He fits the profile of player we need but again we’d probably have to pay an obscene amount of money to prize him away.Quote:
Originally Posted by selassie
Printable View
He fits the profile of player we need but again we’d probably have to pay an obscene amount of money to prize him away.Quote:
Originally Posted by selassie
My opinion and not the opinion ascribed to me by the silly arse is that that’s a consideration we have to make.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Overmars
A) do we think the player will improve the side
B) are we going to pay a ridiculous amount more than we would if we signed him in the summer
C) do we think the signing represents a necessity in terms of title ambitions
btw Mudryk doesn't exactly look happy does he :lol:
https://twitter.com/goal/status/1614...a7a579d1207f82
I don't get it, spin it his way in what sense? Does he need to be on the defensive? Is it now a criminal offense not to sell your player to Arsenal? Do they need to be defensive about anything when they got what they wanted.Quote:
Originally Posted by IBK
Why can't his part of the story not plainly just be him telling his own eyewitness stance on what happened?
Where did I say we should criticise Arsenal for tapping the player up? Is it to hard to read between the lines, even the Shakatar Donestsk CEO isn't saying he's going to report us to FIFA which he can. Why? Because Shaktar are a big club and know they way big clubs workQuote:
2. You say we bungled the deal, yet we are supposed to criticise Arsenal for trying to use all means at their disposal (short of simply bending over and paying an over valuation at the outset) to secure the signing (and let's face it every other transfer involves informal approaches to players). This seems to me to face 2 ways.
3. I think it's naive to believe that approaching the player first was the reason we didn't get the Mudryk signing. It was about the money. Of course it was. And I do not equate failing to pay a stupid valuation figure with bungling the deal.
Anyway please look at my previous posts. My argument has been we did not do what it takes to get this deal over the line...and clearly what it took here was just to meet with their senior people and show all levels of "respect" and seriousness...clearly an ABC in transfer dealings.
I mentioned the Walcott signing mastered by Dein in one of my previous posts. For those of us who are old enough to remember, Mourinho actually confirmed that they offered Southampton more money for Walcott (obviously after they heard we were interested) but they refused to sell, preferring to sell to us. Google is your friend, if you'd like to learn the history of big transfers .
Oh, just read your reply again, you seemed to have missed the part where he clearly says both Chelsea and Arsenal offered the same fee. So your valuation argument is non-existent.
Read the article again or other articles based on his interview. We agreed the same upfront fee and the same bonuses as Chelsea. Only the structure of Chelsea's bonuses was slightly different and the club preferred it.Quote:
4. I haven't seen anyone claim that Arsenal did things the 'right' way (whatever that is supposed to mean). People have said that it was right not to be pushed over a red line when it came to money paid up front for the player. There's a difference.
To put things in perspective, they had accepted our upfront offer as at Friday and we were only arguing about the bonus structure. The club irked by our lack of respect let Chelsea know what we offered. Chelsea co-owner flies in on Saturday and meets their owner, offered the exact same thing but tweak the bonus structure we were dithering about. Deal done.
So I am basically being two faced arguing that we bungled this up? How please.
So you do accept that you were wrong about our current competitors underperforming in the first half of the season and that the CL spot is practically wrapped up?Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ_Reborn
I'm trying to make discussions with you shorter if you've not noticed.
No because they have underperformedQuote:
Originally Posted by 21_GOONER_SALUTE
Were City eight points behind Liverpool? No if I recall they were top of the league
Liverpool have dramatically underperformed by the standards they’ve set in previous seasons
What you think I mean is that Arsenal are purely where they are on luck. No what I’m saying is that the high standards set in previous years by Liverpool and City in terms of accumulating points hasn’t happened and we’ve benefited from that.
And the mediocre standards we’ve set in previous seasons has been completely chucked out the window too
We'd be top on this points total after 18 games last year too, although City would have been closer.
Yeah, my bad, your post made me recheck the link and I just realised I made a mistake with the way I read the table initially i.e. I was looking at the 2nd half of the season and not the 1st half.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ_Reborn
So my assertions on the top 4 and City are wrong.
My take on our performance this season is we've been really good and been EXTREMELY lucky. More luck than I can recall in any season.
Part of it is not having had to play City yet, another part is practically every single time we've met a BIG club, they've not been in form or been having one mini crisis or the other.
The other part is injuries. We've been extremely lucky here too.
The thing is winners will say you need luck to do well and doing well also means you create your luck on the way.
The latter part is what I think has occurred.
But yeah, after my misread, I'll have to concede this one to you.
Seems like 100m euros is the standard fee now for young highly rated wingers. Thank Man United and Chelsea for that!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Overmars
:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac76