better than nothing at all and people wonder why the debts are raising..?

Minimal fee to us, we would have to offer him a rejoining fee.

A free agent gets a larger signing on fee as a free agent.

To sign him back up and sell him for a minimal fee would cost us I would guess.... That's assuming he will not take a signing on fee which he wouldn't.

Well rumour is that Burnley were going to offer £250,000 so I doubt that any outgoing of him re-signing would be greater than that

Well if it's rumoured why didn't they do it?
Maybe cos it's nonsense


Btw snodgrass is in a paper (proper rumour) as signing for city for 8m, had more substance than your rumour and just as silly

Well if it's rumoured why didn't they do it?
Maybe cos it's nonsense

Ok then so why didn't they tell him there was no contract for him in Janauary and then he could have left for a fee..?

Well if it's rumoured why didn't they do it?
Maybe cos it's nonsense

Ok then so why didn't they tell him there was no contract for him in Janauary and then he could have left for a fee..?

Who says they have (other than the sun).
Who says they wanted him to leave on a free I jan?

Surely would have been stupid to release a number 2 at that stage of the season for a low fee considering the games we had coming up we had a wembley game and stuff like

Well if it's rumoured why didn't they do it?
Maybe cos it's nonsense

Ok then so why didn't they tell him there was no contract for him in Janauary and then he could have left for a fee..?

Who says they have (other than the sun).
Who says they wanted him to leave on a free I jan?

Surely would have been stupid to release a number 2 at that stage of the season for a low fee considering the games we had coming up we had a wembley game and stuff like

Marshall is MM's number one, surely if they knew that they weren't going to offer him a contact then rather than letting him run the contact down they should have got rid of him in January. They have brought in another keeper so he could have been back-up to Marshall and got a minimal fee for the sale of Heaton in January. Sorry but I know we are talking of small numbers regarding transfer fees but as the old saying goes 'you look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves'.

Doesn't seem cost effective to me.
Bring in a new keeper who doesn't know the set up or the players. Would be odd for such a low fee.

That assuming the sun is correct and assuming your rumour is about a offer is true. All a bit sketchy.

we need heaton remember what happened last season when we only had bywater. we wouldnt get another good championship keeper if we sold heaton because they know they would be no 2 keeper so there would be no point spending money which could be used elsewhere where the sale of heaton wouldnt cover a half decent keeper

The thing is they should have done this months and month ago so there was no problems the same for any other player MM wants to keep for next year. Thats if MM wants them of course, but now anyone of them out of contract come may can agree a pre-contract with anyone we seen it with joe ledley, adam matthews ,burke and jay most of them last season why are the club letting this happen people worth good money leave for f**k all , it does not make sence

MG talkung complete nonsense as per usual

The thing is they should have done this months and month ago so there was no problems the same for any other player MM wants to keep for next year. Thats if MM wants them of course, but now anyone of them out of contract come may can agree a pre-contract with anyone we seen it with joe ledley, adam matthews ,burke and jay most of them last season why are the club letting this happen people worth good money leave for f**k all , it does not make sence

assumption assumptions and more assumptions

Heaton can only agree a pre-contract with a foreign club at the moment. For clubs in our pyramid system he can sign a pre-contract 1 month before his current deal expires.

Maybe he has told MM he wont sign, could be a reason why we havent offered one.

As for selling him in Jan, he said himself he wouldnt go in jan on Soccer AM. Why would clubs pay if Heatons agent intimates he'll be leaving in June?

Are we all assuming all this from a f*cking rumour off the back of that shit rag of a paper the Sun.... (a newspaper this forum doesn't associate with!) f**k them - i'll wait for official news!

if heaton was scottish he would be the no 1

The thing is they should have done this months and month ago so there was no problems the same for any other player MM wants to keep for next year. Thats if MM wants them of course, but now anyone of them out of contract come may can agree a pre-contract with anyone we seen it with joe ledley, adam matthews ,burke and jay most of them last season why are the club letting this happen people worth good money leave for f**k all , it does not make sence

AFAIK, the pre-contract thing doesn't apply to teams within same domestic structure, only "foreign" leagues.

None of the names you listed signed pre-contracts.

Plus of course, you're missing one fundamental flaw, as does Angry Man. The club could offer a contract to retain their services to then sell on, however that fails on the following levels.

1) They don't have to sign the new contracts.
2) If they sign them and then decline transfers, you're stuck having paid signing on fee, wages on new contract. Oh, and as they didn't ask for the transfer, a "loyalty" fee, common to most player contracts would be due.
3) See point 1, which is the most important one. Knowing the contract is running down, there is nothing in the players interest to sign a new deal if they know other clubs are interested.

sign him up Malky - letting him go would be a mistake imo.

sign him up Malky - letting him go would be a mistake imo.

not that simple, Heaton might not want to sign.

sign him up Malky - letting him go would be a mistake imo.

not that simple, Heaton might not want to sign.

Fair point, but posted assuming that he wants to stay. He has never said he doesn't and he is only going to get better as a keeper as he matures. The question is if he goes, is Parrish our number two or will Malky look elsewhere - not sure there are many better keepers available who we could afford or woudcome to us to warm the bench behind Marshall.

Heaton surely has to be given a contract extension! We will not find a better keeper than Heaton on a free transfer.

Marshall is no better than Heaton. I would give Heaton a run of games now in the league and I don't think he'll dissapoint!