Jump to content

Virgil Transfer Rumours - Summer 17

wild-saint

By wild-saint,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

Saint Albert

Saint Albert

Posted
Posted
Its a complete and utter disaster and reality is that its totally unhealthy for the club and that's why the player and agent still have the upper hand.

 

It really is not. He wants to go. Liverpool want him. His agent wants the fee, but none of them get to decide whether or not he leaves. He has five years left on his contract. Only Saints get to decide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
doddisalegend

doddisalegend

Posted
Posted

I wonder if VVD is starting to wonder if his agent knows what he is doing? I guess if he ends up at pool by the end of the window he'll be happy enough but if all this backfires and he is still at Southampton in the awkward position of having to back track I reckon his agent might be getting the chop .

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Micky

Micky

Posted
Posted
It is also worth pointing out that if Barcelona can't keep a player, it isn't really our board's fault if they end up selling VVD.
It never has been our boards fault, they are managing a very difficult situation very well.

 

Sent from my HTC One M8s using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VectisSaint

VectisSaint

Posted
Posted
£10-£15m is nothing in today's market it's a JayRod or a Fonte.... So I'd sell him to Chelsea or City, bring in some real quality with the £50m and keep fans happy.

You can't just sell a player to someone unless he wants to go there. This is not a slave market. He has stated that he only wants to play for Liverpool, maybe he would go to someone else if they made an offer, but its a bit simplistic to just says, "let's ell him to xyz...", it doesn't work like that.

 

I would still like to know what it was that turned Virgil against Southampton in the period after he extended his contract and early 2017. People seem to think it was because Liverpool tapped him up or because he changed agents (do we know when exactly he changed agents, was that a cause of the issues or an effect). There have been hints that this all started back around January, what lead to him and Les Reed "hating each other"? It must have been after he was announced as captain, was it something to do with how his injury was treated (we have history of our medical staff falling out with players, Ramirez had a similar dispute with his dead leg problem), or was it something to do with Puel - this seems to be hinted at with regard to other players allegedly looking to leave (Bertrand, Tadic) who have now changed their minds. Don't know the answer, but feel that there is more to this situation than meets the eye, based on some hints by the ITKs on here.

 

Personally think the Club should just dig their heels in and not agree to him leaving, whatever the price. If he stays will we renegotiate his contract (downwards) as he will presumably no longer be Captain (and was this why Fonte fell out with the Club and pushed to leave as I suspect). Its time that players started showing a bit more professionalism, as MLT says and behave in a more mature way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Toadhall Saint

Toadhall Saint

Posted
Posted
The Irish Independent articles and Yahoo articles on VVD seem to be accompanying each other this summer via Kevin Palmer. Here's the Yahoo one. It's quite strongly worded:

 

https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/van-dijks-move-liverpool-million-miles-away-angry-saints-dig-heels-134659726.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=tw

 

It is indeed. No actual quotes but it sounds as if SFC are very ****ed off with both VvD and his agent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint Albert

Saint Albert

Posted
Posted
You can't just sell a player to someone unless he wants to go there. This is not a slave market. He has stated that he only wants to play for Liverpool, maybe he would go to someone else if they made an offer, but its a bit simplistic to just says, "let's ell him to xyz...", it doesn't work like that.

 

I would still like to know what it was that turned Virgil against Southampton in the period after he extended his contract and early 2017. People seem to think it was because Liverpool tapped him up or because he changed agents (do we know when exactly he changed agents, was that a cause of the issues or an effect). There have been hints that this all started back around January, what lead to him and Les Reed "hating each other"? It must have been after he was announced as captain, was it something to do with how his injury was treated (we have history of our medical staff falling out with players, Ramirez had a similar dispute with his dead leg problem), or was it something to do with Puel - this seems to be hinted at with regard to other players allegedly looking to leave (Bertrand, Tadic) who have now changed their minds. Don't know the answer, but feel that there is more to this situation than meets the eye, based on some hints by the ITKs on here.

 

Personally think the Club should just dig their heels in and not agree to him leaving, whatever the price. If he stays will we renegotiate his contract (downwards) as he will presumably no longer be Captain (and was this why Fonte fell out with the Club and pushed to leave as I suspect). Its time that players started showing a bit more professionalism, as MLT says and behave in a more mature way.

 

I think that it may have been his new agent, who turned him against the club and turned him on to the idea of moving elsewhere so soon after signing a long-term contract. Also, I'm starting to think that the timed explosion of "VVD wants Liverpool" stories in the press in June, may have come from his agent rather than Liverpool. I recall reading that one of the journos involved denied getting the story from Liverpool. If that is true, it really only leaves one other alternative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
angelman

angelman

Posted
Posted (edited)

Maybe the agent thought it worked the same way as it did when he took RK from us to Everton

 

“He left another agent [Guido Albers] and came to me.

 

“After that, we had some serious talks with Everton before Ronald decided to leave Southampton.

 

“So it was a lot of work to get the transition done.”

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/koemans-agent-reveals-how-tough-12463215

 

VVD changes agent > has talks with LFC > decides to leave Saints. [As an aside, I thought RK decided to leave Saints before talks with Everton]. One might have thought that the President of the European Football Agents Association (EFAA) might have known how to do things in the proper manner.

Edited by angelman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chez

Chez

Posted
Posted
RB LEIPZIG are showing us how its done with Naby K

 

Door slammed shut - player not for sale and message received by Liverpool

 

Player not striking and even talk of new contract

 

Are they? Only difference I see between the two clubs (apart from the obvious) seems to be that one has a player willing to get on with things until a move comes to pass, whilst the other has a player sulking in an attempt to force a move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dusic

Dusic

Posted
Posted

Matter of time before he joins Liverpool IMO. If he does, then Liverpool will have played a blinder really and their underhand tactics will have worked, with their no1 target and a fantastic player signed up.

 

Saints will have taken a stand and then gone back on that and also be left with a short amount of time to spend the money to create a first XI of the quality we had under Koeman.

 

That said, I wouldn't really blame Reed. We think about it conceptually. He has to deal with the reality of his best player doing pretty much everything he can to leave the club.

 

How could VVD really stay after this? Its on another level to Schneiderlin or Wanyama.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jimmy_D

Jimmy_D

Posted
Posted
Matter of time before he joins Liverpool IMO. If he does, then Liverpool will have played a blinder really and their underhand tactics will have worked, with their no1 target and a fantastic player signed up.

 

Saints will have taken a stand and then gone back on that and also be left with a short amount of time to spend the money to create a first XI of the quality we had under Koeman.

 

That said, I wouldn't really blame Reed. We think about it conceptually. He has to deal with the reality of his best player doing pretty much everything he can to leave the club.

 

How could VVD really stay after this? Its on another level to Schneiderlin or Wanyama.

 

Technically he's not on strike as it's the club that's sent him to train on his own, and isn't refusing to play but is instead not in the right frame of mind to play.

 

That can easily be blamed on the agent giving him bad advice.

 

Might not wash with everyone on here that's been hitting F5 on here every 3.6 seconds, but it'd be easy to spin for the majority of fans that aren't us that he's knuckling down and back with the team, especially with a few soundbites from his team mates and a couple of decent performances on the pitch.

 

Bearing in mind that the player hasn't said anything himself publicly, and it's all media reports and twitter that everyone is basing their opinion on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ericb

ericb

Posted
Posted
I think that it may have been his new agent, who turned him against the club and turned him on to the idea of moving elsewhere so soon after signing a long-term contract. Also, I'm starting to think that the timed explosion of "VVD wants Liverpool" stories in the press in June, may have come from his agent rather than Liverpool. I recall reading that one of the journos involved denied getting the story from Liverpool. If that is true, it really only leaves one other alternative.

 

Not directly, but definitely indirectly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jimmy_D

Jimmy_D

Posted
Posted
That article is so biased in so many ways. Even the pictures they chose to use - MP looking down and dejected and of course klopp looking all pleased and happy. Really dislike football more with every year that passes

 

Not surprising, 'tis a David Maddock article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted
RB LEIPZIG are showing us how its done with Naby K

 

Door slammed shut - player not for sale and message received by Liverpool

Southampton have consistently stated "Not for sale", and that Liverpool would be wasting their time even considering making an approach. How is that any different ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SNSUN

SNSUN

Posted
Posted
£10-£15m is nothing in today's market it's a JayRod or a Fonte.... So I'd sell him to Chelsea or City, bring in some real quality with the £50m and keep fans happy.

 

Selling to Chelsea, City or ABL (Anyone But Liverpool) is the natural "happy" ending to this situation for Saints, as I can't see him here come September. Those dipper bastards turned his head, tapped him up and he's now no good to us. I believe we genuinely wanted him here for another season as captain and leader but their devious, underhanded ways have ruined that. The issue is that he's apparently said it's Liverpool his heart is set on. (Because they tapped him up.)

 

I think the next natural step will be VVD handing in his transfer request. This is what Liverpool have been waiting for of course, thinking they can get him at a reduced price. Of course a transfer request will alert other teams, and Liverpool's quest becomes more difficult. We get a bidding war and close to the money we want. Our strong hand is the length of his contract - thus meaning we don't have to sell for less than we want.

 

I say I can't see him here in September, as I think he's burned his bridges, but what if he is... then I agree with others, really his best bet would be to get fit and knuckle down ready for a move in January.

 

Quite frankly I hope they lose their Champions League qualifier, lose Mané and Coutinho, and don't get VVD. Be funny. Petty

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pluto

pluto

Posted
Posted
That article is so biased in so many ways. Even the pictures they chose to use - MP looking down and dejected and of course klopp looking all pleased and happy. Really dislike football more with every year that passes

 

North West based Mirror reporter and will be on the scousers 'go to journos', i think he was part of the original VVD splash about 'choosing Liverpool' in early June.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Toadhall Saint

Toadhall Saint

Posted
Posted
Selling to Chelsea, City or ABL (Anyone But Liverpool) is the natural "happy" ending to this situation for Saints, as I can't see him here come September. Those dipper bastards turned his head, tapped him up and he's now no good to us. I believe we genuinely wanted him here for another season as captain and leader but their devious, underhanded ways have ruined that. The issue is that he's apparently said it's Liverpool his heart is set on. (Because they tapped him up.)

 

I think the next natural step will be VVD handing in his transfer request. This is what Liverpool have been waiting for of course, thinking they can get him at a reduced price. Of course a transfer request will alert other teams, and Liverpool's quest becomes more difficult. We get a bidding war and close to the money we want. Our strong hand is the length of his contract - thus meaning we don't have to sell for less than we want.

 

I say I can't see him here in September, as I think he's burned his bridges, but what if he is... then I agree with others, really his best bet would be to get fit and knuckle down ready for a move in January.

 

Quite frankly I hope they lose their Champions League qualifier, lose Mané and Coutinho, and don't get VVD. Be funny. Petty

 

How about he puts in a transfer request and we say nope not this season also why are LFC waiting for that after all they have given up all interest in the player so would still need to make an official approach and thus losing face etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SKD

SKD

Posted
Posted
You can't just sell a player to someone unless he wants to go there. This is not a slave market. He has stated that he only wants to play for Liverpool, maybe he would go to someone else if they made an offer, but its a bit simplistic to just says, "let's ell him to xyz...", it doesn't work like that.

 

I would still like to know what it was that turned Virgil against Southampton in the period after he extended his contract and early 2017. People seem to think it was because Liverpool tapped him up or because he changed agents (do we know when exactly he changed agents, was that a cause of the issues or an effect). There have been hints that this all started back around January, what lead to him and Les Reed "hating each other"? It must have been after he was announced as captain, was it something to do with how his injury was treated (we have history of our medical staff falling out with players, Ramirez had a similar dispute with his dead leg problem), or was it something to do with Puel - this seems to be hinted at with regard to other players allegedly looking to leave (Bertrand, Tadic) who have now changed their minds. Don't know the answer, but feel that there is more to this situation than meets the eye, based on some hints by the ITKs on here.

 

Personally think the Club should just dig their heels in and not agree to him leaving, whatever the price. If he stays will we renegotiate his contract (downwards) as he will presumably no longer be Captain (and was this why Fonte fell out with the Club and pushed to leave as I suspect). Its time that players started showing a bit more professionalism, as MLT says and behave in a more mature way.

 

he's under contract (a long one at that) at Southampton football club. They can, within reason, do as they please and try and sell/not sell to whoever they want.

 

Of course if an offer is accepted from another club we cannot force anyone to accept it, but we can offer an ultimatum and say that he either goes to xyx club or he stays at his current club. If we don't want to sell to Liverpool, unless it's in his contract that we have to accept an offer from them, which it's clearly not, then we do not have to accept an offer.

 

If given the two options mentioned, it's very very likely that he'll accept an offer from the club of our choosing.

 

Whilst you're right in saying it's not the "slave trade", we effectively 'own' this player until the end of his contract... the power and the players destiny is in our hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Redslo

Redslo

Posted
Posted
The clubs mantra is to get players to sign for us using the stepping stone scenario. If we then are seen to stop these players to do so some players may not join us because of this.

Should we have really believed that no player was going to be sold, as this breaks with our business model?

The 6year extension of contract thing is to the advantage of both parties, as it gives a player more wages but gives the club a stronger hand in getting a better price.

The big thing about selling VVD is that the fans are tired of us bending over to Liverpool again and perhas are misjudging the strength of the fans resentment to Liverpool and then in turn could turn on the board

 

If VVD wanted to leave this summer all he had to do was not sign the contract extension. As he himself acknowledged when he signed it, it meant that he would be here for a couple more years. Players who will join us in the future know that we are happy to sell them on after a couple of years (not one), but if they sign new long term contracts that means that they will stay here longer. That is not a problem. It is what we want them to understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
simo

simo

Posted
Posted

I'm torn between not wanting him at the club after the snide way him and his currently unpaid new agent are trying to engineer his move totally disrespecting the club and us fans and keeping him out of spite and if I was Les I'd tell him that , Personally I'd also tell him he's not going that's final knuckle down and if the dippers do things properly he can go in January!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Redslo

Redslo

Posted
Posted
Simple decision for the club. If they feel VVD at some stage will back down, be professional and that his relationship with the club, staff and players isn't beyomd repair then they should keep him.

 

If any of those things isnt the case then they have no option but to sell.

 

We can't hold a £60m asset that isn't contributing.

 

That said, potentially swapping Fonte and VVD for Bednarek and Hoedt or/Wimmer in 6 months would be terrible management.

 

Swapping out Fonte was inevitable. He was getting old in football terms and unable to do the job to the necessary standard--at least in the future. Getting West Ham to overpay for him was a good deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Redslo

Redslo

Posted
Posted (edited)
Biggest club - or certainly one of the top 2 or 3 - in the world though. Agree on the technicality but why would you swap Barca for PSG? £££.

 

Probably good business by Barca and reckon it might destabilise PSG.

 

The point I was making is that if a club of that size - release clause or not - can be shorn of it's best players then you can see the pressure Saints have been under.

 

The deal will cause them Financial Fair Play issues and they do have a past violation so, in theory, they face greater sanctions. They will have to sell some players at a profit to conduct this transaction.

Edited by Redslo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Redslo

Redslo

Posted
Posted
Care to explain why you think we will back down on our asking price? Unlike previous examples we hold a lot more bargaining power as he is under a long contract.

 

Do you think keeping him here will reduce his value significantly over the next 6-12 months? I'd argue no amount of sulking will change how talented a player he is and so his value shouldn't be affected. Alternatively maybe you think his disruptive attitude is a problem for the club? In which case is your answer to sell any players that don't want to be here to any club that wants them at whatever price they are willing to pay? That is a terrible business model and would be a horrific precedent to set.

 

Honestly I only see 2 real options - pay us what we want and take him off our hands or he stays here. Whether he knuckles down and plays or keeps himself isolated until the next window is up to him. Only reason I think we may drop our price a little is if he does hand in a transfer request and foregoes his loyalty bonus and even then i'd still imagine our profit margin would remain the same on the deal.

 

It might even go up since we don't have to split the unpaid loyalty bonus with Celtic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Redslo

Redslo

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

 

 

 

We CAN afford to continue paying his wages even though he's not playing, we have budgeted VVD's wages into our accounts for the next 5 years. And despite that, the money raised from JayRod's sale covers VVD's wages.

We've just earned a couple of extra million by agreeing for Virgin Media to put patches on our sleeves FFS.

Personally, I'd invite companies to sponsor VVD's wages every week.

It would be an absolute laugh: "this week, Virgil Van Dijk's childish petulance will be sponsored by Paddy Power".

We could turn him into a complete joke.

 

What's more, people saying that he is a £60m asset are wrong!

On the balance sheet (and THAT is what matters in business) he is worth what we paid Celtic for him, and not a penny more.

 

 

The first bolded idea is brilliant.

 

As for the second, technically, he is on the books for approximately 67% of what we paid Celtic for him.

Edited by Redslo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CanadaSaint

CanadaSaint

Posted
Posted

For some time we have needed to place VVD, his agent and Liverpool in a "catch 22" situation, and I can't understand why we haven't done it.

 

Issue a media release stating that "we do not wish to sell Virgil but we will do so reluctantly A) if he formally requests a transfer, and B) if the buying club meets our valuation."

 

If VVD loses his 'loyalty' bonus, he (and his agent) will be looking for Liverpool to make that up, which would only drive the cost up for Liverpool.

 

We will have taken a principled stance, and the parties lacking principles can figure out how the hell to move ahead. Good luck with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jimmy_D

Jimmy_D

Posted
Posted
With City spending 100m on two fullbacks (one fairly average some games and one unproven in England) I think 70m is quite good value for VVD in this market.

 

It would be, but I don't think he's available at that price any more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
View From The Top

View From The Top

Posted
Posted
I couldn't give a flying sh1te if a club wants him but won't match our valuation - it should be non negotiable. The fact they won't pay it is their problem, not ours.

 

Personally I'd let the c*** rot in the u23s, depreciate in value then go on a free to Bolton when he's 31. F*** him

That's more or less my position too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Norm

Norm

Posted
Posted
For some time we have needed to place VVD, his agent and Liverpool in a "catch 22" situation, and I can't understand why we haven't done it.

 

Issue a media release stating that "we do not wish to sell Virgil but we will do so reluctantly A) if he formally requests a transfer, and B) if the buying club meets our valuation."

 

If VVD loses his 'loyalty' bonus, he (and his agent) will be looking for Liverpool to make that up, which would only drive the cost up for Liverpool.

 

We will have taken a principled stance, and the parties lacking principles can figure out how the hell to move ahead. Good luck with that.

 

 

Top post and I agree 100%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saints4Prem

Saints4Prem

Posted
Posted
There is a toxic feel about SFC just now. Can't blame VVD for all of this, but this situation needs resolving one way or another.

 

I have almost zero excitement for the upcoming season.... Am i alone or others feeling the same?

 

If you have toxic feelings about the club and do not feel any excitement for the new season am I alone in thinking its time for you to move on for good ? Bye

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lets B Avenue

Lets B Avenue

Posted
Posted
There is a toxic feel about SFC just now. Can't blame VVD for all of this, but this situation needs resolving one way or another.

 

I have almost zero excitement for the upcoming season.... Am i alone or others feeling the same?

 

I don't believe you.

 

Whilst you probably are a lonely, sad, person. You are positively creaming yourself every time you post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Katalinic

Katalinic

Posted
Posted
There is a toxic feel about SFC just now. Can't blame VVD for all of this, but this situation needs resolving one way or another.

 

I have almost zero excitement for the upcoming season.... Am i alone or others feeling the same?

 

Maybe find another hobby instead then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jimmy_D

Jimmy_D

Posted
Posted
There is a toxic feel about SFC just now. Can't blame VVD for all of this, but this situation needs resolving one way or another.

 

I have almost zero excitement for the upcoming season.... Am i alone or others feeling the same?

 

Sounds like it's time for you to find something else to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sir_fred

sir_fred

Posted
Posted
For some time we have needed to place VVD, his agent and Liverpool in a "catch 22" situation, and I can't understand why we haven't done it.

 

Issue a media release stating that "we do not wish to sell Virgil but we will do so reluctantly A) if he formally requests a transfer, and B) if the buying club meets our valuation."

 

If VVD loses his 'loyalty' bonus, he (and his agent) will be looking for Liverpool to make that up, which would only drive the cost up for Liverpool.

 

We will have taken a principled stance, and the parties lacking principles can figure out how the hell to move ahead. Good luck with that.

 

This is probably done behind the scenes now. The club wanted him to stay and all actions up to now was trying get another year from him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jimmy_D

Jimmy_D

Posted
Posted

I see some of their utter ****wits are still trying to peddle the line that we always wanted to sell and it's just the money we're mad about.

 

Obviously, everything, from making him captain, to him still having half a decade left on his contract, to us stating every single time he's not for sale, to actually calling out an investigation on them for tapping up, which caused them to put out a humiliating public apology, and end all interest in him, apparently at our insistence... all of that just screams 'for sale'....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...