Jump to content

Transfer Rumours Only

Jimmy_D

By Jimmy_D
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

Big Bad Bob

Big Bad Bob

Posted
Posted
No, Taider is an DMC/MC.

 

So he either Raps or makes announcements at ceremonies.

 

What, pray tell, is a DMC or do you mean Defensive Central Midfielder/Central Midfielder??

Saint IQ

Saint IQ

Posted
Posted
More options , but worryingly that does not necessarily mean more of a 'goal threat', unless Pelle reproduces his Feyenoord scoing record for us.

 

If he reproduces his Feyenoord scoring record for us we would get top 4.....

SuperSAINT

SuperSAINT

Posted
Posted
So he either Raps or makes announcements at ceremonies.

 

What, pray tell, is a DMC or do you mean Defensive Central Midfielder/Central Midfielder??

 

Apologies Big Bad Bob. You need to go get yourself a copy of Football Manager.

 

"Central Midfielder" in old lingo.

jasoneuelllfanclub

jasoneuelllfanclub

Posted
Posted
Pretty sure our summer business is about over. Gutted we never got Ings

 

http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/article/15082014-ronald-koeman-pre-liverpool-away-1831640.aspx

 

“We are still looking forward to bring one or two more in – we need one more in the wing position and the club is still working on that.”

Read more at http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/article/15082014-ronald-koeman-pre-liverpool-away-1831640.aspx#jVMulOfBI8Q899Bz.99

Fitzhugh Fella

Fitzhugh Fella

Posted
Posted
I only saw the score of last nights game. Did Ings play for Burnley? If he did how did he do, any good?

 

He was impressive and the commentators (Tyler and Neville) both praised his contribution. He has a brain, he is quick with his feet and reads the game well for one so young.

Saint Rees

Saint Rees

Posted
Posted
I only saw the score of last nights game. Did Ings play for Burnley? If he did how did he do, any good?

 

He looked quite good, but can't see us getting him now we've got Long, nor can I see Burnley selling

pangy

pangy

Posted
Posted
He looked quite good, but can't see us getting him now we've got Long, nor can I see Burnley selling

 

Hoping he may sign for us on a free next season after Burnley are relegated :-)

SaintJackoInHurworth

SaintJackoInHurworth

Posted
Posted

All this talk of wingers, attacking midfielders and strikers, but not one mention of Gaston Ramirez! Is there some assumption that he is about to be sold or abandoned to the garbage heap? If not then he is surely another option for us - either out wide, up top or just behind the striker(s)?

JxgrSaint

JxgrSaint

Posted
Posted
All this talk of wingers, attacking midfielders and strikers, but not one mention of Gaston Ramirez! Is there some assumption that he is about to be sold or abandoned to the garbage heap? If not then he is surely another option for us - either out wide, up top or just behind the striker(s)?

 

Pretty sure he's injured (when isn't he?) - would love to see Koeman get the best out of him, it'd be like a new signing!

shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted (edited)
I guess we all realise the signing of Marcos Rojo by Man U spells another nail in Luke Shaw's dream coffin. He'd better get himself quickly into shape or he's going to find himself on the Zaha scrapheap.

 

Why? Rojo will likely slot in as a LCB and Shaw will play as a left wingback.

 

Couldn't care less either way.

Edited by shurlock
EBS1980

EBS1980

Posted
Posted
Rojo signed for united

£16m Plus Nani on loan for the season

 

Plus paying all Nani wages and a sell on. sporting done well out of that.

S-Clarke

S-Clarke

Posted
Posted

Just been having a read of the Spurs ITK thread on their forums, they've got a couple of Guan 2.0 and K,Billy types. (Their guy is called Goat, apparently) They are of the belief that the personal terms between Spurs and MS are done 100% and have been sorted for weeks, they just can't get us to accept a bid. (And this happens all the time by the way...)

 

They are saying that Southampton pulled the rug from underneath the deal as it was all in place 3 weeks ago, we (Southampton) changed the goal posts as we felt we had a point to prove. Morgan's agent is trying to take it to tribunal under a restriction of trade (???? this bit sounds utter bull**** to me). They've suggested that they will either get him in the last hour of deadline day, with Saints claiming they did all they could to keep him, or they'll get him in January. £20m upfront fee is set.

 

We'll see...

Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted
Just been having a read of the Spurs ITK thread on their forums, they've got a couple of Guan 2.0 and K,Billy types. (Their guy is called Goat, apparently) They are of the belief that the personal terms between Spurs and MS are done 100% and have been sorted for weeks, they just can't get us to accept a bid. (And this happens all the time by the way...)

 

They are saying that Southampton pulled the rug from underneath the deal as it was all in place 3 weeks ago, we (Southampton) changed the goal posts as we felt we had a point to prove. Morgan's agent is trying to take it to tribunal under a restriction of trade (???? this bit sounds utter bull**** to me). They've suggested that they will either get him in the last hour of deadline day, with Saints claiming they did all they could to keep him, or they'll get him in January. £20m upfront fee is set.

 

We'll see...

 

isnt that basically what KK Billy said?

that the plug was pulled on the morgan deal for a saving face exercise and not football reasons?

S-Clarke

S-Clarke

Posted
Posted
isnt that basically what KK Billy said?

that the plug was pulled on the morgan deal for a saving face exercise and not football reasons?

 

Can't remember, lost track of everything! But it's probably very close to the truth, they saw the reaction when it broke that Spurs were closing in and decided to pull it. That's what I feel anyway and that's probably why parties are a bit miffed.

Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted
Can't remember, lost track of everything! But it's probably very close to the truth, they saw the reaction when it broke that Spurs were closing in and decided to pull it. That's what I feel anyway and that's probably why parties are a bit miffed.

 

makes you wonder why they never decided to be this tough with a blatant want-away before they did

meanwhile, chambers makes his debut in the champions league. yet he would have been the easiest 'NO' of the lot

richard

richard

Posted
Posted
Can't remember, lost track of everything! But it's probably very close to the truth, they saw the reaction when it broke that Spurs were closing in and decided to pull it. That's what I feel anyway and that's probably why parties are a bit miffed.

 

Have we ever bought a decent player from Spurs?

S-Clarke

S-Clarke

Posted
Posted
makes you wonder why they never decided to be this tough with a blatant want-away before they did

meanwhile, chambers makes his debut in the champions league. yet he would have been the easiest 'NO' of the lot

 

It's all a bit odd, the Chambers one is clearly the strangest one. Makes me feel that Arsenal hit the release fee on that one though.

aintforever

aintforever

Posted
Posted

Good on the club. We don't need the money, and we don't need to pander to a sulking Frenchman.

 

It's worth digging our heels in on this, if only to see how it pans out. If we just accept the fact that bigger clubs can take whoever they want whenever they want we might as well give up now.

Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted
It's all a bit odd, the Chambers one is clearly the strangest one. Makes me feel that Arsenal hit the release fee on that one though.

 

there was no release fee. the club would have had it plastered all over the media, if there was. get out of jail card, that

Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Posted
Posted
there was no release fee. the club would have had it plastered all over the media, if there was. get out of jail card, that

 

If you announce Chambers did have a release fee, you also announce that other players do too.

 

Best thing to do is simply keep stum.

shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted
If you announce Chambers did have a release fee, you also announce that other players do too.

 

Best thing to do is simply keep stum.

 

That makes no sense at all, Walt Jr.

farawaysaint

farawaysaint

Posted
Posted
If you announce Chambers did have a release fee, you also announce that other players do too.

 

Best thing to do is simply keep stum.

 

The Chambers and Morgan situation are strange to say the least. We were obviously willing to sell Morgan (and I think we would still like to) if the anticipated fan backlash wasn't so strong, I have no idea what the hell has been going on at our club this summer. We've replaced well but who the hell thought such wholesale changes were a good idea in the first place? More to the point can we expect this every transfer window if clubs meet our fair prices or will the board realise you simply can't sell everyone no matter how good the offers.

mitch01

mitch01

Posted
Posted
I guess we all realise the signing of Marcos Rojo by Man U spells another nail in Luke Shaw's dream coffin. He'd better get himself quickly into shape or he's going to find himself on the Zaha scrapheap.

 

'Another nail in Luke Shaw's coffin?' He's going to be a fantastic player for them for a very long time.

Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted
If you announce Chambers did have a release fee, you also announce that other players do too.

 

Best thing to do is simply keep stum.

 

yeah, as agents will toe the line and keep quiet, wont they

CB Fry

CB Fry

Posted
Posted
there was no release fee. the club would have had it plastered all over the media, if there was. get out of jail card, that

Correct, clearly no release fee.

 

Will always look at Chambers sale as a Koeman call. I think the manager decided that for a right back in a position he was already strong, the money was plenty and he didn't want to go to war over Calum Chambers. So he took the money.

Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Posted
Posted
yeah, as agents will toe the line and keep quiet, wont they

 

Agents will talk, as i assume Chambers agent did.

 

However the club dont need to further advertise foolish release clauses that perhaps Cortese agreed?

shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted
Agents will talk, as i assume Chambers agent did.

 

However the club dont need to further advertise foolish release clauses that perhaps Cortese agreed?

 

Why, Walt J? If it is in the club's interest to publicise one release clause, it would have been in its interests to publicise all them - would have shown them to be even more sympathetic prisoners of circumstance.

 

Of course, it doesnt explain why Lovren and Lallana had to throw a strop to get their moves; nor does it explain the negotiations that took place. If a release clause existed, it would have been impossible for us to hold out for a higher fee, as was claimed we did with the Lallana and Shaw deals.

 

The club made its position clear: it would have been an 'insane risk' to keep wantaway players. Need to look no further that for a motive or rationale.

Dellman

Dellman

Posted
Posted
Have we ever bought a decent player from Spurs?

 

Frank Saul was one of their castoffs, Ron Reynolds their goaly lost his place and joined us. He was good for a few years

aintforever

aintforever

Posted
Posted
Agents will talk, as i assume Chambers agent did.

 

However the club dont need to further advertise foolish release clauses that perhaps Cortese agreed?

 

The player's agent most definitely would advertise it though.

Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Posted
Posted
Why, Walt J? If it is in the club's interest to publicise one release clause, it would have been in its interests to publicise all them - would have shown them to be even more sympathetic prisoners of circumstance.

 

Of course, it doesnt explain why Lovren and Lallana had to throw a strop to get their moves; nor does it explain the negotiations that took place. If a release clause existed, it would have been impossible for us to hold out for a higher fee, as was claimed we did with the Lallana and Shaw deals.

 

The club made its position clear: it would have been an 'insane risk' to keep wantaway players. Need to look no further that for a motive or rationale.

 

I dont think or claim that all players had release clauses, that would have been stupid of Cortese.

 

However i dont rule out one or two.

 

Is it completely infeasible that when Chambers signed last summer (aged 18 ) that his parents didnt insist on a top 4 club release clause? Perhaps it was a condition that he himself insisted on? I wouldnt rule it out.

 

Players talk and maybe (just maybe) one got it into the contract and then others wanted similar? Would be prudent for the club to keep quiet if so?

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...