Supporters Forum

long time gooner · **#350481**

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

dec · **#350482**

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.

Gunfire · **#350483**

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.

Zed · **#350484**

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:

gooner7 · **#350485**

Zed wrote:

Willian.....still no takers

https://www.teamtalk.com/news/genuine-r ... -continues

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

gooner7 · **#350486**

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.

AmericanGooner · **#350487**

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.

AmericanGooner · **#350488**

...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.

bubblechris · **#350489**

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.

TOP GUN · **#350490**

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

Decaf · **#350491**

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.

Decaf · **#350492**

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.

TOP GUN · **#350493**

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.

AmericanGooner · **#350494**

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

AmericanGooner · **#350495**

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).

Rich · **#350496**

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

Rich · **#350497**

Arsenal playing Millwall in a behind closed door friendly today

Decaf · **#350498**

Rich wrote:

Arsenal playing Millwall in a behind closed door friendly today

Getting friendly behind closed doors ... :laughing7:

warrior · **#350499**

AmericanGooner wrote:

...and I'm going to sound defeatist and negative...

You ?

mcquilkie · **#350500**

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.

Rich · **#350501**

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

TOP GUN · **#350502**

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

Rich · **#350503**

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 Mané 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

Bernard · **#350504**

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.

Zed · **#350505**

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.

TOP GUN · **#350506**

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

TOP GUN · **#350507**

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

AmericanGooner · **#350508**

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

AmericanGooner · **#350509**

...and not a fan of the style of the numbers but I will have to live with it.

Rich · **#350510**

Arsenal have signed highly-rated 18-year-old striker Mika Biereth.

He finished last season with 21 goals in 21 games for Fulham U18 (+ 13 assists).

Bernard · **#350511**

Rich wrote:

Arsenal have signed highly-rated 18-year-old striker Mika Biereth.

He finished last season with 21 goals in 21 games for Fulham U18 (+ 13 assists).

Considering Biereth is only supposed to be 18, he looks old enough to be drawing his state pension. Okay, that’s a lighthearted exaggeration but I still think he comfortably (meaning by a few years) looks well into his twenties.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/theathleti ... eth/%3Famp

Terry Henry · **#350512**

[quote="AmericanGooner"]This would have made a decent documentary. One of the good things about not being English (and there are too many to name.

From a bloody bell end yank :42laughter:

Terry Henry · **#350513**

AmericanGooner wrote:

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).

What a knob :1laughter:

Bernard · **#350514**

Terry Henry wrote:

AmericanGooner wrote:

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).

What a knob :1laughter:

At this rate you’ll soon be blocked by our friend from across the Atlantic. Like many of us.

Zed · **#350515**

Terry Henry wrote:

AmericanGooner wrote:

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).

What a knob :1laughter:

That pub AG refers to is the "Cock 'n Bull ' in Santa Monica in Cali, as is mentioned a few times on here.

Bernard · **#350516**

Zed wrote:

That pub AG refers to is the "Cock 'n Bull ' in Santa Monica in Cali, as is mentioned a few times on here.

Is that a real pub or an implication that’s what he talks a load of?

Ash · **#350517**

AmericanGooner wrote:

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

Thank you for posting this. One good post out of thirty thousand ain’t bad.

AmericanGooner · **#350518**

warrior wrote:

AmericanGooner wrote:

...and I'm going to sound defeatist and negative...

You ?

AmericanGooner · **#350519**

Rich wrote:

Arsenal have signed highly-rated 18-year-old striker Mika Biereth.

He finished last season with 21 goals in 21 games for Fulham U18 (+ 13 assists).

We're going to win the league! :icon_mrgreen:

But seriously, its always exciting getting young fresh talent.

Bored · **#350520**

Bernard wrote:

Arsenal have signed highly-rated 18-year-old striker Mika Biereth. Considering Biereth is only supposed to be 18, he looks old enough to be drawing his state pension.

My first impression was he must be a very experienced coach which had joined Arteta's back room staff.

Fixtures	Sunday April 28th - Tottenham Hotspur - Tottenham Hotspur Stadium - 2:00 Pm	Kick-Off

	Injuries	Steve Gleiber

Gooners Online - Click to see what Everyones Doing	Colour Key: Visited Profile Members Profile Admin	Get Latest Post
Users browsing this forum: Gunfire and 42 guests

Supporters Forum

Users browsing this forum: Gunfire and 42 guests

Get Latest Post