Jump to content

Virgil Transfer Rumours - Summer 17

wild-saint

By wild-saint,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

Suhari

Suhari

Posted
Posted

 

Yesterday's news.

 

Turns out the guy who took the picture of the silver taxi 'near Stanley Park' (and which was supposedly the same one from the airport) admitted he was bull****ting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
What I’ve been told:

- He’s as good as gone and unfortunately to Liverpool. Bid expected to come in today and understand that assuming it’s over £70m (which it will be), Saints will let him leave.

 

Still being told that a improved Liverpool offer, if it comes, is likely to be rejected. Club are prepared to call VVd's bluff and leave him to sit out the whole season if that's what he wants to do.

 

runroul1.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JoeShmoe

JoeShmoe

Posted
Posted
No restriction of trade here though. He can start to "apply his trade" the minute the clock hits 11pm on thursday. As Tom28 says, thats up to him. We are just restricting him from applying his trade elsewhere, as per the legal document signed just a few months ago. If he went to court, and won, then football contracts will no longer be worth the paper they are written on. Players will be able to push for a move to another club even when the valuation is not met. The transfer system will completely breakdown and clubs will go to the wall.

 

Agree - this is where things are headed - if clubs take a stand (us on VVD, lpool on Coutinho, Leics on Drinkwater) players will go through the courts and the current model falls apart - which then cripples lower league clubs

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Window Cleaner

Window Cleaner

Posted
Posted
Agree - this is where things are headed - if clubs take a stand (us on VVD, lpool on Coutinho, Leics on Drinkwater) players will go through the courts and the current model falls apart - which then cripples lower league clubs

 

And the answer to all that is mandatory release clauses. Club can set them sky high but there is always a door if you have the

wherewithal to open it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted (edited)
The point here being that Vectis suggested he could buy himself out of his contract for 17 million or so but not have his registration released. That would be restriction of trade I believe. So if it t'were in fact possible to buy yourself out of a contract for relatively little then then transfer system would collapse anyway. Which is what FIFPro have been pushing for these last years. They have recently asked the European Commission to look into the legality of transfer fees once again. It may go on for years again but so did the Bosman case.

 

Haven't bothered to read the other 200 pages of this thread, so apologies if this is already posted, but there's already a precedent from Andy Webster. The regulations are that if you're under 28 you can buy your contract out once there's 3 years remaining, if over 28 it's 2 years. So Van Dijk couldn't buy himself out, even if he wanted to, for another 2 years.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webster_ruling

Edited by The9
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint Albert

Saint Albert

Posted
Posted
Eh? Can't remember us conceding many from setpieces when VVD was in the line-up -whether under Puel and VVD. He's an absolute monster in the air. Suggest you actually watch him play and give the political porn on order-order a rest, pal.

 

Even if it was true, hypothetically, why should a team's performances say anything about the qualities of the individual? Perhaps the individual is winning his aerial battles but others in the side aren't. How would the team's record in defending setpieces be relevant unless the interested club wanted to buy the whole team? By your logic, Noles, MLG was a bland and uncreative footballer because he happened to play for a toothless Saints side.

 

The Saints not being able to defend set pieces bit probably comes from a chart that has been doing the rounds on various sites this summer. If I remember correctly, it shows that during the Klopp era Saints have conceded more set piece goals than Liverpool, and Liverpool and Saints have two of the worst records for set piece goals conceded in the PL.

 

I'm not really sure how helpful the stats are. VVD is clearly a beast in the air.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nolan

Nolan

Posted
Posted
Eh? Can't remember us conceding many from setpieces when VVD was in the line-up -whether under Puel and VVD. He's an absolute monster in the air. Suggest you actually watch him play and give the political porn on order-order a rest, pal.

 

Even if it was true, hypothetically, why should a team's performances say anything about the qualities of the individual? Perhaps the individual is winning his aerial battles but others in the side aren't. How would the team's record in defending setpieces be relevant unless the interested club wanted to buy the whole team? By your logic, Noles, MLG was a bland and uncreative footballer because he happened to play for a toothless Saints side.

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/liverpool-transfer-news-virgil-van-dijk-corners-set-pieces-goals-conceded-jurgen-klopp-problem-issue-a7892346.html

 

There you go...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

And? As I said before, he played half a season in 2016/17 -and just because the team concedes goals from setpieces doesn't mean he's individually culpable. Frankly the numbers are so small that I wouldn't read too much into them. Try watching him play.

Edited by shurlock
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lord Duckhunter

Lord Duckhunter

Posted
Posted
Agree - this is where things are headed - if clubs take a stand (us on VVD, lpool on Coutinho, Leics on Drinkwater) players will go through the courts and the current model falls apart - which then cripples lower league clubs

 

Doubt if players will go through courts. It'll go on for years & take a large chunk of the players career. Although Bosman won he case, it took 5 years & ****ed him professionally & personally. I really can't see an agent advising his client to take this line. I'm not saying the system won't fall apart, but if it does it'll be the big clubs that start the process rather than players.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Secret Site Agent

Secret Site Agent

Posted
Posted

 

Bournemouth Airport less than an hour drive from the Saints’ stadium Not forgetting Southampton airport which is 5 minutes from the stadium.

 

And trust me, he isn't at Hearn, never has been today and probably never will do. And I had to check with the man on the doors for this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sotonist

sotonist

Posted
Posted
Haven't bothered to read the other 200 pages of this thread, so apologies if this is already posted, but there's already a precedent from Andy Webster. The regulations are that if you're under 28 you can buy your contract out once there's 3 years remaining, if over 28 it's 2 years. So Van Dijk couldn't buy himself out, even if he wanted to, for another 2 years.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webster_ruling

 

if that applies it puts a different slant on the importance of renewing contracts regularly and it makes the later years fo the contract disproportionately valuable to the player.

 

imagine your club is holding out for £80m for you, but you are in the second year of a six year contract, on £3m a year, you just have to wait a bit and you stand to spend 9m buying out your contract and pocket £71m yourself.

 

have i missed anything glaringly obvious that makes my example wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted
if that applies it puts a different slant on the importance of renewing contracts regularly and it makes the later years fo the contract disproportionately valuable to the player.

 

imagine your club is holding out for £80m for you, but you are in the second year of a six year contract, on £3m a year, you just have to wait a bit and you stand to spend 9m buying out your contract and pocket £71m yourself.

 

have i missed anything glaringly obvious that makes my example wrong.

 

Only the fact that the club you join will probably reimburse you for the buy out fee as well, though how much they compensate you for saving them a transfer fee is another negotiation - there isn't a £71m to pocket unless your new club offers it. ;)

 

To confirm, it is the rules, just as clubs only being able to fine players a maximum of 2 weeks' wages is in every contract, and there's also a list of "minimum requirements" for avoiding contract breach when out of favour, both thanks to the PFA.

 

So far all I can ascertain from the whole thing other than Van Dijk wants to leave, is that he's really terrible at spinning cause and effect when there's evidence to the contrary - for instance, when he put the Transfer request in it was because he was getting fined, but he'd already been asked to train with the kids because he'd said his mindset wasn't right (and then it was rumoured he was asked to play in the U23s game which is presumably why he was getting fined.

 

Seeing as he said he'd never refused to TRAIN, but didn't mention refusing to PLAY (which he may well have done given that he hasn't since January and he's been fit since pre-season began), you'd have to assume that's an accurate assumption.

 

Quotes below

"I feel I have no alternative after I was given notice of the Club's intention to impose a disciplinary sanction against me of a fine equivalent to 2 weeks wages. I will be appealing what I feel to be an unjustified sanction and their inability to follow the correct disciplinary protocol in due course.

 

I would also like to make clear that I have never once refused to train. I can confirm that I was asked about my frame of mind and for all of the reasons mentioned above I was open and honest in saying that I did not feel I was in a settled mindset given the circumstances"

 

Anyway, I can't see us selling him to Liverpool for less than whatever their last rejected bid for Coutinho was, and I can't see us selling to anyone else for under £70m. Whether we manage to resist the temptation to flog him for a massive sum and avoid the hassle of reintegrating him is open to question. One thing that was unequivocal was Reed's insistence that Hoedt was signed to play alongside Van Dijk. Hopefully that doesn't mean we sell them both to Liverpool. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted
Not VVD related, but this made me smile ....

 

Hassan Anfield: I'm optimistic about Alex Ox-Chamberlain will join LFC before window closes. Because he was a former Southampton player.

 

Should we tell him that so is Harlee Dean and Ali Dia! Get on the trail, Liverpool. :)

 

Harlee Dean's just joined Redknapp at Birmingham, so maybe Liverpool will sign him for next season before tomorrow too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Window Cleaner

Window Cleaner

Posted
Posted (edited)
Bournemouth Airport less than an hour drive from the Saints’ stadium Not forgetting Southampton airport which is 5 minutes from the stadium.

 

And trust me, he isn't at Hearn, never has been today and probably never will do. And I had to check with the man on the doors for this.

 

But what about Hurn Airport. You must know what it's called if you've checked with the man on the doors surely.

Hearn is a sort of Stag God in Saxon mythology I think.

Edited by Window Cleaner
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
you brought nationality into it by stating you like it when saints have a core of English players

 

biggot

 

1. Look up the definition of the word bigot (not bigot) in the dictionary.

2. Explain how that equates with me saying that I like to see English players doing well.

3. Look up the phrase "not the sharpest knife in the draw."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted
1. Look up the definition of the word bigot (not bigot) in the dictionary.

2. Explain how that equates with me saying that I like to see English players doing well.

3. Look up the phrase "not the sharpest knife in the draw."

You have been called out yet again
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
You have been called out yet again

 

Not at all. You seem to fail to understand what the word bigot means and are clearly unable to substantiate your point. Repeating it doesn't make it right. You need to actually explain your point in relation to the use of the word bigot.

Once again, go and look up the definition (hint - it is not spelt biggot). Then come back and explain how that word relates to what I said.

Then go and look up "not the sharpest knife in the draw."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted
Not at all. You seem to fail to understand what the word bigot means and are clearly unable to substantiate your point. Repeating it doesn't make it right. You need to actually explain your point in relation to the use of the word bigot.

Once again, go and look up the definition (hint - it is not spelt biggot). Then come back and explain how that word relates to what I said.

Then go and look up "not the sharpest knife in the draw."

You are a bigot (not bigot lol)

The way you hound Yoshida because of his nationality is disgusting by the way

 

Funny how you pick up on my spelling mistakes with your own grammatical own goals

 

Top poster

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sotonist

sotonist

Posted
Posted
Only the fact that the club you join will probably reimburse you for the buy out fee as well, though how much they compensate you for saving them a transfer fee is another negotiation - there isn't a £71m to pocket unless your new club offers it. ;)

 

Yea, I noticed that straight after posting. I don't have unlimited posts or the ability to edit. Instead assume the buying club had a 79m bid turned down and he's only going to pocket 70 (poor lamb) ;)

 

Just to be clear though, the principle appears to be that after three years of the contract are completed, the player acquired the right to buy out the contract, rather than acquiring the right by entering the final three years. In the case of VvD, there is no difference because the contract is 6 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint-Fred

Saint-Fred

Posted
Posted
if that applies it puts a different slant on the importance of renewing contracts regularly and it makes the later years fo the contract disproportionately valuable to the player.

 

imagine your club is holding out for £80m for you, but you are in the second year of a six year contract, on £3m a year, you just have to wait a bit and you stand to spend 9m buying out your contract and pocket £71m yourself.

 

have i missed anything glaringly obvious that makes my example wrong.

 

If this was true Sanchez would currently be a Man City player, the ox would already be at Liverpool...all those in their final year would have bought themselves out and moved on ages ago...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Window Cleaner

Window Cleaner

Posted
Posted
If this was true Sanchez would currently be a Man City player, the ox would already be at Liverpool...all those in their final year would have bought themselves out and moved on ages ago...

 

 

You'd think so wouldn't you. This is why I questioned VvD buying himself out for 17 million or so. Perhaps they all have crap lawyers eh..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pamplemousse

Pamplemousse

Posted
Posted
That update from Kevin Palmer was truly click bait. Just his views on it, no actual news.

 

I don't want to tempt fate here, but I'd expect to start hearing some genuine bits of info this evening if this is going to happen.

 

I'm anticipating one last push from the Liverpool media and their surrogates. They won't go quietly, that's for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sotonist

sotonist

Posted
Posted
If this was true Sanchez would currently be a Man City player, the ox would already be at Liverpool...all those in their final year would have bought themselves out and moved on ages ago...

 

Indeed Alexis signed his contract with arsenal on 10 July 2014, which means he has completed the third year of his contract over a month ago.

 

He's on about £10m a year apparently, so unless he's got more than 5 years left on his contract (which would have made it an 8 year contract in total) it doesn't make a lot of sense for City to raise their bid over 50m if the webster rule holds water.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Window Cleaner

Window Cleaner

Posted
Posted
I'm anticipating one last push from the Liverpool media and their surrogates. They won't go quietly, that's for sure.

 

Oh they'll give up alright, probably would have already if it wasn't for the daft international break. Expect them to start up again come November though. I just hope he makes it worth keeping him until then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SuperSAINT

SuperSAINT

Posted
Posted

From Chris Bascombe article on Chamberlain:

 

Liverpool have agreed a £35 million fee for Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain with the midfielder undergoing a medical tonight.

 

Oxlade-Chamberlain is due to fly to Malta with the England squad tomorrow ahead of Friday’s World Cup qualifier, but he will complete the formalities of his Anfield switch prior to take-off.

 

Liverpool moved to secure the 24 year-old by matching Chelsea's £35m offer, which was accepted on Monday. Oxlade-Chamberlain stalled on the move to Stamford Bridge as he waited to see if the Merseyside club made an official approach.

 

Now that has materialised, it was simply a question of whether Arsenal were prepared to do business with a club they perceive as more natural rivals for a Champions League place. It was known the player preferred Anfield, tempted by the prospect of working with Jurgen Klopp.

 

Liverpool have become one of the most active clubs in the final days of the transfer window. They have already signed Naby Keita for next season. If they can secure Oxlade-Chamberlain, the focus would then switch to Virgil van Dijk.

 

The question remains whether Southampton will invite discussions or stand firm on their decision to keep the player rather than cash in on a deal which could be worth at least £70m.

 

Meanwhile, Wolfsburg are the latest to show interest in Liverpool striker Divock Origi. Origi will be allowed to leave on loan should Oxlade-Chamberlain be recruited, although Liverpool will demand a loan fee.

 

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/08/30/liverpool-agree-35m-fee-arsenal-alex-oxlade-chamberlain-midfielder/

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