david in sweden Posted 14 August, 2012 Share Posted 14 August, 2012 Thats because we very rarely talk about our transfer activity! of course, we understand that, but NA was quick to deny the " Lee Barnard to Palace " rumour a few weeks back. If Seaborne was still an integral part of his planning, he's surely come out and say so, but I think we realise that a handful of NPC games almost one year ago - before the "incident ", and the long recovery period after.. isn't the best preparation for a Prem career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowgli Posted 14 August, 2012 Share Posted 14 August, 2012 If Seaborne was still an integral part of his planning, he's surely come out and say so. He hasn't said that about Lallana, Morgan, Jos or Davis. Should I be worried?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 14 August, 2012 Share Posted 14 August, 2012 He hasn't said that about Lallana, Morgan, Jos or Davis. Should I be worried?? do you think he should do ? ? .........after all they do have long contracts already...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSAINT Posted 27 September, 2012 Share Posted 27 September, 2012 http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/12691/8113685/Nottingham-Forest-Millwall-eye-Southampton-defender-Dan-Seaborne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Charlie Posted 27 September, 2012 Author Share Posted 27 September, 2012 http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/12691/8113685/Nottingham-Forest-Millwall-eye-Southampton-defender-Dan-Seaborne Makes sense, but we would have to be able to recall him. At least until Jan where hopefully we bring in another CB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egg Posted 27 September, 2012 Share Posted 27 September, 2012 He needs to go on loan but I can't see it happening as it leaves us with only 3 cb's. Unless there's a free agent on his way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 27 September, 2012 Share Posted 27 September, 2012 He needs to go on loan but I can't see it happening as it leaves us with only 3 cb's. Unless there's a free agent on his way. I think they're probably counting Jack Stephens as a CB these days. Anyway no point in Seaborne hanging around here, he's not going to get any PL game time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pingwing Posted 27 September, 2012 Share Posted 27 September, 2012 http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/12691/8113685/Nottingham-Forest-Millwall-eye-Southampton-defender-Dan-Seaborne Isn't that a rehash of a "story" from August but Millwall were interested in "buying" him then... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 27 September, 2012 Share Posted 27 September, 2012 Makes sense, but we would have to be able to recall him. At least until Jan where hopefully we bring in another CB. Can't be recalled until after the first month. If we had two injuries to CBs he would be needed no matter how good he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Charlie Posted 27 September, 2012 Author Share Posted 27 September, 2012 Can't be recalled until after the first month. If we had two injuries to CBs he would be needed no matter how good he is. If the loan was strategically started to coincide with the Intl break then it could work. Otherwise we migh as well wait til Jan and loan/sell him when we can replace with better quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeBenali Posted 27 September, 2012 Share Posted 27 September, 2012 Would be surprised to see him go to Forest - they have Danny Collins as their preferred left footed defender, alongside Daniel Ayala and a nipper (Lascelles?) who are all rated quite highly, so could only see him going there as back up to Collins. Unless he's guaranteed games at Millwall, he'd surely be better off staying with us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSAINT Posted 11 October, 2012 Share Posted 11 October, 2012 http://www.newsatden.co.uk/7214-millwall-failed-to-agree-loan-deal-for-southampton-defender.html? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 19 October, 2012 Share Posted 19 October, 2012 interesting that they couldn't agree financial terms similar to Yeovil failing to agree terms for Dickson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Garrett Posted 19 October, 2012 Share Posted 19 October, 2012 I would have thought we wanted his full wages covered, although surely we'd be better off letting him go out and them paying 50% or something. With Dickson...wasn't that due to him wanting his contract to be paid up by Saints as a permanent deal ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egg Posted 19 October, 2012 Share Posted 19 October, 2012 I would have thought we wanted his full wages covered, although surely we'd be better off letting him go out and them paying 50% or something. With Dickson...wasn't that due to him wanting his contract to be paid up by Saints as a permanent deal ? I don't know about Dickson but I know from speaking with a manager that Saints expect the other club to cover all wages. Seems odd - much better to be paying 50% of a players wages than 100% if he's surplus to requirements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 19 October, 2012 Share Posted 19 October, 2012 I don't know about Dickson but I know from speaking with a manager that Saints expect the other club to cover all wages. Seems odd - much better to be paying 50% of a players wages than 100% if he's surplus to requirements. Difficult to say, perhaps the player wanted a percentage of the bonus payments paid as well as the basic left on his contract. Anyway as we all know Cortese doesn't mess about where money is concerned. If you want something from Saints you pay the named price, if you don't tough titty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egg Posted 19 October, 2012 Share Posted 19 October, 2012 Difficult to say, perhaps the player wanted a percentage of the bonus payments paid as well as the basic left on his contract. Anyway as we all know Cortese doesn't mess about where money is concerned. If you want something from Saints you pay the named price, if you don't tough titty. Seems odd for loans though (that's what I was referring to, sorry if I was unclear). My understanding is that it's a policy that applies at all levels, including youngsters going out for league experience. On loans it seems to be a cutting off our nose to spite our face policy, which no doubt p!sses players off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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