- Jun 8, 2004
- 8,670
- 16,854
Yes and probably for every club.
We see the history of our transfer links but don't follow those of other clubs.
Meant at least 1 comment like that, not prolonged transfer! There are at least 100 of them lol
Yes and probably for every club.
We see the history of our transfer links but don't follow those of other clubs.
Sorry what?
It really does make sense, why pay £6m now for the privilege of not getting him until the summer when we could just get him in the summer for a fraction of that? Fulham won't get much from a tribunal will they? They signed him 3 years or so ago so they've not invested that much in his development, he's clearly aware of our interest and so if he really wants to play for the club then he'll wait until he's spoken to us then to decide who to sign for.
I see absolutely no benefit of paying Fulham just to loan him back.
J
insert Gifs of Chiriches, Paulinho, Soldildo, Fazio, Frazier Campbell, Rasiak, Booth etc. etc. here.
Exactly. There's no reason whatsoever that we couldn't have simply told his representatives that we'll be back in the summer for him.
Because we think we can get him cheaper by tribunal, of course.There's something I can't quite understand.
If we are willing to finish the window without signing a striker, why don't we still sign Dembele and loan him to Fulham like they want?
It makes no sense
Unless we made him sign a pre contract, words mean nothing. What's to stop him from signing with Citeh if they offer him a better wage ?
A lot can happen in 6 months
If the reason it broke down was because Fulham wanted him loaned back, I think we should have done it. It wouldn't have solved the issue for this season but we could have started next season with more cover and given him the summer to settle in. I think it was an opportunity missed for another young talent .... If, of course , that was the only reason.
If the reason it broke down was because Fulham wanted him loaned back, I think we should have done it. It wouldn't have solved the issue for this season but we could have started next season with more cover and given him the summer to settle in. I think it was an opportunity missed for another young talent .... If, of course , that was the only reason.
Because he is under 24 we can only offer a contract 1 month before his contract is due to end.Can we literally not agree something with him tomorrow and NOT pay any money?
Because he is under 24 we can only offer a contract 1 month before his contract is due to end.
It's not that, it's because he's from another English club I think (we could negotiate with a 23 year old from France)
I didn't go into all the details as we know he is at a UK club.
So, what you meant to type was "we can only offer a contract when he has a month left as he's at another English club" - we couldn't sign a 25 year old from Fulham on a pre-contract until he had one month left. Point is, age is not the factor, English club is.
#pedantwarrior
Age isn't a factor, if he was 27 and from an English club, we still would have to wait until 1 month before it ends.I didn't go into all the details as we know he is at a UK club.