Jump to content

Virgil Transfer Rumours - Summer 17

wild-saint

By wild-saint,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

Donatello

Donatello

Posted
Posted

Has Gary Neville made any comment about either of these respective transfers? Obviously none of us need a football commentator to tell us how to think, but it'd be a welcome change to hear from someone within the football community who isn't a delusional tw*t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jimmy_D

Jimmy_D

Posted
Posted
Erm. How is stuff posted on here copywrit/ed? One, this is essentially a gossip/opinion site so it would be hard to class any of it as intellectual property; secondly it's been attributed to someone: 'a fan' even though it is possibly and probably a valid recollection of what did occur; thirdly it's what now passes for 'the media' aka 'the press' (as was) so it's all 'Sky sources' and nothing of any real substance (for which you'd probably need only 3 journalists for the whole country).

 

It does show, however, that this site has now become a place where 'journalists' or their gophers will frequent, which we probably all knew anyway, and that Glasgow probably works for The Sun.

 

It's all right there at the very bottom of every page.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ALWAYS_SFC

ALWAYS_SFC

Posted
Posted (edited)
According to Danny Murphy, Countinho should think twice about leaving Liverpool as Klopp really looks after his players and is a special manager.

When asked if VvD will go to Liverpool, he said almost certainly. All parties wanted the deal done but southampton are now just getting a little greedy and want more money

 

I blame the media, tv companies and the like for giving these clueless wan kers the platform to spout off such Ill informed horse shyt...

Edited by ALWAYS_SFC
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pamplemousse

Pamplemousse

Posted
Posted

Just had a look on RAWK.

 

Some of the latest comments:

 

Les Reed is effectively 'cock-blocking' VVD

 

Because Saints haven't publicly responded to the transfer request, it de facto becomes accepted and that green lights Liverpool to make a bid

 

I think it will all come down to Southampton Football Club and whether they are petty and childish or a football club that realizes it will lose a player and make the most of it for the sake of the club, the team and the fans i.e. Go with the highest bidder.....Us

 

We need VVD to put out a statement to Southampton like Costa has been today about only wanting to join AM.

 

:mcinnes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
saint1977

saint1977

Posted
Posted
Has Gary Neville made any comment about either of these respective transfers? Obviously none of us need a football commentator to tell us how to think, but it'd be a welcome change to hear from someone within the football community who isn't a delusional tw*t.

 

Or a scouser/ex-Liverpool/or have same agent as VVD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
S-Clarke

S-Clarke

Posted
Posted
Just had a look on RAWK.

 

Some of the latest comments:

 

Les Reed is effectively 'cock-blocking' VVD

 

Because Saints haven't publicly responded to the transfer request, it de facto becomes accepted and that green lights Liverpool to make a bid

 

 

 

 

 

:mcinnes:

 

Then have a look at their coutinho thread, they're then saying the complete opposite. They're a very confused city at the best of times, but this is just weird.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gingeletiss

Gingeletiss

Posted
Posted
According to Danny Murphy, Countinho should think twice about leaving Liverpool as Klopp really looks after his players and is a special manager.

When asked if VvD will go to Liverpool, he said almost certainly. All parties wanted the deal done but southampton are now just getting a little greedy and want more money

 

How can that be, stupid idiot, they never made a bid. The crap on RAWK is fairy tale stuff, funny as ferk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
View From The Top

View From The Top

Posted
Posted
I love this. We should just roll over to let Liverpool tickle our tummies and be grateful for it. Now Liverpool refusing £72m and £90m for Cutinho is just them being a little greedy.

 

From what I understand, and remember it's just NW football gossip and 3rd hand at best, one of the reasons Saints won't sell to Liverpool due to the dippers saying how Saints would just except what they offered as we always do, then went on and agreed a deal with the player, expecting the club to be grateful to the dippers for the privilege of selling VvD to them. That seriously fu_cked off Les Reed and co.

 

All I was told over the weekend was nothing has changed. Club still states he's not for sale, not a single offer has been made but to "stand by for the panic bids".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
angelman

angelman

Posted
Posted
How can that be, stupid idiot, they never made a bid. The crap on RAWK is fairy tale stuff, funny as ferk.

 

You know what, it has been going on for so long, and the desperation is mounting by the day, that I have moved on from finding the disrespect rather boring, to finding it all rather amusing now. Like most on here, the ideal situation would be Cutinho going, vD not going to them with the cherry on top being Can going off to Italy. Maybe if Ronaldo is banned for 12 games, Real might have a bid for Mané. Now that would be really funny as ferk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
max_saints

max_saints

Posted
Posted

This saga has really brought out the worst in modern football.

 

What I do not understand is, why is VVD so impatient?? It's quite apparent we do not want to sell him, so accept that and knuckle down for the season ahead. He is still young, this is not going to be his 'last big payday' ala fonte. I am very confident if he just put his mind to it to play out another amazing season, he'd be looking at the likes of Barcelona and RM not Liverpool.

 

Which begs the question of what is on his mind now? Is he not confident he'll be as good this season thus wanting to secure his big move? Is he afraid we will continue to reject any other offers next season from the big clubs? (surely not, and moving to Liverpool will further stunt his career path to a really big club I feel) Or is it really (and disappointingly) only about the $$$$$?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cartman

Cartman

Posted
Posted
17 days till the window slams shut!!

 

If we are going to sell you'd assume it will be over next 7 days, give us time to replace and spend the excess.

 

Anyone but the dumb dippers

 

Considering that we haven't sold a first team player later than July 28th you'd actually assume that if it was going to happen at all it would have happened by now, even more so when it has been going on since the end of last season rather than just in the last week like Coutinho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
farawaysaint

farawaysaint

Posted
Posted
I'm sure the Liverpool supporters will somehow interpret today's massive news as a sign that VVD is going to join them.

 

Yes, no significant transactions were allowed which means that it can now go through.

 

Also, a new owner may be more sympathetic to Liverpool.

 

Also, this represents a significant change in circumstances which means they can now bid with no issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
simo

simo

Posted
Posted
Yes, no significant transactions were allowed which means that it can now go through.

 

Also, a new owner may be more sympathetic to Liverpool.

 

Also, this represents a significant change in circumstances which means they can now bid with no issues.

 

Wrong

Wrong

Wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites
angelman

angelman

Posted
Posted
Yes, no significant transactions were allowed which means that it can now go through.

Is the signing of a €20m player not significant?

 

Also, a new owner may be more sympathetic to Liverpool.

Maybe, but then again, if you splash a lot of cash, you aren't going to want to sell your crown jewels if your intention is to push ahead.

 

Also, this represents a significant change in circumstances which means they can now bid with no issues.

Non-sequitur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Give it to Ron

Give it to Ron

Posted
Posted
Yes, no significant transactions were allowed which means that it can now go through.

 

Also, a new owner may be more sympathetic to Liverpool.

 

Also, this represents a significant change in circumstances which means they can now bid with no issues.

 

No significant transactions - what like breaking our transfer record for Lemina you mean?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
S-Clarke

S-Clarke

Posted
Posted
For what it's worth, SSN reporting that we're still saying that VvD won't be sold.

 

Their sources have also claimed that £210m has been pumped into the club, which isn't the case. They're just rehashing what the telegraph article has said, but wording it badly and putting their 'claim' to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ericb

ericb

Posted
Posted

At the start of the summer i was told if we were bought out VVD wouldn't be sold whatever the offer. Obviously a hell of a lot of water has gone under the bridge now but it'll be vey interesting to see if that's the case as apparently it was a condition to sale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr X

Mr X

Posted
Posted

We are being lied to about the vvd situation according to the express "Southampton*haven't come out and gone to town on us. When they got the new manager, it was like backhanded conversations they were having.

 

"With Southampton, they were well up for a deal. Everyone goes on about [meeting him in] Blackpool and things like that.

 

"We had permission to speak to Van Dijk in Blackpool. There were things we didn't have permission for and that's why we made the apology.

 

"Chelsea*met him, City met him, he is actively for sale. That wasn't the issue beforehand.

 

"The issue was that something happened in the press that took a bit of Southampton's power away.

 

"That's the situation with them."

 

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/837141/Virgil-van-Dijk-Liverpool-Transfer-News-Graeme-Kelly-Southampton-News

 

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom28

Tom28

Posted
Posted

I knew the news today was coming (albeit I only found out yesterday it was happening today) but told I couldn't share anything on the forum (strictly). However, I can share what the implications are now re: VVD, some of which I knew and shared yesterday.

 

Kat was open to VVD leaving. She's a businesswomen and so was happy to sell him at the highest price to any club, including Liverpool.

 

Les was adamant that we will not sell him to Liverpool at any price, and that it would take a monumental offer to sell him to any other club. He would rather VVD stays and doesn't play. He feels the club needs to make a stand and financially the club is in a good position and doesn't need the VVD money.

 

Before the takeover, Kat was likely to win out and VVD would have left.

 

Now, it's anyone's guess what the new owner will want. On one hand, £70-80m minus the Celtic sell on fee and one or two player purchases, pays off nearly a fifth or so of the amount Gao has paid for the club. On the other hand, VVD is a big draw and our best player and for the club to continue to grow and compete at the top level, and therefore increase the return on the investment in the long term, it makes sense to keep him at the club.

 

Pure speculation on my part, but I think the new owners first move to sell their best player would get the relationship with the fans off to a terrible start so I think he now stays. But that's speculation and not based on any ITK information.

 

For sure though, the only influence inside the club that was open to selling VVD to Liverpool (assuming they were the highest bidder), has now gone. Which is why I was confident to post last night he wasn't going to Liverpool because Kat was the last remaining hope for VVD that might happen and I knew the takeover was going ahead today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
doddisalegend

doddisalegend

Posted
Posted
We are being lied to about the vvd situation according to the express "Southampton*haven't come out and gone to town on us. When they got the new manager, it was like backhanded conversations they were having.

 

"With Southampton, they were well up for a deal. Everyone goes on about [meeting him in] Blackpool and things like that.

 

"We had permission to speak to Van Dijk in Blackpool. There were things we didn't have permission for and that's why we made the apology.

 

"Chelsea*met him, City met him, he is actively for sale. That wasn't the issue beforehand.

 

"The issue was that something happened in the press that took a bit of Southampton's power away.

 

"That's the situation with them."

 

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/837141/Virgil-van-Dijk-Liverpool-Transfer-News-Graeme-Kelly-Southampton-News

 

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

 

That's from 9 days ago and has already been discussed the bloke who came out with this crap is Graeme Kelly who describes himself as a a social media in-the-know on transfer news...basically the guy doesn't have a ****ing clue but was made to look bad when he claimed VVD to Liverpool was a done deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Redslo

Redslo

Posted
Posted
I knew the news today was coming (albeit I only found out yesterday it was happening today) but told I couldn't share anything on the forum (strictly). However, I can share what the implications are now re: VVD, some of which I knew and shared yesterday.

 

Kat was open to VVD leaving. She's a businesswomen and so was happy to sell him at the highest price to any club, including Liverpool.

 

Les was adamant that we will not sell him to Liverpool at any price, and that it would take a monumental offer to sell him to any other club. He would rather VVD stays and doesn't play. He feels the club needs to make a stand and financially the club is in a good position and doesn't need the VVD money.

 

Before the takeover, Kat was likely to win out and VVD would have left.

 

Now, it's anyone's guess what the new owner will want. On one hand, £70-80m minus the Celtic sell on fee and one or two player purchases, pays off nearly a fifth or so of the amount Gao has paid for the club. On the other hand, VVD is a big draw and our best player and for the club to continue to grow and compete at the top level, and therefore increase the return on the investment in the long term, it makes sense to keep him at the club.

 

Pure speculation on my part, but I think the new owners first move to sell their best player would get the relationship with the fans off to a terrible start so I think he now stays. But that's speculation and not based on any ITK information.

 

For sure though, the only influence inside the club that was open to selling VVD to Liverpool (assuming they were the highest bidder), has now gone. Which is why I was confident to post last night he wasn't going to Liverpool because Kat was the last remaining hope for VVD that might happen and I knew the takeover was going ahead today.

 

But if Gao is thinking this way, doesn't that suggest that there is no intent to invest further in the club? After all, under Liebherr profits from player transfers have been fully reinvested into new players and increased pay for older players.

 

I recognize that I might be reading too much into the way you phrased things here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CB Fry

CB Fry

Posted
Posted (edited)
I knew the news today was coming (albeit I only found out yesterday it was happening today) but told I couldn't share anything on the forum (strictly). However, I can share what the implications are now re: VVD, some of which I knew and shared yesterday.

 

Kat was open to VVD leaving. She's a businesswomen and so was happy to sell him at the highest price to any club, including Liverpool.

 

Les was adamant that we will not sell him to Liverpool at any price, and that it would take a monumental offer to sell him to any other club. He would rather VVD stays and doesn't play. He feels the club needs to make a stand and financially the club is in a good position and doesn't need the VVD money.

 

Before the takeover, Kat was likely to win out and VVD would have left.

 

Now, it's anyone's guess what the new owner will want. On one hand, £70-80m minus the Celtic sell on fee and one or two player purchases, pays off nearly a fifth or so of the amount Gao has paid for the club. On the other hand, VVD is a big draw and our best player and for the club to continue to grow and compete at the top level, and therefore increase the return on the investment in the long term, it makes sense to keep him at the club.

 

Pure speculation on my part, but I think the new owners first move to sell their best player would get the relationship with the fans off to a terrible start so I think he now stays. But that's speculation and not based on any ITK information.

 

For sure though, the only influence inside the club that was open to selling VVD to Liverpool (assuming they were the highest bidder), has now gone. Which is why I was confident to post last night he wasn't going to Liverpool because Kat was the last remaining hope for VVD that might happen and I knew the takeover was going ahead today.

 

Nice one Tom.

 

So what is the likelihood of us signing sulk/strike cover, ie bring in a player like Hoedt to be a senior CB in case VVD really does refuse to play/lack focus.

 

Or is the plan based on the fundamental belief that Virgil will play and play to his previous standard for us post September 1st?

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