Tonny Vilhena

[Feyenoorder]

I'd say I was insulted by the offer made by another team if the transfer didn't work out' date=' too.. [/quote']

 

They are insulted by the offer because it's an insulting offer. Even Feyenoord-fans themselves are offended.

The loan-offer Southampton made was a lower amount of money then what Feyenoord is currently receiving for their loaned out 3rd goalkeeper.

This is one of our biggest youth products with a dutch team cap and almost 100 official matches under his belt at the age of 20. It's pretty laughable.

 

Didn't his agent come crawling to Koeman like worm, begging him to bring this bro to England?

 

No.

 

A low offer is business.

 

As said in this same thread somewhere above, if Wenger pulled the same stunt with Schneiderlin, would you still approve?

 

Interesting, and commendable, that Agents in Holland are decent, honest and truthful upstanding citizens.

 

Over here in England they usually talk complete rubbish for their own biased objectives.

 

I appreciate the sarcasm, but Feyenoord's director comfirmed the offers in an interview. He called out Southampton on wasting his time.

 

Also, despite beliefs to the contrary we did not have lots and lots of money to spend in January if we are going to show a FFP profit for this season and I believe there are good reasons to do so if we think we might qualify for Europe.

 

This makes sense. Look, I understand the semi-sarcastic responses on what happened here.

I'm just stating my annoyances and I hope next time your director can come up with something more respectful.

[benjii]

More details about the transfer-offer now released by Vilhena's agent, who claims he and Vilhena are insulted by Southampton's offer as they felt he was only used as a cheap bargain option.

The first offer made by Les Reed was to sign Vilhena on a free loan for 6 months, with an option to possibly buy him in the future.

The second offer was £600.000x3 panned out over 3 years, meaning Feyenoord would have received £1.800.000 by the end of 2016. An added bonus of £300.000 if Southampton will reach the Champions League (!)

 

Now, I don't know exactly what Les Reed was thinking, but I think all he did was insulted both parties and in no way will Vilhena go to Southampton in the summer.

I'm sure that most Southampton fans won't really mind as they don't know Vilhena, but I think regardless of the player this is really bad manners from your director.

 

Well, sorry for any offence, but when you sell people like de Vrij and Martins Indi cheaply when they have played well in the World Cup you can hardly expect high offers for your substitutes.

[sadoldgit]

If the offer is not acceptable the club says no thank you and says what is acceptable . If the club making the offer does not increase the offer then there is no deal I assume. All the rest is just hot air.

[sadoldgit]

When the player himself is insulted after being publicly unsettled, you've probably done something wrong. Understand that the player himself had to take the risk to step up mid-season and speak out to the fans that he would want to leave the team, only to be let down by Southampton.

 

Let down because we wouldn't pay a higher price than we were prepared to pay? He has lost an opportunity to play in the Premier league and earn himself a fortune but if the club has made an offer and Feyenoord turned it down exactly whose fault is that?

[trousers]

Didn't his agent come crawling to Koeman like worm, begging him to bring this bro to England?

 

No.

 

So, Koeman was lying....?

 

'The case of Vilhena is that the management of the player called me and they were afraid about his situation at Feyenood.'I said ''okay, I like the player.''

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2933949/Southampton-boss-Ronald-Koeman-eyes-Tonny-Vilhena-Filip-Djuricic-utility-transfers.html

[angelman]

Listen, the guy might be good or might not, but the fact is that he is contracted for 18 months more at Feyenoord. £1.8m might be on the low side, but £6m or what ever they wanted was madness. But we do live in the world of mad offers and personally am happy not to have him if it meant not over spending. I would far rather have someone from the academy come through. Maybe the club thought so as well - offer a low bid which is either accepted or not. If not, so be it, and the academy players can come through.

 

If Arsenal or Spurs put in low bids, would I be upset or offended? Of course not. They have done this already during the last closed season and I wasn't offended - it's to be expected and it's how business should be done. It's the initial bid. Sometimes they are accepted and then you are pretty pleased. Usually they are refused and you come back with an improved offer.

 

Tell me Feyenoorder, what value would you think acceptable for a central midfielder, a position where Saints aren't exactly short in? £3m? Or do you think that the £6m was about right? Was the sale of Luc Castaignos for less than £1.5m not a yardstick that could be used?

[lifeintheslowlane]

When a transaction breaks down both parties will be unhappy. Who is to blame depends on what side of the transaction you are on. Move on...

[david in sweden]

when you sell people like de Vrij and Martins Indi cheaply when they have played well in the World Cup you can hardly expect high offers for your substitutes[/b].

 

 

THIS ..is the best comment on the entire thread. The guy has been a regular substitute for.... a Dutch club ...it's not as if we're bidding for their star player.

[angelman]

http://www.tribalfootball.com/articles/feyenoord-chief-explains-blocking-southampton-move-vilhena-4061768?utm_source=main_feed

 

Saints were willing to pay €3.5 million for Vilhena, while Feyenoord refused to budge from their €6 million valuation.

 

Fair enough, although somewhat different from the insulting value given earlier. If true, £2.6m for him is about right in my mind, and certainly not a valuation to be offended by. £4.6m to me is too much, given 18 months left. But then Spurs bought an 18yo for that from MK Dons and Bournemouth tried to from Brum for that much.

Edited 4 February, 2015 by angelman

[sadoldgit]

If he hopes we will go back for him in the Summer probably wise not to throw accusations about insulting behaviour around then maybe?

[hutch]

I think it's quite clear cut. He turned us down because we didn't offer enough. And Harry's got a crippled knee.

[Feyenoord1908]

THIS ..is the best comment on the entire thread. The guy has been a regular substitute for.... a Dutch club ...it's not as if we're bidding for their star player.

 

De Vrij and Martins Indi both went for about 7,5 million Euro's. De Vrij had 1 year contract left and Indi had a longer term deal and spent some time on the subs bench last year as well. They both left in the summer and we had replacements from the youth academy ready who are better players than De Vrij and Indi. That's a huge difference.

 

An installment payment that leads to 2,4 million Euro's at the end of 2016 is a complete embarassment for a player that just turned 20 years old and played in almost 100 matches for Feyenoord. He has been part of the National team squad, reached the prelim squad for the World Cup, won 2 Euro U17 championships while being decisive in both finals and winning the Golden Boot in the process and he is a regular for the U21's.

 

Adding extra bonusses of a few hunderd thousands that will be triggered when Saints survive the Champions League group stages and reach the knockout stages is laughable. Reaching the group stage would already be a miracle in the Premier League + the Saints Euro coefficient in potentially the CL play-offs and potentially group stage (being 4th seeded).

 

I understand that Saints want the best deal but trying to get Vilhena on loan in first instance and coming up with the solution above as the best offer is embarassing to the extreme. This is pretty much comparable to Liverpool/United offering the same amount for JWP with a 1,5 year contract. It's crazy and a waste of time and energy.

 

Koeman should've said nothing about this transfer unless the club was serious in their approach. This is not good for both Saints and Feyenoord. The player wouldn't be interested in a summer move anymore because Saints are clearly not serious with a shameful offer like this and he's now a disappointed player at Feyenoord who hoped to be in the Premier League. If you had used the Cork money 4/5 million Euro's without installments, it would probably be close to getting a deal done.

 

 

Was the sale of Luc Castaignos for less than £1.5m not a yardstick that could be used?

 

Castaignos had an illegal contract at Feyenoord. He signed a 3 + 2 year contract at Feyenoord when he was 16. At the end of the 3 years he could've gone for nothing because players before their 18th birthday are not allowed to sign a contract longer than 3 years. Inter agreed a compensation fee with Feyenoord and were very kind not to go to court to get him on a free (with lower compensation).

[sadoldgit]

Is 3.5m euros for someone who is not an established 1st team player really "shameful" ???

[James]

Well, sorry for any offence, but when you sell people like de Vrij and Martins Indi cheaply when they have played well in the World Cup you can hardly expect high offers for your substitutes.

 

Exactly this. You can't sell two establish Netherlands internationals for peanuts and then ask the earth for a substitute.

 

If De Vrij and Indi went for 7.5 m then even 3.5 m is probably over the odds for Vilhena.

[Bearsy]

Is 3.5m euros for someone who is not an established 1st team player really "shameful" ???

 

I'm not feeling the shame tbh. It's been quite nice being friends across the water with all these dutch bros lately, but I'm not much caring about their gripes and complaints. They should save the whining for their own forums! We have whining enough of our own!

[saint-crinny]

For me, it likes from our side that we thought a low bid for him in January was worth a shot, with one eye on the summer. Koeman likes him and knows him, he's not playing regularly and would be a worthwhile addition if we don't have to spend too much on him.

 

By the summer, particularly if we have made the Champions League and to a lesser extent the Europa, we'll probably have our sights set on better players than Vilhena, and will be happy enough that we didnt shell out £5m on him in January, leaving us less to play with in the summer.

[Goatboy]

Maybe we have our eyes on someone else in the summer and Vilhena was just an opportunity for a bargain?

I wouldn't take offence at a derisory offer. Just say "no thanks" and move on. Burning bridges may prove costly to both parties.

 

What saint-crinny said FFS.

[shurlock]

De Vrij and Martins Indi both went for about 7,5 million Euro's. De Vrij had 1 year contract left and Indi had a longer term deal and spent some time on the subs bench last year as well. They both left in the summer and we had replacements from the youth academy ready who are better players than De Vrij and Indi. That's a huge difference.

 

An installment payment that leads to 2,4 million Euro's at the end of 2016 is a complete embarassment for a player that just turned 20 years old and played in almost 100 matches for Feyenoord. He has been part of the National team squad, reached the prelim squad for the World Cup, won 2 Euro U17 championships while being decisive in both finals and winning the Golden Boot in the process and he is a regular for the U21's.

 

Adding extra bonusses of a few hunderd thousands that will be triggered when Saints survive the Champions League group stages and reach the knockout stages is laughable. Reaching the group stage would already be a miracle in the Premier League + the Saints Euro coefficient in potentially the CL play-offs and potentially group stage (being 4th seeded).

 

I understand that Saints want the best deal but trying to get Vilhena on loan in first instance and coming up with the solution above as the best offer is embarassing to the extreme. This is pretty much comparable to Liverpool/United offering the same amount for JWP with a 1,5 year contract. It's crazy and a waste of time and energy.

 

Koeman should've said nothing about this transfer unless the club was serious in their approach. This is not good for both Saints and Feyenoord. The player wouldn't be interested in a summer move anymore because Saints are clearly not serious with a shameful offer like this and he's now a disappointed player at Feyenoord who hoped to be in the Premier League. If you had used the Cork money 4/5 million Euro's without installments, it would probably be close to getting a deal done.

 

 

 

 

Castaignos had an illegal contract at Feyenoord. He signed a 3 + 2 year contract at Feyenoord when he was 16. At the end of the 3 years he could've gone for nothing because players before their 18th birthday are not allowed to sign a contract longer than 3 years. Inter agreed a compensation fee with Feyenoord and were very kind not to go to court to get him on a free (with lower compensation).

 

You've got to realise that reason will only get you so far here. Many posters are hypocrites and homers (natural bedfellows of a football forum). They will blindly put our youth prospects on a pedestal while rubbishing those from other teams. They will gladly cherrypick transfer fees to justify our lowball offers yet wheel out grossly inflated ones to defend our players values - all while working themselves into a frothy state of agitation.

 

I can quite easily understand why your lot would be annoyed by our offer - the player is still raw but has made more appearances than any of our youngsters, represented the national side at every level and got a full call-up. We're perfectly within our rights to make any offer we want but shouldnt be too surprised if we get told to f**k off.

Edited 4 February, 2015 by shurlock

[Mosin]

@

Feyenoord1908

 

Castaignos had an illegal contract at Feyenoord. He signed a 3 + 2 year contract at Feyenoord when he was 16. At the end of the 3 years he could've gone for nothing because players before their 18th birthday are not allowed to sign a contract longer than 3 years. Inter agreed a compensation fee with Feyenoord and were very kind not to go to court to get him on a free (with lower compensation).

 

Also is it no tradition to offer a new contract when the old one is near to finishing? after all i dont see many players in the world signing contracts for big bucks and then waiting till its over to sign a new one, every player in the world would play for Barca and Real madrid if that was the case........

[cellone]

derisory

 

I was starting to think that this word had been banned as it is normally found on every other post on this type of thread.

 

[sadoldgit]

I think Liverpool got Lambert on the cheap but would reserve "shameful" for what they paid for Lovren

[Feyenoord1908]

Is 3.5m euros for someone who is not an established 1st team player really "shameful" ???

 

Not established?

 

Vilhena turned 20 last month and has already played in nearly 100 matches for Feyenoord.

 

The last 2 seasons he has started 53 games + 6 sub appearances out of a possible 68 Eredivisie matches. This season he has started 8 (played full 90 in all) + 6 subs out of a possible 20. He also started in 2 Champions League + 4 Europa League (playing full 90 in all) matches + 1 sub appearance.

 

The offer was 2.4 million Euro's. 800.000 would be paid in the summer (so from now until the summer Vilhena would've been playing for free at Southampton) + another 1.6 million in two installments with the latest at the end of 2016. Absolutely mad.

[Lallana's Left Peg]

The offer does sound low and I don't know much about the player but I do know a bit about Karim El Ahmadi and I'm glad Saints don't want to pay too much for anyone being kept out of the team by him.

[angelman]

You've got to realise that reason will only get you so far here. Many posters are hypocrites and homers (natural bedfellows of a football forum). They will blindly put our youth prospects on a pedestal while rubbishing those from other teams. They will gladly cherrypick transfer fees to justify our lowball offers yet wheel out grossly inflated ones to defend our players values - all while working themselves into a frothy state of agitation.

 

Some of us can see the bigger picture concerning our youth prospects and how much we are prepared to pay for other peoples prospects. It's just common business sense rather that rest of the guff you posted in an attempt to belittle the posters on here.

 

I can quite easily understand why your lot would be annoyed by our offer - the player is still raw but has made more appearances than any of our youngsters, represented the national side at every level and got a full call-up. We're perfectly within our rights to make any offer we want but shouldnt be too surprised if we get told to f**k off.

 

£2-2.6m depending on who you want to believe is what we offered - they wanted £4.6m - what value would you think a decent offer so that people aren't insulted?

[shurlock]

 

£2-2.6m depending on who you want to believe is what we offered - they wanted £4.6m - what value would you think a decent offer so that people aren't insulted?

 

Around £4m, maybe just shy. Depends how it's structured.

[sadoldgit]

Not established?

 

Vilhena turned 20 last month and has already played in nearly 100 matches for Feyenoord.

 

The last 2 seasons he has started 53 games + 6 sub appearances out of a possible 68 Eredivisie matches. This season he has started 8 (played full 90 in all) + 6 subs out of a possible 20. He also started in 2 Champions League + 4 Europa League (playing full 90 in all) matches + 1 sub appearance.

 

The offer was 2.4 million Euro's. 800.000 would be paid in the summer (so from now until the summer Vilhena would've been playing for free at Southampton) + another 1.6 million in two installments with the latest at the end of 2016. Absolutely mad.

 

So not a first team regular then? The thing is he wouldn't be coming here are a regular either, he was offered to the club form what I understand - not someone we have been actively looking at. You would get 3.6 million euros for him but that offer wasn't acceptable and SFC didn't think it was worth going higher. Not sure what the problem is? It would have been insulting if the club had said no thanks he is rubbish. An offer was made that wasnt accepted by Feyenoord. Clubs disagree on valuations all the time. Sometimes they are resolved, sometimes not. Not sure why you are so upset? If you like the player so much you still have him and if he is worth more at some point someone will pay that price.

[sadoldgit]

Not established?

 

Vilhena turned 20 last month and has already played in nearly 100 matches for Feyenoord.

 

The last 2 seasons he has started 53 games + 6 sub appearances out of a possible 68 Eredivisie matches. This season he has started 8 (played full 90 in all) + 6 subs out of a possible 20. He also started in 2 Champions League + 4 Europa League (playing full 90 in all) matches + 1 sub appearance.

 

The offer was 2.4 million Euro's. 800.000 would be paid in the summer (so from now until the summer Vilhena would've been playing for free at Southampton) + another 1.6 million in two installments with the latest at the end of 2016. Absolutely mad.

 

Do you know what wages were offered? Were they "insulting" ?

[red&white56]

Sorry, I thought our offer came after the "black box" had analysed a player and calculated their value ??? Maybe there's a function on the black box for "shameful offers" as opposed to "realistic offers"?

[Bearsy]

Not sure why you are so upset?

 

Apparently he don't want to play for Feyenoord anymore cos we've unsettled him, and he don't want to play for us either cos we've insulted him. Basically, we have ruined him On the other hand, if he's really that unstable, maybe we're better off out of it

[sadoldgit]

Apparently he don't want to play for Feyenoord anymore cos we've unsettled him, and he don't want to play for us either cos we've insulted him. Basically, we have ruined him On the other hand, if he's really that unstable, maybe we're better off out of it

 

Good point!!!

[angelman]

So not a first team regular then? The thing is he wouldn't be coming here are a regular either, he was offered to the club form what I understand - not someone we have been actively looking at. You would get 3.6 million euros for him but that offer wasn't acceptable and SFC didn't think it was worth going higher. Not sure what the problem is? It would have been insulting if the club had said no thanks he is rubbish. An offer was made that wasnt accepted by Feyenoord. Clubs disagree on valuations all the time. Sometimes they are resolved, sometimes not. Not sure why you are so upset? If you like the player so much you still have him and if he is worth more at some point someone will pay that price.

 

Clubs also disagree on what has been offered apparently. F1908 - can I ask how you know it was €2.4m that was offered rather than the €3.5m others claim it to have been? Are you sure it was Euro rather than Sterling - I presume it wouldn't be anything as simple, although one never knows. I am not sure that SFC have come out and said how much they offered, so one has to take the word of one party rather than corroborating from both parties.

 

As for people saying he is a substitute, I guess that that is a little bit open to interpretation. I personally wouldn't say he was, but looking at this - http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/tonny-vilhena/leistungsdatendetails/spieler/182581/saison/2014/wettbewerb/NL1/verein/234 - I can see how people come to that decision.

[sadoldgit]

The basic point is that we felt he wasn't worth what Feyenoord wanted. I am sure he would have been on better wages with us so instead of feeling insulted perhaps he should just feel frustrated that both clubs could not reach a compromise? I would image more deals fall through than get over the line and this is one that didn't work out. Getting @rsey about it doesn't help matters.

[Dig Dig]

F1908 raises some fair points. If a club publicly spoke about one of our promising players and then submitted a bid below asking price with unrealistic payment structures in place, I'm sure the apologists on this thread would be royally f***ed off about it.

Edited 4 February, 2015 by Dig Dig

[Saint Charlie]

Offer IMO was poor. Especially given the riches of the PL and the potential of the player.

 

Made worse by Koeman's comments I think. He could just have refused to comment on other players.

[doddisalegend]

F1908 raises some fair points. If a club publicly spoke about one of our promising players and then submitted a bid below asking price with unrealistic payment structures in place, I'm sure the apologists on this thread would be royally f***ed off about it.

 

Of course but I make no bones about being a hypocrite on this subject. I want every player saints sell to be for more money than he is worth and every player we buy to be an under priced bargain....why would any saints fan want different? With the greatest respect to Feyenoord, or any other club, I'm only interested in saints doing well so why would I care if they are not happy?

[Dig Dig]

Of course but I make no bones about being a hypocrite on this subject. I want every player saints sell to be for more money than he is worth and every player we buy to be an under priced bargain....why would any saints fan want different? With the greatest respect to Feyenoord, or any other club, I'm only interested in saints doing well so why would I care if they are not happy?

 

That's a different position from others trying to justify it .

[Dangermouth]

I'm simple in my approach:

 

Pay what the bloke's worth.

 

The offers made sound pitiful tbh. Would have been better to promise big add ons and if he proved a success as is likely then Feyenood (the best academy in Holland) profit very well.

[scotty]

I'm simple in my approach:

 

Pay what the bloke's worth.

 

The offers made sound pitiful tbh. Would have been better to promise big add ons and if he proved a success as is likely then Feyenood (the best academy in Holland) profit very well.

 

Sounds nice and simple. But the problem with the january window is that most clubs are looking beyond the simple "what is he worth" bit, its more like "what is he worth at this specific moment, and would signing him impact on our chances of getting a CL spot with all the money and kudos that would bring with it."

 

I know nothing about this guy. But I'm guessing the club will have assessed his value based on other factors than, say, his general value in the summer window.

[Ludwig]

Sorry, Feyenoord1908 but our hands our tied on this one.

 

[Ludwig]

*are

[Toadhall Saint]

When the player himself is insulted after being publicly unsettled, you've probably done something wrong. Understand that the player himself had to take the risk to step up mid-season and speak out to the fans that he would want to leave the team, only to be let down by Southampton.

 

Didn't his agent contact RK in the first place moaning that his player wasn't getting any game time?

[sadoldgit]

Apparently yes, he was offered to us.

[sadoldgit]

We paid too much for Long and didn't offer enough for this guy. What a shabby club we are.

 

 

 

[sadoldgit]

F1908 raises some fair points. If a club publicly spoke about one of our promising players and then submitted a bid below asking price with unrealistic payment structures in place, I'm sure the apologists on this thread would be royally f***ed off about it.

 

The player was offered to us. We made a bid that want acceptable and decided that we didn't want to improve the offer. What is your problem? As an "apologist" I would not have a problem in a club being turned down if our Board didn't fancy their offer.

[Dark Munster]

Wow, lots of posts today. Haven't bothered reading them. Has he signed yet?

[cellone]

If a club offered us a low price on a player and we didn't accept it I would see little reason to be offended.

[Dig Dig]

Apparently yes, he was offered to us.

 

Not by his club. His agent let Koeman know that the player wasn't happy (presumably he knows Koeman) but that doesn't mean that a) Koeman has to let the World know that and b) it doesn't mean we should try and get the player on loan and then offer to pay up to half his value with fantasy payments thrown in.

 

You can pretend you wouldn't care if the situation were reversed all you like but it doesn't mean it wasn't a laughable proposition for Feyenoord.

[saint_roffa]

This is pretty much comparable to Liverpool/United offering the same amount for JWP with a 1,5 year contract. It's crazy and a waste of time and energy.

 

JWP is actually second on the list of comparable players to Vilhena on transfermarkt.com.

[the_emu]

This is really what Les et el do in the Black Box...

 

http://http://youtu.be/ZXg2jiOsT-8

[sotonist]

I understand that Saints want the best deal but trying to get Vilhena on loan in first instance and coming up with the solution above as the best offer is embarassing to the extreme. This is pretty much comparable to Liverpool/United offering the same amount for JWP with a 1,5 year contract. It's crazy and a waste of time and energy.

Understand your point of view but with Vilhena not prioritised as a first team player it seems more comparable with Cork than JWP aside from the length of contract.

 

Koeman should've said nothing about this transfer unless the club was serious in their approach. This is not good for both Saints and Feyenoord. The player wouldn't be interested in a summer move anymore because Saints are clearly not serious with a shameful offer like this and he's now a disappointed player at Feyenoord who hoped to be in the Premier League. If you had used the Cork money 4/5 million Euro's without installments, it would probably be close to getting a deal done.

agree Koeman shouldn't have spoken unless the deal was agreed, but that is not his department, perhaps he was trying to force the hands of both sides to conclude the deal.

 

In January I would hope we are looking to sign Clasie rather than Vilhena. Volhena looked like a stop-gap solution.