Jump to content

Romeo Lavia - Official: Signs for Not Liverpool

Saint Garrett

By Saint Garrett,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

S-Clarke

S-Clarke

Posted
Posted (edited)

You wouldn't think he's only 18 to be honest, he certainly has the potential to make a similar immediate impact as Tino did for us.

Just need to be careful not to run him into the ground.

Edited by S-Clarke
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint Fan CaM

Saint Fan CaM

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

You wouldn't think he's only 18 to be honest, he certainly has the potential to make a similar immediate impact as Tino did for us.

Just need to be careful not to run him into the ground.

Yeah I really liked his presence on the ball…much more forward thinking than I expected. Just hope Ralphball doesn’t coach that out of him.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
Fabrice Fernandes no.1 fan

Fabrice Fernandes no.1 fan

Posted
Posted

We’ll miss him already if he’s out a few weeks

similar impact to Tino last season, come in and just blown me away with raw talent but composure that is beyond his experience. Couple of times again where he turns away from danger in our half when he has no right to be able to and splits their team. Reminding me of Schneiderlin at times already 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
S-Clarke

S-Clarke

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, skintsaint said:

Did I hear Ralph say he is out for 6 weeks?

Yep, big blow. Really bad hamstring injury by the sounds of it.

I reckon we'll see him back Arsenal home game at the end of Oct. Looks like AMN is going to get a lot of games early doors!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JRM

JRM

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, S-Clarke said:

Yep, big blow. Really bad hamstring injury by the sounds of it.

I reckon we'll see him back Arsenal home game at the end of Oct. Looks like AMN is going to get a lot of games early doors!

Has AMN had a proper pre season / game time? Definitely leaves us a bit short with no Romeu either to break up attacks 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John Boy Saint

John Boy Saint

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

"Skacel retired following Příbram's relegation playoff victory over FC Zbrojovka Brno on 2 June 2019"

Wikipedia. Yes, I know you weren't being serious.

Of course I was being serious - you can’t post stuff and nonsense on here - the context devoid police will be all over you like a rash regardless of how many emojis you throw in. 😳

Get with the programmer Grandad!

😀😃😄😁😆😅😂😂🙃😵‍💫🤪

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dusic

Dusic

Posted
Posted

Even after a handful of games it seems pretty obvious the big clubs will come after him next summer.

Excellent player, excellent signing and really this interest just shows the approach works - it gives these players the platform to announce themselves at PL level.

At the time we were all suprosed and shocked Ralph put Livramento straight in but it looks a genius move now as it showed others that the same would be possible for them. I wonder if perhaps it was partly a decision made for that reason, as well as because he is so good.

No wonder other talents want to move here, and Lavia's early impact and hype should only increase that further.

Next step I guess is to try and get these lads a little younger before we need to spend £10m on them, but I think Brexit has made that very difficult for the foreign players at least and the British talents probably want to be playing PL2 top division so hopefully we can get promoted back to that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
a1ex2001

a1ex2001

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, saint lard said:

I’ve just heard this too. 
they actually offered £50m for this nipper who we had just signed,based on a couple of appearances. 
mental. 

I think it’s pretty clear already we got a steal on this one, he looks good enough that I can see city actually using the buy back clause!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JRM

JRM

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, whelk said:

So Chelsea offered us £50m on deadline day. That club is a mess 

Absolutely bonkers, he's hardly played any first team football and is now out for 6 weeks so won't have played much by the next transfer window. Looks a class player admittedly but far too early to put him down as a £50M player. 

Edited by JRM
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint NL

Saint NL

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, whelk said:

So Chelsea offered us £50m on deadline day. That club is a mess 

It's being reported on BBC Sport. Crazy.

 

Southampton rejected a £50m proposal from Chelsea for Belgian midfielder Romeo Lavia, 18, on deadline day, having only just signed him from Manchester City. (Daily Echo)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VectisSaint

VectisSaint

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Saint NL said:

It's being reported on BBC Sport. Crazy.

 

Southampton rejected a £50m proposal from Chelsea for Belgian midfielder Romeo Lavia, 18, on deadline day, having only just signed him from Manchester City. (Daily Echo)

It isn't being reported on BBC Sport, it is a line in their Gossip page, directly quoted from the Daily Echo/Alfie House (I'm beginning to sound like MLG)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beatlesaint

beatlesaint

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Saint86 said:

What have chelsea's new owners got to do with many city's buy back clause on lavia? 

Man City have first refusal don’t they? That’s how buy back clauses work. So approaching Southampton on transfer deadline day with that complication in the contract was never gonna result in them buying him

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CB Fry

CB Fry

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, beatlesaint said:

Man City have first refusal don’t they? That’s how buy back clauses work. So approaching Southampton on transfer deadline day with that complication in the contract was never gonna result in them buying him

Everything about it is insane.

Just imagine if Saints say yes to Chelsea. What kind of bad-faith move would that be - our Joe Shields can kiss good bye to any future young stars if that's how we treat City and their young stars. 

And even for Chelsea, it doesn't make them look ambitious or forward thinking. The kid has played five matches in his entire career. Their leadership just look ridiculous as well. 

Absolutely nuts.

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
VectisSaint

VectisSaint

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, beatlesaint said:

I guess the new owners at Chelsea haven’t grasped how buy back clauses work 🤔

I imagine Chelsea understand these things better than most. Having a new owner probably makes little difference to the day to day operations, at least in the short term. Buy back clauses are not really intrinsically complex and have been around for a few years and are regulated by the governing bodies AFAIK. Think that if there is any truth in this story (an assumption in itself) Chelsea were just chancing their arm. If you don't ask you don't get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint_clark

Saint_clark

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, CB Fry said:

Everything about it is insane.

Just imagine if Saints say yes to Chelsea. What kind of bad-faith move would that be - our Joe Shields can kiss good bye to any future young stars if that's how we treat City and their young stars. 

And even for Chelsea, it doesn't make them look ambitious or forward thinking. The kid has played five matches in his entire career. Their leadership just look ridiculous as well. 

Absolutely nuts.

 

Depends if he ended up getting game time for them. If he made 20+ appearances for Chelsea then it might have ended up showing young players just how quick they can get a first team place at a top 6 club if they sign for us 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Verbal

Verbal

Posted
Posted

Well this is quite something... 

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The Future of Football 🔮<br><br>What&#39;re you changing? 🤔⬇️ <a href="https://t.co/vOvqdXrnUF">pic.twitter.com/vOvqdXrnUF</a></p>&mdash; Matchday365 (@Matchday365) <a href="https://twitter.com/Matchday365/status/1568330287142301696?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 9, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dark Munster

Dark Munster

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Turkish said:

Looks like we set the buy back for him way too low 

I doubt City would've sold him to us without the low buy back. Basically a nice loan deal, where we enjoy him for a few seasons and make a bit of money at the end of it, rather than paying a non-refundable loan fee for him. Can't complain!

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Holmes_and_Watson

Holmes_and_Watson

Posted
Posted

I think all parties are going to do well out of this one. As DM said, we wouldn't have got him without the set buy back fee. It's still a good profit for us. You never know, CIty may not want to exercise it (although it would seem daft not to, it is early days). It will also show any player who feels they are of a similar talent, that Southampton is a place where they will make a breakthrough into the premier league. No bad thing. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
a1ex2001

a1ex2001

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

I think all parties are going to do well out of this one. As DM said, we wouldn't have got him without the set buy back fee. It's still a good profit for us. You never know, CIty may not want to exercise it (although it would seem daft not to, it is early days). It will also show any player who feels they are of a similar talent, that Southampton is a place where they will make a breakthrough into the premier league. No bad thing. 

Still trying to work out what happens if the player says no or has he also agreed a contract with city to go back!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
saint1977

saint1977

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, Dark Munster said:

I doubt City would've sold him to us without the low buy back. Basically a nice loan deal, where we enjoy him for a few seasons and make a bit of money at the end of it, rather than paying a non-refundable loan fee for him. Can't complain!

Exactly. Turn a £28m profit, get to see a great player in the making in a Saints shirt, plus hopefully he and the others increase the PL place prize money, cup runs and shock horror, maybe even a cup itself.

Compare that to Lemina, Boufal, Carrillo, Hoedt, Vestergaard, Ely who have either or will cost heavy losses on original outlay + wage contributions. 

Edited by saint1977
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dusic

Dusic

Posted
Posted

Pretty sure the Livramento buy back was set so it didnt kick in for 18 months. Lavia's may well be the same.

Regardless of the amount, what is difficult to quantify is the benefit Saints get when trying to sign other players of a similar ilk.

This bid from Chelsea, plus his performances so far, show these players that its a great move to make. 

That is potentially worth a huge amount.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Verbal

Verbal

Posted
Posted
On 11/09/2022 at 01:17, a1ex2001 said:

Still trying to work out what happens if the player says no or has he also agreed a contract with city to go back!

If he goes to a club other than City we get market rate. Not since Bosman has it been possible to compel a player to re-sign for their previous club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Lighthouse changed the title to Romeo Lavia - Official: Signs for Not Liverpool

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...