Jack Posted 29 July, 2012 Posted 29 July, 2012 Arsenal can f*ck right off. Don't they know we're on a march to the champions league? Throw any offers in the bin NC, and fax them a £3m offer for Walcott.
ToreSF Posted 29 July, 2012 Posted 29 July, 2012 So, if the deal was to take Walcott for £8m + Luke Shaw, would you take it?
buctootim Posted 29 July, 2012 Posted 29 July, 2012 So, if the deal was to take Walcott for £8m + Luke Shaw, would you take it? No. Luke Shaw wants to be here and will only get better. Theo wants to be a central striker and we need a RM.
Jack Posted 29 July, 2012 Posted 29 July, 2012 So, if the deal was to take Walcott for £8m + Luke Shaw, would you take it? If Walcott would be prepared to drop his wages to fit our wage structure, yes. Which he wouldn't IMO.
Nexstar Posted 29 July, 2012 Posted 29 July, 2012 So, if the deal was to take Walcott for £8m + Luke Shaw, would you take it? Personally I think that would put Luke Shaw at a value of about £4m and he looks like he will be worth a hell of a lot more than that in the future.
Toadhall Saint Posted 29 July, 2012 Posted 29 July, 2012 So, if the deal was to take Walcott for £8m + Luke Shaw, would you take it? Nope.
Brussels Saint Posted 29 July, 2012 Posted 29 July, 2012 8m and chuck in Walcott and we might consider it!
Leicestersaint Posted 29 July, 2012 Posted 29 July, 2012 Hopefully we are not a selling club any longer.
VectisSaint Posted 29 July, 2012 Posted 29 July, 2012 "He looked confident and competent enough in a match treated with stunning indifference by the Southampton fans." Surprises me sometimes that 5000 pay to go to a friendly match, especially when it is live on free-to-air TV.
Badger Posted 29 July, 2012 Posted 29 July, 2012 So, if the deal was to take Walcott for £8m + Luke Shaw, would you take it? Walcott AND £8m then we might think about it. (yes, I amm taking the **** by the way)
Professor Posted 29 July, 2012 Posted 29 July, 2012 Saints are a club on the way up; Arsenal are a club on the way down but it takes the gutter press time to work these things out. If the story of an offer from Arsenal is true, NC would tell them what he told Chelsea, that offers for Luke Shaw will not be considered. But its almost certainly not true, just a re-working of the Chelsea story. The Walcott story is probably fiction as well. It would be interesting for someone to research the full extent of the inaccuracies in press reports of football transfers. It must be around 80%-90% inaccurate, an error rate that would not be tolerated in any responsible organisation.
SaintAndy14 Posted 29 July, 2012 Posted 29 July, 2012 So, if the deal was to take Walcott for £8m + Luke Shaw, would you take it? I wouldn't even take a straight swap deal - Shaw looks as though he could be awesome in a few years whereas Theo will always just be 'good' or 'decent'.
Saint Charlie Posted 29 July, 2012 Posted 29 July, 2012 As I have said previously in this thread this is the moment for Cortese to show the ambition of the club. We don't need to sell. Shaw recently signed a three year contract and is clearly going to be class. If City, Chelsea and Arsenal are keen then they obviously think he is a Champions League player of the future. Cortese to Arsenal: He isn't for sale. For us to sell you will have to make a ridiculous offer otherwise what's in it for us. Come back with £25m otherwise kindly **** off. End of discussion, don't bother talking to us about him again unless you have that money on the table. Thanks. Bye. (Not saying he is worth that kind of money but might be one day, let's send a message that we aren't anyone's feeder club anymore).
Glasgow_Saint Posted 29 July, 2012 Posted 29 July, 2012 I wouldn't even take a straight swap deal - Shaw looks as though he could be awesome in a few years whereas Theo will always just be 'good' or 'decent'.
melmacian_saint Posted 29 July, 2012 Posted 29 July, 2012 IMO I don't think we'll let him go without at least a full season of regular first squad football.
sandwichsaint Posted 29 July, 2012 Posted 29 July, 2012 Saints are a club on the way up; Arsenal are a club on the way down but it takes the gutter press time to work these things out. If the story of an offer from Arsenal is true, NC would tell them what he told Chelsea, that offers for Luke Shaw will not be considered. But its almost certainly not true, just a re-working of the Chelsea story. The Walcott story is probably fiction as well. It would be interesting for someone to research the full extent of the inaccuracies in press reports of football transfers. It must be around 80%-90% inaccurate, an error rate that would not be tolerated in any responsible organisation. Papers would be a bit empty though?
david in sweden Posted 30 July, 2012 Posted 30 July, 2012 (edited) same old story. Those " BIG " London clubs....especially those who haven't won much in the last 5 years, think they can motor down to their "country cousins " on the coast and wave a couple of mill. under our noses and expect us to fall over ourselves to sell our talent at a knock down price. A scenario that has (sadly) been played out many times over the last 60 years..... .and even before. Now ...thanks to the Liebherr inheritance, we can put up a " NOT FOR SALE " sign and we don't need their " charity". I sincerely hope that Nicola Cortese tells them where they can deposit their money ! Up yours sunshine ! Edited 30 July, 2012 by david in sweden
Foxstone Posted 30 July, 2012 Posted 30 July, 2012 As I have said previously in this thread this is the moment for Cortese to show the ambition of the club. We don't need to sell. Shaw recently signed a three year contract and is clearly going to be class. If City, Chelsea and Arsenal are keen then they obviously think he is a Champions League player of the future. Cortese to Arsenal: He isn't for sale. For us to sell you will have to make a ridiculous offer otherwise what's in it for us. Come back with £25m otherwise kindly **** off. End of discussion, don't bother talking to us about him again unless you have that money on the table. Thanks. Bye. (Not saying he is worth that kind of money but might be one day, let's send a message that we aren't anyone's feeder club anymore). Could not have put it better myself... Arsenal can go and boil their heads! Shaw will breakthrough into our first team this season - He's a class lad and he will be playing Prem football for us! end of...
david in sweden Posted 30 July, 2012 Posted 30 July, 2012 (edited) Saints are a club on the way up; Arsenal are a club on the way down but it takes the gutter press time to work these things out. If the story of an offer from Arsenal is true, NC would tell them what he told Chelsea, that offers for Luke Shaw will not be considered. But its almost certainly not true, just a re-working of the Chelsea story. The Walcott story is probably fiction as well. It would be interesting for someone to research the full extent of the inaccuracies in press reports of football transfers. It must be around 80%-90% inaccurate, an error rate that would not be tolerated in any responsible organisation. now come along Professor ....are you REALLY expecting any sense of responsibility from our current crop of journalistic misfits? They are a bunch of desperate rumour-mongers trying to make a living. " A lie can travel around the world in the time it takes truth to tie up its shoelaces " ......... Mark Twain 1850-ish Edited 30 July, 2012 by david in sweden
Graffito Posted 30 July, 2012 Posted 30 July, 2012 Any chance Arsenal make a derisory bid for Shaw so Saints responded with a bid for Walcott, to show how they felt? Yes there is a chance that this is retaliatory - the club sending a signal to Arsenal to lay off Luke Shaw or we'll target one of yours.
Professor Posted 30 July, 2012 Posted 30 July, 2012 Thanks DiS, the Mark Twain quote very good. On another point, whether the story is true or not, several posters suggest that the club should sell a potential star player if the price is high enough. Understandable on the basis that everything has its price, including football transfers, but if SFC are serious about the ambition being Champions League, sales have to resisted regardless of price. Our competitors at European level include teams prepared to pay £50m for one player. To compete, SFC should be prepared to have players of that calibre in the side. But the stated means of doing that is not by paying massive fees, but by bringing on our own stars. But this means that any star player who emerges must be kept, not sold, otherwise the project can't succeed.
Elmore Posted 30 July, 2012 Posted 30 July, 2012 A lot of these prem clubs (especially arse) seem to leak details of their transfer business through the newspapers - obviously to unsettle their targets. Not a nice way of doing business.
hypochondriac Posted 30 July, 2012 Posted 30 July, 2012 A lot of these prem clubs (especially arse) seem to leak details of their transfer business through the newspapers - obviously to unsettle their targets. Not a nice way of doing business. Quite often effective though. Good tactics.
Badger Posted 30 July, 2012 Posted 30 July, 2012 A lot of these prem clubs (especially arse) seem to leak details of their transfer business through the newspapers - obviously to unsettle their targets. Not a nice way of doing business. Or just say "bugger his current club" and enter discussions with the youngster's parents
Chez Posted 30 July, 2012 Posted 30 July, 2012 A lot of these prem clubs (especially arse) seem to leak details of their transfer business through the newspapers - obviously to unsettle their targets. Not a nice way of doing business. The Theo to SAINTS story was perhaps supplied by Arsenal in an attempt to offload their player
david in sweden Posted 30 July, 2012 Posted 30 July, 2012 (edited) Thanks DiS, the Mark Twain quote very good. On another point, whether the story is true or not, several posters suggest that the club should sell a potential star player if the price is high enough. Understandable on the basis that everything has its price, including football transfers, but if SFC are serious about the ambition being Champions League, sales have to resisted regardless of price. Our competitors at European level include teams prepared to pay £50m for one player. To compete, SFC should be prepared to have players of that calibre in the side. But the stated means of doing that is not by paying massive fees, but by bringing on our own stars. But this means that any star player who emerges must be kept, not sold, otherwise the project can't succeed. the other point being, of course, that these lads (LS, JWP and Co.) are more likely to see Prem. match action at SMS than they are at Chelsea or Arsenal. Can anyone see Luke Shaw displacing say....Ashley Cole in the Chelsea set-up? More likely he would spend much time on the bench..if he's lucky. There is of course, sometimes very sad tailpiece to some of these transfer deals.. In the 1970's ...Newcastle (I think) bought a promising Scots striker ..(Jim Smith) across the border but hardly played him in the first team. But when asked why he wasn't played more often...the(then) manager was reputed to have said...? well, firstly...he doesn't always fit the formation we play...but also....whilst we've got him no-one else can use him. Newcastle did well that season, whilst Smith's career went downhill, and he later returned to Scotland a much wiser man. Taking a promising youngster "out of the System " and putting him in the youth squad is a highly cynical way of "defusing" any threat from an opposing club. Edited 30 July, 2012 by david in sweden
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now