Fixtures Saturday September 18th - Burnley - Turf Moor - 3:00 Pm

Kick-Off

       Injuries                    Steve Gleiber



Get the Latest Post Go to the Bottom of Page It is currently Thu Sep 16, 2021 6:39 pm

All times are UTC


  


Reply to topic

Users browsing this forum: Bernard, Bing [Bot] and 18 guests

 
Post #532321  Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 11:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:30 pm
Posts: 7652

HoddGooner wrote:
Rich wrote:
Kane to City for £160m? City are bonkers if they’re paying that. Kane will be 28 next week and has a more regular history of injuries and a habit of taking some time to get back up to match fitness after. You could get Haaland or probably Mbappe for a similar price.

From Spurs side £160m would be huge and could easily facilitate a rebuild in a number of positions. I’m still amazed no big club comes in seriously for Son. He would improve most teams.

I may be wearing "rose-tinted specs" on this but every article I've read on this says £160m DEAL
In my parallel world that means that the total deal - transfer and contract - is worth £160m
With weekly wages of £400k, the contract takes up £83.2m, which would leave c£80m for the transfer - more reflective of the current market.

Actually, that makes a lot more sense. A £160m fee for Kane is daft.

_________________
"I just kept going pretty lively. Them killers wasn't too healthy company."


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532322  Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 11:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:46 pm
Posts: 2728

HoddGooner wrote:
In my parallel world that means that the total deal - transfer and contract - is worth £160m
With weekly wages of £400k, the contract takes up £83.2m, which would leave c£80m for the transfer - more reflective of the current market.


Ah, that makes more sense and makes me feel a bit better.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532323  Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 12:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 14449

Guys, no way will Daniel Levy sell Harry Kane for just an 80 million fee. If he’s sold expect a 100+ Transfer fee easily not total deal. They are probably quoting city 160 as a meet in the middle for a transfer eventually getting done around 120 mark.

Griezmann was sold for 120, 145 for mbappe. Kane falls into this category.

Honestly if he’s sold for 80 I think we should give Ben white a miss, get a refund on lokonga and try and get him ourselves !


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532324  Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 12:11 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 5:27 pm
Posts: 9542

TOP GUN wrote:
Griezmann was sold for 120, 145 for mbappe. Kane falls into this category.

But weren’t they sold pre-depression of the transfer market?


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532325  Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 12:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 14449

Bernard wrote:
TOP GUN wrote:
Griezmann was sold for 120, 145 for mbappe. Kane falls into this category.

But weren’t they sold pre-depression of the transfer market?

I doubt very much if that even comes into it with a transfer of this type especially when the likely buyers are sheiks and oligarchs.

If Ben white is going for 50 don’t expect Kane to go for 80. He’s under contract till 2024. If it happens it Will be another silly transfer fee unfortunately

I have a feeling he will end up staying at spurs as they won’t be able to get the figures to work. Similar with ourselves and Maddison


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532326  Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 12:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:06 am
Posts: 14100

dec wrote:
HoddGooner wrote:
I may be wearing "rose-tinted specs" on this but every article I've read on this says £160m DEAL
In my parallel world that means that the total deal - transfer and contract - is worth £160m
With weekly wages of £400k, the contract takes up £83.2m, which would leave c£80m for the transfer - more reflective of the current market.

Actually, that makes a lot more sense. A £160m fee for Kane is daft.

£80m would daft too.
But the football transfer market is daft.

I suspect this is one of those where there is a huge gap between the maximum amount the buyer is willing to pay (City rolling in it) and the minimum the seller is willing to take (Spurs probably feel Kane is approaching his sell-by date).

_________________
Hamba kakuhle, Madiba


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532327  Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 12:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:06 am
Posts: 14100

TOP GUN wrote:
Bernard wrote:
But weren’t they sold pre-depression of the transfer market?

I doubt very much if that even comes into it with a transfer of this type especially when the likely buyers are sheiks and oligarchs.

If Ben white is going for 50 don’t expect Kane to go for 80. He’s under contract till 2024. If it happens it Will be another silly transfer fee unfortunately

I have a feeling he will end up staying at spurs as they won’t be able to get the figures to work. Similar with ourselves and Maddison

I suspect that Kane will go because City want him, Spurs are desperate to cash in and, perhaps most importantly, Kane wants to get away from that hole, and who can blame him?

Still struggle to wrap my head around the Ben White price. I hope he is that good!

_________________
Hamba kakuhle, Madiba


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532328  Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 12:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 14449

Decaf wrote:
TOP GUN wrote:
I doubt very much if that even comes into it with a transfer of this type especially when the likely buyers are sheiks and oligarchs.

If Ben white is going for 50 don’t expect Kane to go for 80. He’s under contract till 2024. If it happens it Will be another silly transfer fee unfortunately

I have a feeling he will end up staying at spurs as they won’t be able to get the figures to work. Similar with ourselves and Maddison

I suspect that Kane will go because City want him, Spurs are desperate to cash in and, perhaps most importantly, Kane wants to get away from that hole, and who can blame him?

Still struggle to wrap my head around the Ben White price. I hope he is that good!


Unfortunately the best young English players cost an absolute fortune and I think whilst the prices are crazy there’s an element that you need ignore it and crack on anyway.

For example People are moaning about the price quoted for Aaron Ramsdale at 32 million being ridiculous however look at it from Sheffield Uniteds point of view. They only signed him for 18.5 last August and he was their player of the season. Why should they let him go for a small mark up.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532329  Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 12:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:30 pm
Posts: 7652

Bernard wrote:
TOP GUN wrote:
Griezmann was sold for 120, 145 for mbappe. Kane falls into this category.

But weren’t they sold pre-depression of the transfer market?

I would say both were quite different scenarios. Griezmann was Barcelona being desperate for big name signings post Neymar. They spent over £100m on Coutinho also...madness.

Mbappe is a huge talent. Potential to be one of the greats of the game. He was already one of the best players in the world when he was 19 years old.

I am surprised City aren't going for Haaland instead of Kane.

_________________
"I just kept going pretty lively. Them killers wasn't too healthy company."


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532330  Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 3:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:57 pm
Posts: 19316

Arsenal not willing to extend Lacazette's deal, want to invite offers in the region of £15m and find someone to take on his big salary.

If we can't sell Lacazette you have 2 options, new contract or keep him 1 more year and lose him for free
A new 3 year deal for Lacazette at £200k per week would cost us £31m and we have a player for 3 more year who is probably on the decline.
Losing him for free next year means we lose any potential fee (£15m)

I lament us losing players for free but in Lacazette's case it would be preferential to lose him for free than to give him a new deal in my view


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532331  Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 3:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:57 pm
Posts: 19316

dec wrote:
Rich wrote:
Yep - 4 more years. He's 29, never won a thing but could walk in to more successful sides. As surprised as I am that no one seems to have seriously bid for him I'm equally surprised that he hasn't had enough and wants a new challenge and trophies like Kane has seemingly done

With Kane leaving, I'd say they have offered him a big contract. A bit like our situation with Alexis and Özil, they couldn't afford to lose the two of them and for it to happen in the same window would be a huge hit.

That makes sense, but doesn't explain why no other clubs have come in for him, particularly Premier League clubs - as a left winger in a front 3 he'd improve Chelsea, City and Man U for me


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532332  Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 4:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:57 pm
Posts: 19316

I can't help but thinking that we need to cash in on Willock and AMN this summer. Both may never be as highly valued as they currently are and both are attracting attention from a number of premier league clubs. It all adds up to being able to get a really top price for both of them. We really should be getting £50m minimum for the two combined.

Selling players abroad seems to be having to accept low values or loan with option/obligation to buy clauses. None of which help right now. I think we have a likely £5m from Mavropanos and £12m from Guendouzi coming in next year. That offsets Lokonga's fee and is the way we need to look at transfers.

Nketiah and Nelson could fetch £25m for the pair, the contribution from both last year was very little, and virtually zero post Xmas so in squad terms we simply don't need them and won't miss them. Aouar is meant to be available for £25m.

I know it is overly simplistic to see things this way, but if there are Prem clubs after our players we need to really consider every offer with a stance towards selling - it does seem the only way to make decent money on a player in this window.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532333  Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 5:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 7:45 am
Posts: 23934

According to my local paper moving from Brighton to Arsenal is a sideways step. My, how we have fallen. :14laughter:


Attachments:


_________________
I believe in our team, I believe in our quality and I am convinced that I am right. (Arsene Wenger Dec 08)
 Profile  
 
 
Post #532334  Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 9:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:30 pm
Posts: 7652

Rich wrote:
dec wrote:
With Kane leaving, I'd say they have offered him a big contract. A bit like our situation with Alexis and Özil, they couldn't afford to lose the two of them and for it to happen in the same window would be a huge hit.

That makes sense, but doesn't explain why no other clubs have come in for him, particularly Premier League clubs - as a left winger in a front 3 he'd improve Chelsea, City and Man U for me

He is 29. Man U are signing Sancho and have Rashford. City have Sterling, Foden and Torres. Chelsea are a bit different but you would think they will spend big on a striker in the next 12 months. His time to move was two years ago.

_________________
"I just kept going pretty lively. Them killers wasn't too healthy company."


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532335  Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 9:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:42 pm
Posts: 4798

Rich wrote:
I can't help but thinking that we need to cash in on Willock and AMN this summer. Both may never be as highly valued as they currently are and both are attracting attention from a number of premier league clubs. It all adds up to being able to get a really top price for both of them. We really should be getting £50m minimum for the two combined.

Selling players abroad seems to be having to accept low values or loan with option/obligation to buy clauses. None of which help right now. I think we have a likely £5m from Mavropanos and £12m from Guendouzi coming in next year. That offsets Lokonga's fee and is the way we need to look at transfers.

Nketiah and Nelson could fetch £25m for the pair, the contribution from both last year was very little, and virtually zero post Xmas so in squad terms we simply don't need them and won't miss them. Aouar is meant to be available for £25m.

I know it is overly simplistic to see things this way, but if there are Prem clubs after our players we need to really consider every offer with a stance towards selling - it does seem the only way to make decent money on a player in this window.


I think in Willock there is a quality player waiting to be released. Would rather he stayed.

_________________
"If you do not believe you can do it then you have no chance at all"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532336  Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2021 10:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:51 pm
Posts: 2945

tomc wrote:
AmericanGooner wrote:
I'll let Rich (or another brave soul) say if this has any chance of coming to fruition...

https://ninetyminutesonline.com/arsenal ... y-abraham/
Arsenal should sign Chelsea striker Tammy Abraham


For the life of me I can never understand why people put together these "Welcome To Arsenal" clips until a player has actually signed for us.

Reminds me when in 2008, Chelsea inadvertently put Robinho shirts for sale on the Chelsea online store, before the deal was completed for his move from Real Madrid.

:14laughter:


Attachments:
robinho chelsea shirt-thumb-425x257.jpg
robinho chelsea shirt-thumb-425x257.jpg [ 20.41 KB | Viewed 1298 times ]

_________________
Be careful who you call your friends. I'd rather have four quarters than one hundred pennies.
 Profile  
 
 
Post #532337  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 2:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 2:55 pm
Posts: 9549
Location: Singapore

Zed wrote:


Unfortunate for both parties, especially Arsenal. He still gets a fat wage every week, and now he has a stomach to match.

_________________
Onwards and Upwards!


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532338  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 2:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 2:55 pm
Posts: 9549
Location: Singapore

Rich wrote:
Kane to City for £160m? City are bonkers if they’re paying that. Kane will be 28 next week and has a more regular history of injuries and a habit of taking some time to get back up to match fitness after. You could get Haaland or probably Mbappe for a similar price.

From Spurs side £160m would be huge and could easily facilitate a rebuild in a number of positions. I’m still amazed no big club comes in seriously for Son. He would improve most teams.


I would take Son in a heartbeat.

_________________
Onwards and Upwards!


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532339  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 4:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 31035

Rich wrote:
Arsenal not willing to extend Lacazette's deal, want to invite offers in the region of £15m and find someone to take on his big salary.

If we can't sell Lacazette you have 2 options, new contract or keep him 1 more year and lose him for free
A new 3 year deal for Lacazette at £200k per week would cost us £31m and we have a player for 3 more year who is probably on the decline.
Losing him for free next year means we lose any potential fee (£15m)

I lament us losing players for free but in Lacazette's case it would be preferential to lose him for free than to give him a new deal in my view


C'mon Rich, we've already seen this movie before. We won't be able to sell him and we won't extend. He'll spend the season not trying to get hurt for his next club and leave on a free.

_________________
"Never relegated, Never Will Be" :)


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532340  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 4:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 31035

...and I'm going to sound defeatist and negative but we won't sell Willock for what we want, nor AMN and we'll end up getting much less than we wanted if we get anything.

I wish the same people making transfer deals for Arsenal were on the other side of the negotiating table when I am in contract discussions.

_________________
"Never relegated, Never Will Be" :)


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532341  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 5:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:31 pm
Posts: 3697
Location: Waltham Abbey, Essex

Rich wrote:
dec wrote:
With Kane leaving, I'd say they have offered him a big contract. A bit like our situation with Alexis and Özil, they couldn't afford to lose the two of them and for it to happen in the same window would be a huge hit.

That makes sense, but doesn't explain why no other clubs have come in for him, particularly Premier League clubs - as a left winger in a front 3 he'd improve Chelsea, City and Man U for me


Anyone who pays mega bucks for Kane has to be crazy. He will become an Özil type Albatross for the club. One injury, one setback and his form will drop like a brick ala Aubameyang who needs to move on.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532342  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 7:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 14449

AmericanGooner wrote:
Rich wrote:
Arsenal not willing to extend Lacazette's deal, want to invite offers in the region of £15m and find someone to take on his big salary.

If we can't sell Lacazette you have 2 options, new contract or keep him 1 more year and lose him for free
A new 3 year deal for Lacazette at £200k per week would cost us £31m and we have a player for 3 more year who is probably on the decline.
Losing him for free next year means we lose any potential fee (£15m)

I lament us losing players for free but in Lacazette's case it would be preferential to lose him for free than to give him a new deal in my view


C'mon Rich, we've already seen this movie before. We won't be able to sell him and we won't extend. He'll spend the season not trying to get hurt for his next club and leave on a free.


Yes I think your probably going to be right on this. Who is going to offer him 182k a week elsewhere plus pay a fee for a 2 or 3 year contract at 30 years old.

This is the thing, the wages for these players long eclipsed the talent. I wouldn’t be againest offering him an extension and maybe the club did but they go into it knowing his agent is going to ask for the same or greater salary for a player who blows hot and cold a bit. It’s a discussion that won’t go amicably before you even sit down.

Like you said I’d expect him to stay for another year before leaving on a free


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532343  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 7:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:06 am
Posts: 14100

bubblechris wrote:
Rich wrote:
That makes sense, but doesn't explain why no other clubs have come in for him, particularly Premier League clubs - as a left winger in a front 3 he'd improve Chelsea, City and Man U for me


Anyone who pays mega bucks for Kane has to be crazy. He will become an Özil type Albatross for the club. One injury, one setback and his form will drop like a brick ala Aubameyang who needs to move on.

From Spurs perspective, yes. That's why I think Spurs will pretty well take what City offers. They don't want to be relying on Kane to drag them into the top 6 every year.

I do fear it will be quite a lot, unfortunately. Its not just silly money. City can make much better use of him. They can manage his game time and more than make do when he is not available. They want to win the CL, and Kane is exactly what the need for that.

The comparison with Aubameyang is questionable. Kane is 28, and has an excellent chance of actually winning stuff at City, so is rather unlikely to treat it as a retirement berth. Giroud certainly didn't treat his move to Chelsea as such. And we still need to see whether Aubameyang is past it. Last season was a weird one all round.

_________________
Hamba kakuhle, Madiba


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532344  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 8:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:06 am
Posts: 14100

AmericanGooner wrote:
Rich wrote:
Arsenal not willing to extend Lacazette's deal, want to invite offers in the region of £15m and find someone to take on his big salary.

If we can't sell Lacazette you have 2 options, new contract or keep him 1 more year and lose him for free
A new 3 year deal for Lacazette at £200k per week would cost us £31m and we have a player for 3 more year who is probably on the decline.
Losing him for free next year means we lose any potential fee (£15m)

I lament us losing players for free but in Lacazette's case it would be preferential to lose him for free than to give him a new deal in my view


C'mon Rich, we've already seen this movie before. We won't be able to sell him and we won't extend. He'll spend the season not trying to get hurt for his next club and leave on a free.

I think that Lacazette deserves a bit more respect than that. Generally when we have needed him, he has stepped up well. He also showed his leadership last season.

I agree that he is probably not worth that much money and it would be decent business to sell him, but to somehow turn that into an assault on his character, is pretty poor in my opinion.

_________________
Hamba kakuhle, Madiba


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532345  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 9:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 14449

If city are going to unload 120 to 150 million on spurs for Kane I really hope it’s towards the end of the window rather than sooner as they could go into over drive and gazump us for any remaining targets.

The suggestion in the press is that city are prepared to offer them 120 and no more so if it’s done at that price thats a healthy budget to sign 2 or 3 really quality players.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532346  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 9:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 31035

This would have made a decent documentary. One of the good things about not being English (and there are too many to name. :42laughter: ) and not growing up a football fan is there are tons and tons of football stories, current and historical as well as cultural things I've just skimmed in totality.

Derby historically and currently are an interesting club. PS: You guys are pronouncing the name incorrectly, 'er' sound, not 'ar'...may wanna work on that. :1laughter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQbNBbnsta0&t=1452s

_________________
"Never relegated, Never Will Be" :)


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532347  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 10:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 31035

At the pub I used to watch games, I used to hear some people say such and such are a "cup team". With as many FA cups we have won, I haven't really heard that said about us. Maybe the term was used derisively. I am not sure. Maybe were called a cup team but I haven't personally heard other fans say that about us. I've heard it said of Sperz, even Chelsea (before Roman).

_________________
"Never relegated, Never Will Be" :)


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532348  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 11:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:57 pm
Posts: 19316

Solksjaer signs new deal with Man U
Penalties all competitions since Solskjaer was appointed

49 Man Utd
34 Chelsea
34 Man City
24 Leicester
20 Spurs
20 Liverpool
17 Arsenal


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532349  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 11:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:57 pm
Posts: 19316

Arsenal playing Millwall in a behind closed door friendly today


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532350  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 11:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:06 am
Posts: 14100

Rich wrote:
Arsenal playing Millwall in a behind closed door friendly today

Getting friendly behind closed doors ... :laughing7: :laughing7:


_________________
Hamba kakuhle, Madiba


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532351  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 12:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 5:38 pm
Posts: 5343
Location: ɹǝpu∩uʍop

AmericanGooner wrote:
...and I'm going to sound defeatist and negative...

You ?

:12hello-bye:


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532352  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 1:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:15 am
Posts: 2475

Rich wrote:
Solksjaer signs new deal with Man U
Penalties all competitions since Solskjaer was appointed

49 Man Utd
34 Chelsea
34 Man City
24 Leicester
20 Spurs
20 Liverpool
17 Arsenal

Amazing stat, Rich. Back when the Nevilles were getting a stern talking to for their GBH on Reyes, and Van Nistelrooy's stud-rake on Cole and kidney-punch of Freddie was being ignored by the ref, and Solskjaer's 'I've-been-hit!!!' routine when brushed by Sol was met with the obvious punishment, it was a given that United would be awarded between 15 and 30 more penalties than anyone else in the space of a couple of seasons. But how does it still happen even now, when United aren't part-owned by Sky Sports? If I was a Chelsea, City, Liverpool or Spurs fan, I'd be livid.

_________________
'It's the gaps what rocks' - Steve Marriott


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532353  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 1:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:57 pm
Posts: 19316

Rich wrote:
Arsenal playing Millwall in a behind closed door friendly today

Arsenal beat Millwall 4-1 at London Colney this afternoon, goals from Chambers, Lacazette, Pépé & Balogun


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532354  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 3:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 14449

Sky have just said the 2nd bid for Ramsdale was actually 18 million plus add ons not 30.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532355  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 3:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:57 pm
Posts: 19316

As well as the excitement of possible new signings I think we should look at those players who have managed to have a proper rest and full pre season, as uneffected by covid as possible. Partey Pépé and Aubameyang for example.
Players on other teams had mentioned the importance of this as well, I saw Mane say something like this is the first summer since he joined liverpool that he’s actually had a proper summer break.

We didn’t have that many players at the euros so hopefully we can get a quick start


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532356  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 6:17 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 5:27 pm
Posts: 9542

TOP GUN wrote:
Sky have just said the 2nd bid for Ramsdale was actually 18 million plus add ons not 30.

What Sky say sounds more realistic about Ramsdale. In my view people get far too taken in by the offers or fees quoted in unreliable transfer gossip. As I’ve said, £50m for Ben White? Yeah, right; pull the other one. There was more chance of one of Baldrick’s cunning plans in Blackadder being a logical idea. If he ends up joining Arsenal, it’ll officially be stated as for an undisclosed fee. Whatever the fee is, I reckon it’ll be a damn site less than £50m.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532357  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 7:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:51 pm
Posts: 2945

mcquilkie wrote:
Rich wrote:
Solksjaer signs new deal with Man U
Penalties all competitions since Solskjaer was appointed

49 Man Utd
34 Chelsea
34 Man City
24 Leicester
20 Spurs
20 Liverpool
17 Arsenal

Amazing stat, Rich. Back when the Nevilles were getting a stern talking to for their GBH on Reyes, and Van Nistelrooy's stud-rake on Cole and kidney-punch of Freddie was being ignored by the ref, and Solskjaer's 'I've-been-hit!!!' routine when brushed by Sol was met with the obvious punishment, it was a given that United would be awarded between 15 and 30 more penalties than anyone else in the space of a couple of seasons. But how does it still happen even now, when United aren't part-owned by Sky Sports? If I was a Chelsea, City, Liverpool or Spurs fan, I'd be livid.

Fergie still hovering at games.

_________________
Be careful who you call your friends. I'd rather have four quarters than one hundred pennies.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532358  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 8:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 14449

Bernard wrote:
TOP GUN wrote:
Sky have just said the 2nd bid for Ramsdale was actually 18 million plus add ons not 30.

What Sky say sounds more realistic about Ramsdale. In my view people get far too taken in by the offers or fees quoted in unreliable transfer gossip. As I’ve said, £50m for Ben White? Yeah, right; pull the other one. There was more chance of one of Baldrick’s cunning plans in Blackadder being a logical idea. If he ends up joining Arsenal, it’ll officially be stated as for an undisclosed fee. Whatever the fee is, I reckon it’ll be a damn site less than £50m.


The suggestion is the cash offer is 18 and there will be a third and final bid which you would have to assume will probably be 20-23 plus a few add on depending on performance. Honestly is that really that bad for the England back up keeper to provide cover for Leno?

Arsenal fans have been losing the plot on the internet about it for several weeks :15laughter: I seriously hope the player hasn’t read any of the *%^@ written about him by Arsenal fans on the internet


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532359  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 8:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 14449

Incidentally I don’t know much about Ramsdale but I did watch one game when he played for Bournemouth early on and he had a proper thou shall not pass performance and saved everything and I mean absolutely everything that came at him including several impressive stops. I walked away thinking he would end up at a big club and definitely involved with England


 Profile  
 
 
Post #532360  Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2021 8:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 31035

Early, I know but hoping we get better defensively on crosses and such.


_________________
"Never relegated, Never Will Be" :)


 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
     [ 535350 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1 ... 13306, 13307, 13308, 13309, 13310, 13311, 13312 ... 13384  Next

All times are UTC

Gooners Online - Click to see what Everyones Doing

Colour Key:  Visited Profile    Members Profile      Admin

Get Latest Post

Users browsing this forum: Bernard, Bing [Bot] and 18 guests


Search for:

Go to Top

Powered by php BB © 1993 - 2018